Would it be limited to movies about participation trophies and the road to hell being paved with good intentions?

I'm assuming that's what a good number of the posts I can't see are about.

Is it a whole plate or whole box?

Yes.

I think the problem with the critique of "fat acceptance" as espoused ITT is similar to a number of similar issues that happen when social media curates the most extreme examples of a particular social trend. That is, the sense I have (admittedly without paying much attention) is that most "fat acceptance" stuff is just entirely reasonable. It's saying let's not bully and shame and mock fat people, let's try to think about health in a multifaceted way, let's try to acknowledge mental health challenges and social stigmas etc and work on those as opposed to exclusively focusing on "fat shaming". I'm sure there are examples found on twitter or whatever where people also say ridiculous things and suggest that being obesity has no indicators of poor health or whatever. But I suspect this is proportionally much rarer.

Basically, if you focus your critique on the most extreme caricature of what is happening, then even when you are right you are still rather off.

The bigger problem is that anything that does not comport with what you seem to be saying, which i would sum as 'be nice' is generally referred to 'fat shaming' and that is very deliberate.

I have posted in the obesity thread people on line getting attacked for being positive about their own journey to get in shape and that is labelled 'shaming of the others'.

the tactic of labeling things 'shaming' or using other negative 'loaded' words is pretty common across all the left as a way to silence commentary they do not like and is large part of why we see the obesity epidemic getting worse.

In todays society you would be foolish to bet against activists taking issue with a simple video like this...




A video like this would have that morbidly obese Dr woman tearing it apart today saying the 'steps they label' are too simplistic. 'exercise is not necessarily the fix', 'weight control is not necessary for good health', 'and eating a good and balanced diet is not key as there are no bad foods... how about a plate of donuts?'

Each of the things the Dr would be saying ganstaman would likely be here saying 'examined critically have some merit' while deliberately ignoring how terrible and harmful that messaging is for the general public.

I feel like this is a good illustration of my point. I'm sure twitter will source you examples of bad liberals being bad. But I don't think mocking "being positive about your own journey" is at all an orthodox position, either of society in general or even among the narrower group of people who are trying to promote positive healthy lifestyles physical and mentally for obese people. You are probably right, probably someone was ridiculous on the internet, but I think your priors are causing you to focus on extremes.

You say this like it is a fact. Do you have data to support this claim, or is this just your opinion?

Stretching it but that's a load of bull

Step 1 : Take what you said above.

Step 2: Place one slice of bread on top of it and one slice of bread beneath it.

And, voila!, you have yourself a baloney sandwich!

lol at "someone" when the stream of examples is closer to constant now than someone.

How many examples would need before you acknowledged the reality of today? If i post 5, 100 or 10,000 will that be enough or will you just call that small number knowing there is no reasonable number of incidents you would accept and that this forum would not call spam, if I began posting numerically.

So lets get away from the game of 'asking for proof' you know cannot be provided (ala ganstaman and e_d game) and acknowledge these truths...

- today a campaign with a really fit and pretty model type is far more likely to be publicly attacked and labelled shaming, and then taken down, and replaced by one with morbidly obese people, called inspirational and brave

- today even if you are beloved celebrity (Adelle type) if you journey is one of losing lots of weight and you tell that story you are far more likely to be attacked as fat shaming then if you gain weight and become obese, and tell that story which will be called brave and inspirational

(What you will do next is ignore the underlying realities of those two points, which is absolutely true while you try to minimize and mock the specific with a comment like 'lol poor Adelle')

Ya that one is easy.

BTw let me try to explain this to you once again. Another attempt to educate you on something you would learn if you took one basic debate class but like trying to educate lozen, on what a right talking point it, you seem to be unable to understand.


In random discussions there is no requirement or need to caveat everything with IMO, unless it is subject matter where if you do not, people may assume you are reporting facts known to you.

Let me give you two examples to help you.

