Why is under-eating more demonized than overeating in society?

[Johnny Novgorod]

I should think any body type beyond "average" gets demonized one way or the other these days.

And isn't that the crux of it, what the fuck is "average"?

By World Health Organization standards, any weight that results in a Body Mass Index higher than 18.5 and lower than 25. Apparently if you have a BMI lower than 18.5 you're underweight, if you're higher than 25 you're overweight (physically unhealthy) and higher than 30 is diagnosed as morbid obesity. If you're anywhere between 18.5 and 25, science declares you "average" - or healthy, which I think is a prettier word.

Yeah, but that's from political pressure in and of itself.

25 is actually the midpoint. below 25 is 'underweight', above 25 is 'overweight', because 25 is the exact 'ideal' weight according to BMI calculations.

Incedentally, original definitions put anything between 20 and 30 as healthy, but the whole 'overweight' stigma seems to have killed that, and the extension down to 18.5 still being considered healthy is entirely due to the fact that most models would otherwise be classed as severely underweight.

Are you sure about this? Because I'm well below 25 and hardly model material. If you were to gather everybody I know into one room (it's doable) and repeat this to the point where you conclude I'm underweight because I have a 22 BMI, they would die laughing and I with them.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Both of them are equally looked down upon.
Under eating is just less frequent.

That drastically depends what country we're talking about.

 

[iRevanchist]

I actually agree with the OP. Under-eating is seen as a terrible waste, a disease, while over-eating is seen as 'hearty' or 'grateful'. Fat people are associated with jolliness, good humor, and friendliness, while anorexic people are either pitied or seen as stupid, easily manipulated by images of size 00 models.

 

[Dragonbums]

Both of them are equally looked down upon.
Under eating is just less frequent.

That drastically depends what country we're talking about.

Well I'm from the States. I guess I should've put that in my original post.

 

[loc978]

I should think any body type beyond "average" gets demonized one way or the other these days.

And isn't that the crux of it, what the fuck is "average"?

By World Health Organization standards, any weight that results in a Body Mass Index higher than 18.5 and lower than 25. Apparently if you have a BMI lower than 18.5 you're underweight, if you're higher than 25 you're overweight (physically unhealthy) and higher than 30 is diagnosed as morbid obesity. If you're anywhere between 18.5 and 25, science declares you "average" - or healthy, which I think is a prettier word.

Yeah, but that's from political pressure in and of itself.

25 is actually the midpoint. below 25 is 'underweight', above 25 is 'overweight', because 25 is the exact 'ideal' weight according to BMI calculations.

Incedentally, original definitions put anything between 20 and 30 as healthy, but the whole 'overweight' stigma seems to have killed that, and the extension down to 18.5 still being considered healthy is entirely due to the fact that most models would otherwise be classed as severely underweight.

Bleh. Politics and fashion. The original definition of 20-30 being healthy makes much more sense than the modified 18.5-25 range.
Being slightly overweight is hardly a huge health risk. It's only once you start to really get large that you get serious health problems.
For that matter, someone being in the 25-30 BMI range could easily be due to muscle; It weighs more than fat, and BMI is not a system that takes body composition into account - only weight and height.

It can go much farther than that. Some of us are just barrel-chested, dense-boned and heavy-muscled. When I had ~10% body fat due to fairly excessive daily cardiovascular workouts (about 2 hours a day, 5 days a week), at a time when I "didn't even lift"... I was by no means a bodybuilder... my BMI was ~27. Since then I've lost an inch off my height due to spinal compression and I'm around 15% body fat. I've also gained a moderate amount of muscle mass (I've gained a little under 10lbs), but I'm not "cut" by any stretch of the imagination. My BMI is ~31.
As Penn would say, BMI measurements are bullshit.

I would prefer to think of them as far from hard-and-fast rules. The kind that don't account for variations from a mean.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

Mr.Snips

I'm going to have to ask you, what part of the US do you live in? I'm in the Midwest, Indiana to be exact. Growing up, all I heard in health classes in school and on local and national television, and read in magazines, was the pitying of people with eating disorders, that it isn't their fault, that popular fashion media and advertising images are what is to blame.

The only ones I've ever seen get ridicule is overweight people. I have never once heard someone feel sorry for an overweight person and tell them that it wasn't their fault. I mean look at all the food advertising and all the good tasting but "unhealthy" foods that are made, the fast food culture. Not once does a fat person get told that it isn't their fault because of all the food advertising, they are told it is their fault because they chose to overeat.

