Why it is acceptable to criticize smokers, but not fat people?

uncanny474

New member
Jan 20, 2011
222
0
0
Brawndo said:
On the chance that you're a troll, screw off.

On the chance that you're serious...

WHAT?

Addressing your bold points, in order.

1. Being fat hurts other people.

As for the health insurance thing, that's like saying that you're selfish because you've got any other chronic disease. Being fat isn't necessarily something you can control with healthy eating. There's a lot of genetics that plays into it, as well as you stretching as far as you can for something to hurt fat people with.

As for your assertion that it hurts children because there's "no healthy food in the house", that's just not true. Period. My mother keeps the pantries stocked with whole-wheat foods, vegetables (both canned and fresh) and fruits (mostly fresh). Yes, we have ACCESS to junk food, but we have access to non-junk-food as well, and my brother is thin as a twig to show for it.

Plus, begin fat isn't harmful to everyone in a radius around you. If I binge, everyone gets grossed out and calls me a pig. If I smoke, I give the people around me cancer. Kind of a difference there.

2. IT'S A COMBINATION OF GENETIC STUFF AND BEING RAISED THAT WAY.

I was raised by overweight people. My family has been overweight as far back as I can remember. My sister is overweight, and so am I. There are clear genetic factors that allow us to gain fat easier than a normal person. Also, we were raised eating extra amounts of food and, at this point, it's second nature. If anything, it may be a mental disease. It is NOT a choice. And it happens a LOT more often than you think.

BTW, I RARELY eat out at a fast food joint. Don't have the money for it. Maybe once a month I go to McDonalds and eat a meal there. Occasionally even twice a month. But I don't do it as frequently as you seem to be implying. My meals are, by and large, home-cooked. They're not health food, but they ARE home-cooked, which is definitely more healthy than fast food.

Generally speaking, for lunch, I have ramen and lunch meat, if I eat lunch at all.

Stop generalizing, stop soapboxing, and stop trolling.
 

Suicidejim

New member
Jul 1, 2011
593
0
0
I'd say one reason is that over-emphasizing weight issues can be incredibly damaging if done badly, whereas smoking, less so. Anorexia, bulimia, etc. often are rooted in this paranoia about not being fat. The worst thing anti-smoking propaganda can do is make somebody stop smoking. But being too heavy-handed on the whole "YOU MUST NOT BE FAT" issue can kill someone. The whole 'big girls can be beautiful' concept was, I think, developed with that issue in mind, not so much as a way of justifying obesity, but preventing people from doing dangerous things to lose weight (because a lot of people get a little crazy and impressionable when it comes to health).
 

BlumiereBleck

New member
Dec 11, 2008
5,402
0
0
Are you kiddin'? People, particularly the media, hollywood, magazines, rag on obese folks all the time, to the point they've made a show dedicated to the degrigation of obese folks.
 

teisjm

New member
Mar 3, 2009
3,561
0
0
Both are cóstly for the medical system. Though at least where i live, smoking is heavily taxed, to compensate for it, alchohol as well. But while theres just come a fat-tax around on fat food, fat meat is still more expensive than lean meat, and the same goes for a lot of food.

People who don't act tolerant while smoking leads to second hand smoking. As a smoker i'm all for specified smoking areas at jobs, bars and public places, so people don't have to be bothered by my bad habbits, unless they choose so themselves.
I even tend to keep smoking to the kitchen when having non-smokers over at my appartment, where i close the door and open the window when smoking to bother them as little as possible, even though we're at my place.
If they choose to come along to the kitchen when i go smoke, they're choosing for themselves.

As for all the talk about "no second hand fat" i've seen a documentary, where they had statistics showing, that kids with fat parents were more likely to become fat, than kids with non-fat parents.
You could argue that this is somewhat the same, since it's the parents dietary choice, thats making their kids fat.
I'm fully aware that these things are not identical, i'm not retarded, so don't try to tell me that i don't get fat if teh guy next to me devours 10 hot dogs, i'm fully aware of that. Just pointing out that for some people, their obecity affects others negatively.

Another thing, and this is only my observation, not really backed by any statistics.
There seems to be a lot of sympathy from people, when someone has a hard time loosing weight, and people acknowledge that it's hard. But theres a whole lot of ignorance about how hard it actually is to quit smoking.
Both are theoretically easy, for smoking, you just gotta stop stuffing ciggarets in your face and lighting them, and for obecity, you just gotta stop stuffing more calories in your face than you burn (regardless of rare medical conditions, you you eat less th<n you burn, you loose weight, unless you can suck in nutrients and calories from the air around you)
But in the end, both things are made hard, by the sense or hunger, and the addiction to nicotine (and what other crap they stuff the ciggarets with)
I know it differs from person to person, some peopel will suffer rfom terrible hunger if they don't eat enough, while others like myself can drop the excessive holiday pounds in less than a month without even trying, or go 24+ hours without food without beeing too bothered by it.
And some people can quit ciggarets without a lot of trouble, while others, like me end up willing to tear their face apart to still the hunger for ciggarets.

