Nintendo Apologizes to Fat Kids

[sirdanrhodes]

Hypocondria.

 

[Kikosemmek]

I cannot understand the letting them insult me statement, maybe I did, but after eleven staight years of it, emotionally I was so broken that I just sat there and took it as I could not do anything else.

I have started to come to terms with my childhood, and while I am beginning to acsept what had happened.

I understand. I have said before and will stress again that no one is invulnerable, and I am not holding you accountable for anything. Instead it is you who is doing that, through coming to terms with it. You are reckoning for your own sake. It makes me happy that you are because that means that you're healing any emotional harm that was caused. I commented because it is a revelation I made for myself about this type of subject. No one ever says we must respond to people we deem tedious or insulting, and there was never a rule that claimed that what people say about is us is a truth we must accept.

I must say that I find it absurd if a fat person takes offense to being called fat and points an indignant finger at the offender. What's really offending the fat person is the fact that they agree with the offender about a truth they find tragic or unacceptable. They should instead point the finger at the truth and attempt to alter either their opinion of it or the truth itself. By that I mean they can grow used and tolerant of themselves being overweight, learning to love themselves the way they are, or they can alter the fact that they are overweight by losing weight.

It all amounts to personal responsibility and resolve.

I do come off very harsh to many people by taking an aggressive stance about general mental discipline. I must say that I kicked my own ass, but that it also paid off. I do not condone the abuse you went through. Far from it. I sympathize with you, and this is why I posted in the first place. I was hoping that you'd learn something from my own experience. No one can touch your mind or your emotions unless you let them- unless you agree with them and don't dismiss them. Your life _does_ revolve around you, and to you everything dies should you do so. Everything that exists to you depends on you to exist, and so you should never lose sight that you are the mistress of your life, and that nothing should go on in it that you cannot deal with or accept- learn to accept everything and nothing will offend you, because once everything's accepted, nothing's taboo or unconscionable. Nothing will touch you.

That said, I'm sure you look lovely.

 

[stompy]

While I've been teased for being fat in the past (hazzar for growth spurts!), I do believe that the parent was a bit overzealous when it came to calling fault to Nintendo. I mean, while I understand where he's coming from (if someone close to you, especially your child, was insulted, wouldn't you also react?), I think that he should've at least talked to Ninendo support staff or something. At least he didn't sue though...

Edit: Hey, according to the BMI, I'm severely underweight (a 17 at last check, with was only a few days ago), and I struggle to run 1.6 km (uh, I got 9:56). So, we all know it's bullshit.

Edit Edit: A Username Not In Use, I too have terrible spelling. May I suggest Spell-Checker as a Mozilla add-on to help your spelling? (It only works with FireFox, but if you still use IE, it's worth downloading FireFox).

 

[A Username Not In Use]

THhat does make alot of sence kilosemmek, maybe he reason I didn't agree those dishing out the humiliation was that im my own aragunt (Christ I should have paid more attention in English class)mind I felt it would mean admiting defeat and letting them win, in the end I own shortsightedness did more to harm me.

Still there there is one thing that I do hold in great pride from my childhood, the path I taken after school and my choice of career and the qualifications I have taken were done because I wanted to do them, not to try and prove to everyone that they were wrong about me.

 

[Alphavillain]

Fat kids and their stupid fat parents. They're fat. Fat fat fat fat. FAT.

 

[Fangface74]

Interesting read everyone.

But maybe it's not the world that needs to change;

"No one can make you feel bad without your permission."

"You can only offend the 'offendable'"

 

[maxusy3k]

The funniest thing here is that WiiFit would never actually label anybody as 'fat'. It does have the capability to label you as 'obese' or 'overweight', but it sure as hell doesn't include a 'fat' setting.

Facts are fun.

 

[Mathew952]

Jeez, were they able to put down the cheeseburger long enough to make a lawsuit?

I hate most Americans now. I live in Warrington, PA, 18976, if you want to waddle over and kick my ass.

But Now a days they are characterized by whiny fat ass drama queens who are traumatized every time some one says something negative to them. In fact these people should be called even more names, and the more they complain, you taser them. Grow up. Grown men suing Restaurants, because they can't fit the chairs, and it hurts their feelings. GROW SOME MOTHER******** HAIR ON YOUR CHEST.

People who complained about this should be fined for disgracing the human race.

Note: It's not that their fat. it's not that your bald, or ugly, or whatever offended you. It's the fact you think your hurt feelings are worth 2.3 million dollars.

 

[Skrapt]

You are making a straw man argument here, perhaps without meaning to. I believe what he means is that killing a killer (A killer being defined as someone or something that kills) does not make you any less of a killer yourself.

No, he's equivocating on what the words 'murderer' and 'killer' mean. He's using them in one place to mean a person who commits an unjustified killing, and in another to mean a person who commits a justified killing--that's equivocating.