- this years best movie was XYZ. It was far better than the other movies. (no need to say IMO)

- ABC is the far more prolific speaker than XYZ and does far more events (imo is needed if you are countering what someone is saying and you have no proof but is seems obvious to you)



BUT, BUT QP, why then do you always make an issue of people WRONGLY expressing their opinion as fact ala Point 1 above?


This part is key uke and i have told you before, as it ties in to my pet peeve and it is something I will call out near 100% and it is something you do constantly.

Ready...

In any discussion, even if clearly an opinion topic as soon as you tell a person they are WRONG, you have changed the conversation from one of opinion to now one of fact.


- Vanilla ice cream is best
- XYZ is the best movie
- this forum is one where posting 'trending news stories that are not yet verified is beneficial to do'


Uke, the second you say 'you are wrong' you have to then have demonstrable proof, not just your beliefs of something else to PROVE the person is wrong.

I am not wrong that i think Vanilla is the best or that this forum is one where trending news is ok, because you disagree. We can agree to disagree but i am not wrong. We just differ in opinion.


A person who has to label every difference of opinion as 'wrong' is a person who is intolerant to anyone not thinking and saying what they say and thus their default is to think and say it is wrong as they cannot, themselves, tolerate the other person not changing to their view as they find their opinions really convincing to themselves and thus cannot understand why OTHERS are not convinced (Carlin meme).


That is you uke. And like lozen i suspect you will learn nothing and just keep repeating the same. But i try.

Social media is just bad man, turn that **** off. It's designed to produce "engagement" which means it deliberately feeds you stuff to make you mad. It's why your feed is full of trans athletes and fringe fat acceptance types. It's why you're constantly mad at people I've never heard of doing things that will never affect you in the slightest.

My post had nothing to do with SM and was simply trying to educate uke on a mistake he makes on most of his posts and if he does it in real life would also be problematic or at least make people think he does not understand the difference between fact and opinion.

I am not sure he will be able to comprehend it but if he does, I have done good work today.

I didn't read your post, I'm just telling you social media is unhealthy and you need to stop worrying about every outrageous thing you see on the bird app.

Weird. My question was whether you had any data to support both that the apparent attempt "across all of the left" to silence commentary is a "large part of why we see the obesity epidemic getting worse"? I have no idea why you went on a rant about ice cream, but it seems like the answer is no, you don't have such data?

I think you are making a fairly basic mistake. I don't doubt that your twitter feed shows you 5, 100, or 10,000 examples of whatever it is that you engage with. The challenge in 2022 for a lot of us is to figure out whether the thing the algorithms are showing us is really representative. I'm new to this topic, so I'm here to learn, but you aren't being very persuasive so far.

In the bolded, this seems obvious false. Most advertising campaigns and broadly speaking actors/singers/celebrities in general are really fit and pretty model types. I've seen a few ad campaigns with obese people, but this seems like a very small minority. Don't you have your claim exactly backwards?

The bolded point might just mean that the type of occurrence expressed therein is simply far more likely to occur today than it was before, as opposed to whether an obese person or thin model type person is more likely to appear in an ad.

Well that was clear and is typically clear due to your nonsensical posts that would violate rules on most other forums as just spam.

He might mean it in this relative sense but it doesn't help his claims then. As in, sure, this might have gone from exceedingly rarely done to rarely done. But regardless today most ads and most cultural entertainment involves pretty people, and most of that isn't cancelled. So I don't quite get how to connect the dots to how cancelling is being a large part of why the obesity epidemic is getting worse?

I point out constantly that it is debate tactic to ask for 'data' in areas where no such data can be provided and then to pretend it makes your point a winning one, when the person cannot provide it. I have called you, ganstaman and e_d out when appropriate for trying to use that game.

"Data" is not some magical thing that just generates on request. Data is most often aggregated by some form of advocate seeking specific answers who will pay for the study and aggregation. If no such person is paying for it, it likely is not available. You, uke, do not have the superior point just because you call for 'data' that has not been generated, especially in areas where it is not likely to be aggregated.