The funny thing is that the people under eating have the same choices to make with all the same media types floating around them as with the over eaters. So if it is the over eaters fault for their problem, then it should be seen as the under eaters fault.

But I for one think we shouldn't demonize either side.

I'm from Australia. We have plenty of fat folks too. Last I heard, our obesity rates were roughly on par with yours.

As for the US, I've never lived there, so there's only so much I can say. However, I can say that your media, like most media, is full of skinny women and athletic men. The only time you see a fat person in the limelight is when they're being made fun of.

Of course, media isn't reality, but it does reflect it.

I think your fine in assuming that what the OP is talking about is rather odd. What you see over there is the same as over here.

I think OP must be living in a small part of the US where Opposite day has run rampant. Heck we've had the federal government trying to raise taxes on sodas and snack foods. Also we have seen one side of police state style law making in the New York city ban of the sale of any soda size higher than 16oz. (which I'm happy to report that as of March the soda size ban was overturned, and looks to be sticking) I mean seriously, all that shows that large parts of our society is trying to tell others how to live, demonizing overweight people, trying to pass laws on what they can eat or at least taxing the hell out of it.

From what I've seen of the topic of the whole, it is a big pity party for the under-eaters, while it is an all out war against "obesity" to the equivalence of people trying to smack overweight people upside the head with laws and taxes.

We should just let people be who they are and help the ones that want to be help, instead of forcing it upon them.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

Both of them are equally looked down upon.
Under eating is just less frequent.

That drastically depends what country we're talking about.

Well I'm from the States. I guess I should've put that in my original post.

I'm going to ask you too, what part of the States do you live? I have not once seen in the education system or local and national media, people that under eat get laughed at, called names, and get told "we are going to try are best to regulate the system and tell you what you can and can't eat, you stupid fatty, if you won't make the right decision, we are going to make it for you".

Every reaction to under eating I've seen is, "You poor thing, don't worry, it's not your fault. You have a decease and it it is the fault of fashion media and commercials with them constantly bombarding you with images that you've got to be thing, stop eating so much."

 

[Shoggoth2588]

Anyhow, as we can probably all agree, people tend to harbor more negative feelings towards undereating than overeating.

Outside of learning about what Bulimia and, anorexia are no: I can't say I've ever heard anything even resembling this. Personally, I chose not to eat most of the time because I'm neurotic about not having enough money to afford food...gas is more important anyway...and various other bills...(I'm from the US by the way)

Under-eating isn't more "demonized" than overeating.

Not even fucking close.

It's so not close that I'm having trouble coming up with a sufficiently silly metaphor. Perhaps something involving fluffy bunnies and pedophiles?

Fat people are regarded and depicted as gross, revolting, unattractive, unintelligent and legitimate targets for ridicule. People who under-eat are, at the very worst, pitied as victims of body image and the media.

Zhukov summed it up pretty nicely.

 

[Zantos]

I'm going to side with the World Health Organization and leave crackpots to their webcams, I think. Creds to Penn & Teller though, I have huge respect for those guys, but how's genetics an argument AGAINST the Body Mass Index? It just shows some people have it (genetically) easy to be fit, and others not so much because of slow metabolism. And lastly, about the "feeling good and happy with yourself", I agree with the feelgood vibes, but health is not an opinion, either you have it or you don't.

The problem here is that you're assuming a certain BMI is healthy, which is the problem people with BMI. It's worked out on your weight and height, but bears no regard to the composition of the weight. A good example of this problem would be with the British and Irish Lions team currently on tour. These are extremely fit professional sportsmen with big frames and large amounts of muscle, yet if you check their stats you'll see that according to the BMI scale many of them are overweight or obese (something like half and a third, respectively). To put it as you did they have health, even though their BMI puts them as people at risk of heart disease and diabetes. You might say that that's just a special case and doesn't count for everyone, which is true, but only in the same way that weight can also be an indicator of being unhealthy. Things like body fat percentage may not be possible to work out at home, but provide a far better picture of someone's health than their BMI.

BMI is a whole lot more complex than it looks, and it infuriates me when people assume my general body type due to my weight.
For example some military personnel was looking for new recruits. They called my house and asked me a bunch of questions. One of them was regarding my weight. When I told him he said that I should consider getting a liposuction.

Excuse me? What do you think I look like? A pot belly pig?
Most of my weight goes to my thighs, and more than one person has said that I'm heavier than I look.