I don't know how to make a fair sollution to the costs obecity puts ont he medical system, you can't just taxate fat food, cause it's not nececerily bad in itself, if mixed with other stuff (yeas healthy food can contain bacon) and excercice.
Ciggarets on the other hand should just (and again, i speak as a smoker) be taxated, so the government gets in through smoke-tax what they loose due to smoking related medical expenses.

And as for the guy who said that the media/society is already hard on fat people, i dunno about your social circles, but i know both guys and girls, who will instantly turn down a potential partner for beeing a smoker, and as a smoker, i know first hand how people pick on you for smoking.
Both smoking and obecity are lifestyle flaws* that a lot of people find unattractive, it's just easier to see obecity in media, cause you can tell that a person is fat from a picture, youc an't tell as easily that someone smokes, unless they're actively smoking in the shot.

*yeah yeah, rare medical exceptions exist, but i'm honestly tired about that minority beeing used as an excuse for the big majority of fat people, who's main problem is the same lack of spine/willpower that's preventign me from quitting ciggarets for good.
 

Fetzenfisch

New member
Sep 11, 2009
2,460
0
0
as a hedonistic aestheticist i can get along with smokers way better. Even if i got a sensitive day they would only annoy me when sitting right next to me smoking indoors. while the look of fat people repells me all the time. plus smoking can be enjoyable at some times. a nice cigar ata party outside in a autumn night, a sweet spliff shared with fun people, an aromatic hookah in a round of friends. While being fat cant be worthwile at all. So its 1:0 for the smokers
 

Mallefunction

New member
Feb 17, 2011
906
0
0
Electric Alpaca said:
Mallefunction said:
I am not saying that the government should take control of people's eating habits. What I'm saying is that fast food and junk food companies SHOULD NOT have the right to influence the government!
I did a quick search of "pizza is a vegetable" as I made the mistake of believing you in the first instance; I've seen you post a lot and credited you with usually being quite well informed.

This is what I got:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/did-congress-declare-pizza-as-a-vegetable-not-exactly/2011/11/20/gIQABXgmhN_blog.html

First an excerpt:

Congress passed a revised agriculture appropriations bill last week, essentially making it easier to count pizza sauce as a serving of vegetables. The move has drawn widespread outrage from consumer advocates and pundits, who see ?pizza is a vegetable.? as outlandish.

There?s just one little misperception: Congress didn?t declare pizza to be a vegetable. And, from a strictly nutritional standpoint, there?s decent evidence that lawmakers didn?t exactly bungle this decision.
What this link gives you (in summary; you're welcome to read the facts yourself) that it is an argument between nutritional value rating by volume of serving. (Of course you can slander the publication if you choose, but as far as I new the Washington Post is reasonably high brow, American equivalent of our Telegraph etc)

Tomato puree happens to be used on Pizza, so quick thinkers have jumped on this to attack the administration.

Pizza isn't unhealthy

For example: http://www.eatingwell.com/recipes/thai_chicken_pizza.html

In fact, I regularly use pizza as a accompaniment to my own training regimes.

Regulation of fast food isn't needed in the slightest, it's the schools delivery system and budget that needs to be reviewed pure and simple, it's that which is causing the issue. Nothing to do with fast food companies.

The general ignorance of the public, the popularity of misinformation as delivered by Fox News and how individuals are happily willing to launch themselves onto one side of the fence really makes it difficult to make any form of strides for the better.
Yes, I know that they were calculating the tomato puree and not the pizza itself. I have read up on the subject. My point is congress is going about this by promoting it as a healthy option rather than a pure uncooked, unprocessed vegetable. They are essentially stating that since pizza contains a certain amount of sauce that it is healthy. That sends the message to people less informed that eating pizza all the time is good for you.

Yes, well made pizza is not that unhealthy, but for anyone who has seen the kind of slop that most kids are served labeled 'pizza'...well. I remember at my own cafeteria in elementary that our 'pizza' was literally half a loaf of white bread with some sauce poured in the middle and about 5 pounds of cheese on top. We called them pizza boats.

Once again, I am not saying that fast food needs to be regulated. I do not think they should be allowed to influence the government as they have for the past few decades.
 