'Murder is the unlawful killing of a human person with malice aforethought, as defined in Common Law countries. Murder is generally distinguished from other forms of homicide by the elements of malice aforethought and the lack of lawful justification'

Killing someone intentionally, if they are a murderer themselves or not, makes you a murderer. There is no justification for murder, and there is no excuse therefore my comment still stands.

Here is the definition of a bigot:
a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

Being bigoted against bigots, DOES IN FACT MAKE YOU A BIGOT.

But I'm not 'utterly intolerant' of his beliefs. I'm justifiably, rationally, and supportably intolerant--hence, not 'utterly'. See the difference? It's a huge one. You missed the function of the word 'utterly' in that definition.

The word 'Utterly' does not excuse you of being a bigot against bigots. It doesn't mean 'oh, well if you have something to back it up you can ignore everything after the word 'utterly''. In fact obtaining justifications and rational arguments makes you more of a bigot, since you are trying to support your argument, everyone is a bigot, it's not a question of whether you are one, it's a question of whether you are one for better reasons then the person you are arguing with. I only laughed at the fact that people were making a fuss over information that wasn't accurate, and over a console that cannot formulate an opinion.

 

[Mathew952]

You are making a straw man argument here, perhaps without meaning to. I believe what he means is that killing a killer (A killer being defined as someone or something that kills) does not make you any less of a killer yourself.

No, he's equivocating on what the words 'murderer' and 'killer' mean. He's using them in one place to mean a person who commits an unjustified killing, and in another to mean a person who commits a justified killing--that's equivocating.

'Murder is the unlawful killing of a human person with malice aforethought, as defined in Common Law countries. Murder is generally distinguished from other forms of homicide by the elements of malice aforethought and the lack of lawful justification'

Killing someone intentionally, if they are a murderer themselves or not, makes you a murderer. There is no justification for murder, and there is no excuse therefore my comment still stands.

Here is the definition of a bigot:
a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

Being bigoted against bigots, DOES IN FACT MAKE YOU A BIGOT.

But I'm not 'utterly intolerant' of his beliefs. I'm justifiably, rationally, and supportably intolerant--hence, not 'utterly'. See the difference? It's a huge one. You missed the function of the word 'utterly' in that definition.

The word 'Utterly' does not excuse you of being a bigot against bigots. It doesn't mean 'oh, well if you have something to back it up you can ignore everything after the word 'utterly''. In fact obtaining justifications and rational arguments makes you more of a bigot, since you are trying to support your argument, everyone is a bigot, it's not a question of whether you are one, it's a question of whether you are one for better reasons then the person you are arguing with. I only laughed at the fact that people were making a fuss over information that wasn't accurate, and over a console that cannot formulate an opinion.

Isn't that the equal of saying that you're racist toward Nazis? Why do people feel the need to waste their lives arguing over the nuances of the English language.

 

[Skrapt]

Isn't that the equal of saying that you're racist toward Nazis?

Nazi's are not a race, they were a political party in Germany

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

GODWIN!

 

[Skrapt]

Again--you've being sloppy with your words. Of course there's "no justification for murder"; that's like talking about a married bachelor.

However, you're wrong that there is no justification for killing a killer. Although we don't use it anymore, in older legal systems if you murdered someone, that could result in being declared an "outlaw," someone literally 'beyond the law' which meant that you could be killed by the murder victim's kinfolk, or sometimes by anyone in society.

We retain this concept of legal self-help. If it helps you understand, think of a contract where I fail to live up to my promise. That's a breach. Now under certain conditions, *you* can breach the contract in response too. However, even though we both breached the contract, only *I* failed to live up to the contact's terms.

breach=intolerant

failed to live up to the terms of the contract=bigot

See how your logic is flawed because you're conflating 'utter' intolerance with justified intolerance?

Just because intolerance is justified doesn't mean you aren't a bigot, are you actually listening to me at all? I've said 3 times now, it's not wrong being a bigot, it all depends on your reasons behind it. And using the outlaw argument is a little invalid, considering it doesn't exist in most modern societies, I don't care whether you feel someone hasn't lived up to their promise or 'contract', taking matters into your own hands and committing an equally reprehensible act, and saying afterward 'well he did it first' is no excuse.

No, but it excuses me of being intolerant of them, which means I'm not a bigot in the first place--you need to be less sloppy with your words. That's why you're so confused--you can't keep the concepts straight.

Just because you have evidence doesn't make intolerance excusable, it just shows how intolerant that you feel you need to gather information for your belief. Me not keeping concepts straight? I've said the same thing 3 times yet it can't seem to make it's way into your brain.

Well, they *thought* they were a race.

they never thought they were a race, they held an 'ideal' in their mind that every German should be blonde haired and blue eyed, which is considered trying to create a racial ideal. Yes it's possible to be racist against people who have committed grave acts against humanity. All I've been trying to say is it's possible for someone to be the same thing they are accusing their enemy of, it's only down to who has the better reasons.