He also never took my height or whether I'm more muscle than fat into account.
Ugh. Really upsetting.

I wish they would tell this to the general public. Not make broad stereotypes.

That's a pretty poor show, not sure how they intend to recruit people by recommending surgery to people.

At the end of the day, BMI is not some magical number that determines whether someone will live a long, healthy life or die early. It's a system the World Health Organisation adopted because it's easier than personally testing everyone and it works slightly better than the weight or "do you eat healthily and exercise" system. If I'm concerned about my weight, which I am, I can go to a medical professional and they can work out if my weight has a negative impact on my health and suggest changes I can make and a weight I can aim for which does not have this negative impact. They can regularly repeat tests as I move towards my target weight and reassess if that will be correct to not impact my health. Once reached, providing I can maintain my weight such that it continues to not have a negative impact then I won't lose any sleep over it. Unless one of the symptoms of weight issues was fatigue, at which point I probably will lose some sleep over it, but in a good way.

 

[RJ 17]

I've got to disagree with the very premise of this topic, though it could verywell be a regional thing. I know that here in the US, the fatties (myself included) are under constant assault. I think it started with that movie Super Size Me. But everywhere you look there's campaigns against obesity while in all honesty, I don't hear much of any commotion against anorexia. Hell, the First Lady of the country has made it her personal objective to wipe out obesity. Look at all the laws the mayor of New York City is enacting. The guy tried to make 32oz drinks illegal for crying out loud.

I don't know how it is in other countries, but here in the US, overeating is vastly more demonized than undereating.

 

[Emaruse]

Fat people are demonized more because they are ugly, disgusting, stupid, lazy slobs. While it may not be right all stereotypes have some amount of truth in them. Most people who are overweight are that way because they are either to stupid/lazy to eat healthy, to lazy to exercise, gorge them selves on food, or just dont give a shit about their body.


Plus have you ever seen an obese guy walking down the street on a hot summer day? Holy shit sometimes its enough to want to make you hurl.

Fat people are one of the last "free passes" for ridicule by society, partly because it's harder to hide. Never mind if the person in question might have a physical condition that prevents them from losing weight. Never mind if they're too poor to afford better food. Never mind if they have a nice personality and friendly disposition. They're fat, therefore they're scum. That's what the media and the fashion industry preach in this day and age. Indeed, it's this obsession with thinness that drives some people to starving/purging themselves in the first place.

It is actually cheaper to eat healthily then to not. Junk food, fast food, and even those cheap microwave dinners are all much more expensive then normal healthy food.

No offense to you, but what part of the world do you come from? I'm considered slightly overweight, due to being, and I'm proud to admit it, 218lbs and getting skinnier by the weeks due to moderation, and yet most people where I'm from know better than to say something to me in my face. Not everyone where I'm from is too stupid/lazy to eat healthy and exercise and even wonder how I lose weight so fast due to my habits of walking everywhere and eating what I can. Hell, I even see people fatter than me, but eat a hundred times more healthy than myself & exercise each day. Saying "Most" people do that, really assumes you've only met a set group of people who do that, instead of meeting many people who go through being overweight and try to find ways around it. And also, where I'm from, it actually costs quite a lot more to buy healthy food than junk food, seeing as I can get a full meal that can last for a few days and is unhealthy to a point for $5, but that much can only get me small fruits and stuff. Actual Vegetables in good supply, healthy food choices instead of junk food substitutes, vitamin waters & super milks cost about $5 just for one of said thing, if not more money involved where I am.

Personally, I don't understand why our world is full of such fools who love to ridicule fat people to make themselves feel better, when they want to under-eat themselves skinny. I wonder why no one promotes the simple word that would make many people keep themselves balanced: "Moderation". Especially with foods & drinks.

 

[Dragonbums]

Both of them are equally looked down upon.
Under eating is just less frequent.

That drastically depends what country we're talking about.

Well I'm from the States. I guess I should've put that in my original post.

I'm going to ask you too, what part of the States do you live? I have not once seen in the education system or local and national media, people that under eat get laughed at, called names, and get told "we are going to try are best to regulate the system and tell you what you can and can't eat, you stupid fatty, if you won't make the right decision, we are going to make it for you".

Every reaction to under eating I've seen is, "You poor thing, don't worry, it's not your fault. You have a decease and it it is the fault of fashion media and commercials with them constantly bombarding you with images that you've got to be thing, stop eating so much."