EmperorSubcutaneous

New member
Dec 22, 2010
857
0
0
Quite often, people become fat because they're too overworked to make their own food and too poor to buy any healthy pre-made food, and so they're forced to subsist on cheap, fattening food like McDonald's. Then, because they're obese, they start having expensive health problems, which means they have even less money to spare for good quality food. It's extremely sad.

Smokers, on the other hand, most certainly have no one to blame but themselves. As much as people go on about peer pressure and whatnot, nobody enjoys their first couple cigarettes. You have to put in actual effort to get yourself addicted to them in the first place.
 

SilverUchiha

New member
Dec 25, 2008
1,604
0
0
GamerKT said:
It usually takes longer for someone to stop being fat than to stop smoking. Also, smoke stinks. The most a fat person could inconvenience another is by taking up extra space or food.
Fat people can stink too. Trust me. I've met my share of smelly people.

Brawndo said:
1. While I don't like being seated next to a smoking section in a restaurant or whatever, I agree that smokers shouldn't taking the beating they have been over the many years. But I also can attribute this opinion to the fact that restaurants were forced (at least in my state) to ban smoking from their establishments and I disapprove of government intervention when it comes to people running a business. It's a stupid law. I don't smoke, and even I think it's wrong.

2. When has it been wrong to hate on fat people? Well, okay, I guess I don't hate, but I certainly don't see why we would treat them any nicer than anyone else. Then again, I work in food service and when I see fat people come up to order food... goddamn I want to just leave and not come back until they are good and gone. Plus, why do they ride around in those electric scooters now? Isn't part of the reason that people are fat because they don't move around to lose any weight anyway? That seems to perpetuate the problem more than anything. Not to mention I've never found overweight people attractive in the slightest. For both shallow reasons and for deeper issues like I don't want to be in a relationship with someone who may eventually have health issues I may have to pay out the nose for or, god forbid, I end up with kids who are overweight and I have to deal with their health issues too.

Umm... that's all I got to say to weigh in on this issue. Cheers.
 

Giant Space Hamster

New member
Jul 5, 2011
10
0
0
Personally I don't think it's okay to criticize smokers or obese people. Its their body, their allowed to do with it as they please. It only becomes a problem if it could possibly harm others, possibly by second hand smoking. Also despite being unpleasant second hand smoking won't cause much permanent damage unless exposed frequently or for a long period. And one last thing, I don't really see a difference between chain smoking and binge drinking, except binge drinking's possibly more harmful to others, yet I don't see any anti-alcohol marches now (although I do live in the UK and we have a culture of drinking. also there was prohibition but hat was just under a centery ago).
 

RedTNT

New member
Nov 16, 2011
24
0
0
michael87cn said:
Deviate said:
To me, fat people are actually a health risk and a major added stress in my day to day life. I'm a paramedic and my job is basically to help those who need help. Now, while I will give -anyone- the finest treatment and security while under my care, be they murderers, child molestors, fat people or smokers... there is a certain amount of mental strain whenever I deal with a patient.

Self-inflicted injuries, diseases or illnesses are... vexing. They're very annoying. Every time I have to go out and give medical care to someone who did these things to themselves, I might be too busy with that person to respond to a call where someone needs help -without- having caused the issue themselves.

Smokers are almost -never- an issue in that regard. When a smoker gets cancer or other lung-related troubles, they are almost never in need of an ambulance to transport them anywhere, or emergency medical aid. Fat people, though? I have long since lost track of how many times I've responded to calls where self-inflicted obesity is the primary cause of an illness, injury or whatever I'm responding to.

These are people I have to give aid to, then -very- often strain my back and risk my own health and safety to carry on a gurney or carry-chair into an ambulance (where they barely fit) down stairs and so on. It's painful, it's very hard and every single time it's a gamble with my own health.

Do these people deserve medical aid? Absofuckinglutely, just like everyone else out there. No one should ever be deprived of medical aid when needed. Do these people deserve to be 'protected' from the same treatment smokers and so on get? No. Not even remotely. Yes, there are some glandular and genetic causes for obesity, but those are extremely rare compared to the amount of horribly obese people there are out there. And even those cases -can be rectified through diet, activity and in some cases, medical treatment!-

Being overly obese IS a choice. Even in the cases of the people who have legitimate medical conditions that makes obesity much more likely. Do they deserve hatespeech or harassment? Absolutely not. Do they deserve to be PROTECTED from pressure and social endeavors to reduce obesity internationally? Hell no.