No one has aggregated here how many times you alone use those tactics to smear and silence people, not just saying stuff you do not like but those in the wings who might dare to agree with anyone's points that counter yours, but it is clear that you do it all the time. One person, in one forum whose first go to technique is to use bullying/silence techniques to cow others into not engaging.

You saying 'give me the data on frequency or it did not happen' is not going to happen as i am not going to do a study to count how many times you do and oppose that with the rest of your posting to calculate some 'rate' because even if demonstrable you will then hand wave it away or ignore it.


What i am alluding to which is the 'cancel culture left tactics used to silence' are not some fiction of my making. Google it yourself and you will find pages of material and pundits speaking to it and how damaging it is to discourse and how the internet has empowered the worst amongst us (you) to use it as a hammer.

You googling it and then reply 'give me quantifiable data or it does not exist' is just a silly game.

I can tell you are new to it all as you do not know what you are talking about despite speaking as an authority who can judge others who know far more than you.

We are discussing an ongoing change and push here, which does not require majority status for it to be true.

This 'change' along with the attempts to make opposition to the change (labeling everything Obesity shaming) is a significant issue of growing proportions.

You can try to push a line 'it is not meaningful if and until it is the majority' but that is just nonsense.

I am saying 'if you put up 2 ads, that are supposed to be motivational that are:

- a super fit and beautiful girl
- an morbidly obese person


Engaging in various activity or doing nothing at all, the one of the "fit person" is far more likely to draw not just more hate but actual calls for the advertiser to take it down and for the gov't to ban it, if in public under the call for it 'demonstrating unrealistic beauty standards and images'.

The one with the morbidly obese person is much more likely to be labeled, brave, inspirational and treated as if a good image for society, and the 'realistic image'.


And there is no shame in their game as posting a morbidly thin person, where due to a huge overlap in factors that cause over eating and under eating, have more similarities than not, is also wrong like, posting the super fit person, but for different reasons.

Even if the super thin person is really healthy, tha imagery would still be considered wrong.


So my argument was about what in society TODAY is most engaged in as wrong and most actively pushed for gov't and advertisers to remove from the town square, or advertising, and what is being pushed to being substituted instead.


Not engaging these pushes to control the dialogue and the imagery would be a tragic and growing mistake.

Again, QP, put down the twitter and look at the actual world around you. Do you see attractive people in advertisements? Are there actual hordes of people irl calling for these ads to be banned; have you talked with many people who say this?

Or is it an exaggerated nothingburger Twitter is putting in your head because Twitter knows you'll be enraged over it?

Amazing times we live in when the beautiful fit woman is flamed and cast aside for big Bertha

Every few weeks a new pseudo outrage. Good stuff

Twitter is not sentient fwiw

this sounds like a variant of the failed argument you guys try to push of 'Was Joe Rogan (XYZ) actually cancelled? If not Cancel Culture is not a thing'.

Or on the far right if they point to calling anyone who disagrees with them pedophiles or groomers and saying there is nothing wrong with it, if you cannot demonstrate enough real harm befalling individuals to a threshold they would accept.


Both of these extremes on the Left and Right are targeting doing the exact same thing and that is controlling what people can think or say or put out in public with the threat of aggressively labeling them ('fat shamer', 'groomer', etc) and you Trolly want to just ignore it on the left and right (actually I am sure you would say it is wrong on the right) pretending the measure is 'how many people like Rogan' or 'how much of main stream imagery' has been taken over. A strategy that pushes to 'do nothing until its significant'.

the problem is these tactics are done in a way to be deliberately loud and extreme to simply cow others into quiet compliance, and thus you can never measure how many people may have said or did differently without the fear of the one being focused on and called 'fat phobic', or 'groomer' etc.

You see a mother of one, wrongly savaged after having 3 kids and getting herself back in shape, and putting out a message of 'what's your excuse' and think 'she made the apology tour and is still around... so what the harm... how is this cancel culture', but what you do not see is all the people who saw the **** storm she got for a perfectly appropriate comment and question, who now will just avoid making such a comment, when such commentary is MORE needed than ever now.