I live in Virginia.
I have a friend who has an eating disorder, and I know multiple people that are really underweight.
The issue here is that some people are honestly just thin I have a friend for instance who eats junk all the time, and the only weight she gains is in her boobs.
However to those that are indeed underweight the doctors never really pity them for being victims of self esteem. They treat it as a mental disorder, and encourage them to eat more bit by bit.
This may not be the same everywhere in the states. It may not even be the same withing the state of Virginia as a whole. However in the area I live in, that is the experience most of the people who under eat have.

 

[Gothproxy]

Anyhow, as we can probably all agree, people tend to harbor more negative feelings towards undereating than overeating.

They do? I've never heard anything about under-eating being looked at worse than over-eating.

I personally think over-eating is costing America in skyrocketing medical costs (especially when taxes pay for those 'big' people who can't afford medical insurance) and I am against it and look down on it, hard. But I've seriously never heard any news in the past few years about the dangers of "under-eating" and how people frown on it. Hmmm.

'Course, I live in the Mid-west, where 2 out of 3 people are overweight. So there's that.

 

[Ihateregistering1]

And also, where I'm from, it actually costs quite a lot more to buy healthy food than junk food, seeing as I can get a full meal that can last for a few days and is unhealthy to a point for $5, but that much can only get me small fruits and stuff. Actual Vegetables in good supply, healthy food choices instead of junk food substitutes, vitamin waters & super milks cost about $5 just for one of said thing, if not more money involved where I am.

Although I SERIOUSLY disagree with the person's post who you are responding to, they are largely right about the whole "healthy food is way more expensive" idea being a myth. This is probably the most reliable diet I've come across and I've been into health and fitness for 13 years:
http://gizmodo.com/5709913/4+hour-body-+-the-slow+carb-diet

Scroll about halfway down the page and you'll see that one person managed to do this diet on an average meal cost of $1.34 a meal, or about $4.02 a day. No, seriously. Now obviously this is in the states, but assuming you live in a first world country I can't imagine the difference being too extreme.

Also, all those vitamin waters, supers milks, etc. aren't necessary, and a lot of them are just complete rip-offs.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

snip

I live in Virginia.
I have a friend who has an eating disorder, and I know multiple people that are really underweight.
The issue here is that some people are honestly just thin I have a friend for instance who eats junk all the time, and the only weight she gains is in her boobs.
However to those that are indeed underweight the doctors never really pity them for being victims of self esteem. They treat it as a mental disorder, and encourage them to eat more bit by bit.
This may not be the same everywhere in the states. It may not even be the same withing the state of Virginia as a whole. However in the area I live in, that is the experience most of the people who under eat have.

That's the thing though, what the OP was talking about is people demonizing and making fun of people that under eat.

And you are saying that under eaters are equally looked down upon, your statement shows nothing of this.

The doctor isn't looking down upon your friends, under eating can be a mental disorder. I guarantee a doctor wouldn't label a person with an under eating disorder(which is a mental disorder) if they didn't actually have one. That isn't the ridicule that the OP is talking about, nor is it looking down upon.

 

[Dags90]

I would prefer to think of them as far from hard-and-fast rules. The kind that don't account for variations from a mean.

You mean like a statistical tool meant to be applied to large populations where the exceptions on either side will roughly cancel each other out? Because that's sort of the whole reason it was devised, and it's pretty good at that.


I would say that it's much more socially acceptable to make comments on someone's thinness or lack of eating than it is to mention obesity or overeating. I've heard girls gossiping about the amount other girls eat as being too little way more than talking about how someone is a fatty. Maybe just because anorexia is less common and therefore more interesting.

There's also notable gender disparity. Being a little (10-20 lbs) overweight is considered no real biggie for dudes, being similarly underweight brings in a whole host of issue of manliness and gender roles.

 

[loc978]

I would prefer to think of them as far from hard-and-fast rules. The kind that don't account for variations from a mean.

You mean like a statistical tool meant to be applied to large populations where the exceptions on either side will roughly cancel each other out? Because that's sort of the whole reason it was devised, and it's pretty good at that.


I would say that it's much more socially acceptable to make comments on someone's thinness or lack of eating than it is to mention obesity or overeating. I've heard girls gossiping about the amount other girls eat as being too little way more than talking about how someone is a fatty. Maybe just because anorexia is less common and therefore more interesting.