If you're fat... I'm going to come give you the best damn medical treatment I can give you when you inevitably have serious and acute medical issues as a result of it. You should, however, know that YOU are putting my health at risk with your choice, and you are also costing society massive amounts of money because you have -chosen- to be fat.

It's damn near impossible for us not to resent that fact, no matter how good we are at hiding that we do.
A very selfish outlook for someone employed in a supposedly very selfless job.

I wonder if that "we" is just you and your regular ambulance buddy.

Your post reeks of "me, me me, oh poor me, smokers aren't a problem because they're not -my- problem" "fat people make me have to work harder, I hate them!"

Boo freakin' hoo. You get paid well and you "made the choice" to do that job. Deal with it ,whiney.
I agree with many of your points here. I'm a reporter and did a feature with local paramedics earlier this year. While being shown around an ambulance I was shown a hoist which had just been installed to replace another one - increasing the maximum weight it could lift. The paramedics told me that they were dealing with more and more overweight patients for health problems. It costs the NHS a lot to deal with everyday.
 

Goldjit

New member
Jun 21, 2011
109
0
0
Simple. Fat people don't blow their fat into my face at the time. Smokers however...
 

DaMan1500

New member
Jul 10, 2009
471
0
0
Um, when were we not allowed to look down on fat people? I'm pretty sure fat people are one of the last groups that we ARE allowed to publicly mock without looking like total bastards because of their wretched immoral fatty existence. In fact, isn't Michelle Obama trying to get fat people put in internment camps or something?
 

hooglese

New member
Feb 14, 2011
104
0
0
I believe that fat people deserve more punishment than smokers because smokers have the addiction excuse. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXTq2_3LfXM
 

Biodeamon

New member
Apr 11, 2011
1,652
0
0
Because fat people sometimes didn't have a choice to become fat whereas smokers had all the choice in the world. however people who became fat by choice not genetics are the worst of all, sucking up all the wellcare for stuff they brought on by their own hands. I personally think that smoker's can whatever they want as long as they don't smoke around other people, then it's second degree-murder.
 

Zorg Machine

New member
Jul 28, 2008
1,304
0
0
Two reasons. One, fat people look more pathetic (I said look, not that they are) so it's just not sporting to mock them. Two, it's easier for a smoker to stop smoking than it is for a fat person to get thin (in a lasting, healthy way).

Also, fat people don't damage me when they eat next to me.
 

Electric Alpaca

What's on the menu?
May 2, 2011
388
0
0
Mallefunction said:
Yes, I know that they were calculating the tomato puree and not the pizza itself. I have read up on the subject. My point is congress is going about this by promoting it as a healthy option rather than a pure uncooked, unprocessed vegetable. They are essentially stating that since pizza contains a certain amount of sauce that it is healthy. That sends the message to people less informed that eating pizza all the time is good for you.

Yes, well made pizza is not that unhealthy, but for anyone who has seen the kind of slop that most kids are served labeled 'pizza'...well. I remember at my own cafeteria in elementary that our 'pizza' was literally half a loaf of white bread with some sauce poured in the middle and about 5 pounds of cheese on top. We called them pizza boats.

Once again, I am not saying that fast food needs to be regulated. I do not think they should be allowed to influence the government as they have for the past few decades.
Apologies, your opening statement led me to believe otherwise.

Congress didn't mention pizza. The bill didn't mention pizza. Pizza has been brought into it by extraneous parties, because it happens to be the best avenue for defamation with the item that has been handed to them. This is what sensationalist media does. For clarity: they are not "essentially" stating anything. "Essentially" is an overused, reassuring word to try and lean a person into a manner of thinking agreeing with the deliverer.

Tomato purée is healthy:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/tomato_puree.

It's tomatoes and salt (maybe this is the bad ingredient). Some water sometimes. If this constitutes an accreditation of being unhealthy, then so is every cooked vegetable.

Although:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=raw-veggies-are-healthier

(Please read the article, or at least the last paragraph on page 2 for the summary).

The bill is bang on, it's the people abusing it. This is what I'm talking about when referring misinformation and misdirection. The real issues are being missed.

I really want to see where where fast food has ever successfully leaned on government. For example in the UK, McDonald's serve salads and the such as an alternative to evil food on the other side of the menu. I really fail to see what interest there is to chase one agenda when they already have the opposing relic catered.

If McDonald's in America doesn't offer this option, this says more about supply and demand than it does about some conspiracy theory that the fast food chains are promoting darkening our eating habits. Unless offering healthy articles is part of the ruse?

But you're also using schools as a demon, what do they have to do with the fast food industry? Are they being instructed on how to prepare their food by the CEO of Burger King?