There's also notable gender disparity. Being a little (10-20 lbs) overweight is considered no real biggie for dudes, being similarly underweight brings in a whole host of issue of manliness and gender roles.

Except that it's not just used as a statistical tool, it's used as a standard that individuals are told in no uncertain terms to stay within. I should know, in the army my leadership had to measure my neck to waist ratio every single PT test, despite my quite obvious fitness (also, that came with a mandatory "counseling statement" about being overweight despite passing by a wide margin every time. Those go into your personnel file and reflect badly on you for promotion consideration). Security, police, and various other jobs with a physical fitness requirement also judge a person's performance partly based on BMI. Works for most people, so they don't bother changing it... doesn't stop it from being bullshit.

As for social demonization... I still haven't seen it, but then, the "mean girl" thing stereotypically happens outside the view of "guys" like myself. Just because I've never encountered it doesn't mean it's not happening when I leave the room... but dudes making fun of other dudes for being skinny? I've seen it in movies from the 50s... even in the army we were just jealous of their ability to run 4-5 minute miles effortlessly and their status as a much smaller target than the rest of us. Where the fuck is that sort of shaming actually a thing?

...also, I'm aware this is probably a difference in social groups, rather than regions. I tend to avoid excessively fashionable suburban people, whom I tend to think of less-than-charitably as "vain" (or, depending on their level of flamboyance, maliciously as "useless fashion victims"). Most of my friends, male or female, are of the same mind.

 

[FalloutJack]

Is it? I don't recall anybody saying this. As I recall, both runaway obesity and not-eating (anorexia and bulimia) were both terrible conditions. Speaking as someone who IS overweight, there are some people out there who shock the hell out of me. I can carry myself, long and hard, even fast. I'm strong too. But I hear about the Katamaris rolling around Walmart and I'm like "DAYUM!". That ain't right. The trouble is that too thin is also horrifying too. You only see the flaws and you half-starve to the point where your body can't even retain heat. Neither of these is worse than the other. They're both bad, so stop doing it!

 

[Emaruse]

And also, where I'm from, it actually costs quite a lot more to buy healthy food than junk food, seeing as I can get a full meal that can last for a few days and is unhealthy to a point for $5, but that much can only get me small fruits and stuff. Actual Vegetables in good supply, healthy food choices instead of junk food substitutes, vitamin waters & super milks cost about $5 just for one of said thing, if not more money involved where I am.

Although I SERIOUSLY disagree with the person's post who you are responding to, they are largely right about the whole "healthy food is way more expensive" idea being a myth. This is probably the most reliable diet I've come across and I've been into health and fitness for 13 years:
http://gizmodo.com/5709913/4+hour-body-+-the-slow+carb-diet

Scroll about halfway down the page and you'll see that one person managed to do this diet on an average meal cost of $1.34 a meal, or about $4.02 a day. No, seriously. Now obviously this is in the states, but assuming you live in a first world country I can't imagine the difference being too extreme.

Also, all those vitamin waters, supers milks, etc. aren't necessary, and a lot of them are just complete rip-offs.

Wow, you know what's spooky? I've been doing this diet plan for the past four years to 90% Accuracy! And I personally never knew this plan existed. Only things I've been doing off, is drinking Kool-Aid, which is sugar, avoiding sodas until one day specifically in the week, and other than that, I followed this plan perfectly without ever knowing said plan at all. And you know what's really screwed up? My drinking Kool-Aid hasn't made me gain more weight, especially since I've been drinking it everyday. Matter of fact, I've been losing weight each month because of that and constant exercise each day, proving once and for all that Kool-Aid doesn't make you fat, especially if you exercise each day and eat in moderation.

Thanks for showing me the origin source of my diet plan! But yeah, they are rip-offs most of the time, and I just found it best to exercise by walking 30min-1hr each day, or double/triple it on one day in particular, to keep my body focused. Eating Moderately actually saves far more money imo than going pure junk or pure healthy in my honest opinion. And before anyone asks, I was way heavier a long time ago, now I'm just skinny fat, and I love it that way. Althought, getting just a little bit more weight off wouldn't be too bad XD

 

[BNguyen]

Based on what I've seen, it seems that it's supposed to be the other way around. Most fast food places have shrunk their meal sizes, put in apples and yogurt, etc. And the recent legislation to limit the sizes of drinks that could be bought thing.
I mean, look at McDonald's happy meal fries size - they are essentially giving you five or six potato sticks, not even an actual french fry at this point.