![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
moonvoiceMany characterize paganism as an umbrella term "earth-centered" religions. Following from that there is an idea that pagans should be dedicated to honoring all life and be caretakers of the earth. The next jump made by many is that pagans should therefore refrain from eating meat. What do you think? Do pagans have a responsibility to honor all life and thus be vegetarians?
Following from that there is an idea that pagans should be dedicated to honoring all life and be caretakers of the earth. The next jump made by many is that pagans should therefore refrain from eating meat. What do you think? Do pagans have a responsibility to honor all life and thus be vegetarians?
This is, to me, such a flawed premise.
The thing is, it firstly assumes that pagans can only honour nature by 'letting it live' all the time. It completely denies the importance, and sacredness of death; and it ignorantly forgets that there is a natural life/death cycle with everything we do. I actually find it quite anti-nature, and anti-pagan, to forget that there is a natural life and death cycle that we are constantly a part of.
I mean we kill and eat plants while they're still living, even vegetarians need to own their part in killing to eat. Plants aren't exempt from being alive, sacred, or even potentially sentient just because they lack a central nervous system or can't scream in pain. We know that plants don't like being damaged and eaten, because many plants have evolved sophisticated and sometimes energy-consuming techniques to prevent it from happening.
I think that all life is equal, regardless of whether I can anthropomorphise it or not. I think that plants are equal to animals, and therefore it is hypocritical of me to value the lives of animals over the lives of plants just because we don't hear plants scream or see them struggle. I also find it kind of amusing that some vegetarians feel more superior than non-vegetarians, yet they are actually consuming a living being while it is still alive. Those fresh, raw vegetables are all living beings that still have a chance of living a full life in the ground - it is our call to strip it of its life in our digestive tract; often without thinking about it or even saying thank you for the sacrifice of the plants.
You would also hope that all vegetarians didn't ever kill any insects or trap mice or basically hurt anything that was 'animal like,' if that is their primary reason for eating vegies - 'respecting nature.' You can't logically have it both ways. If you refuse to eat meat because you see the sacredness in life, then how can you justify not being heart-broken every time you step on an ant, or inhale a dust mite?
The thing is, I feel that if people are using the 'respecting life / sacredness of life' reason as a justification for vegetarianism (as opposed to health reasons, or even just not wanting to eat battery meat / factory farmed animals (who does?)) then they are simply refusing to give the same sense of equality to all animals, let alone all living things. It's convenient, but I'm not sure if it's a really respectable way of being as a pagan.
I think there are a lot of flawed assumptions amongst those who think that eating vegetables only is more respectful than ever eating meat. Assumptions based on misunderstandings of the life/death cycle and the sacredness of death, assumptions based on the value of animals over plants, assumptions even based on cuter animals over the less cute ones (like insects or dust mites or mosquitoes)... so my answer is actually No. There is no reason that a pagan should be a vegetarian because they are pagan. There are plenty of reasons to be vegetarian, but 'respecting life,' is one of the flawed reasons, imho.
Following from that there is an idea that pagans should be dedicated to honoring all life and be caretakers of the earth. The next jump made by many is that pagans should therefore refrain from eating meat. What do you think? Do pagans have a responsibility to honor all life and thus be vegetarians?
This is, to me, such a flawed premise.
The thing is, it firstly assumes that pagans can only honour nature by 'letting it live' all the time. It completely denies the importance, and sacredness of death; and it ignorantly forgets that there is a natural life/death cycle with everything we do. I actually find it quite anti-nature, and anti-pagan, to forget that there is a natural life and death cycle that we are constantly a part of.
I mean we kill and eat plants while they're still living, even vegetarians need to own their part in killing to eat. Plants aren't exempt from being alive, sacred, or even potentially sentient just because they lack a central nervous system or can't scream in pain. We know that plants don't like being damaged and eaten, because many plants have evolved sophisticated and sometimes energy-consuming techniques to prevent it from happening.
I think that all life is equal, regardless of whether I can anthropomorphise it or not. I think that plants are equal to animals, and therefore it is hypocritical of me to value the lives of animals over the lives of plants just because we don't hear plants scream or see them struggle. I also find it kind of amusing that some vegetarians feel more superior than non-vegetarians, yet they are actually consuming a living being while it is still alive. Those fresh, raw vegetables are all living beings that still have a chance of living a full life in the ground - it is our call to strip it of its life in our digestive tract; often without thinking about it or even saying thank you for the sacrifice of the plants.
You would also hope that all vegetarians didn't ever kill any insects or trap mice or basically hurt anything that was 'animal like,' if that is their primary reason for eating vegies - 'respecting nature.' You can't logically have it both ways. If you refuse to eat meat because you see the sacredness in life, then how can you justify not being heart-broken every time you step on an ant, or inhale a dust mite?
The thing is, I feel that if people are using the 'respecting life / sacredness of life' reason as a justification for vegetarianism (as opposed to health reasons, or even just not wanting to eat battery meat / factory farmed animals (who does?)) then they are simply refusing to give the same sense of equality to all animals, let alone all living things. It's convenient, but I'm not sure if it's a really respectable way of being as a pagan.
I think there are a lot of flawed assumptions amongst those who think that eating vegetables only is more respectful than ever eating meat. Assumptions based on misunderstandings of the life/death cycle and the sacredness of death, assumptions based on the value of animals over plants, assumptions even based on cuter animals over the less cute ones (like insects or dust mites or mosquitoes)... so my answer is actually No. There is no reason that a pagan should be a vegetarian because they are pagan. There are plenty of reasons to be vegetarian, but 'respecting life,' is one of the flawed reasons, imho.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: A rambling response....
Date: 2008-06-19 03:23 am (UTC)Hey now... The first female images were big-bellied, big-hipped, big-boobed and small-headed. I don't use the fact that the Venii were fat as an excuse, but it is nice to know that I resemble something Goddess-like, lol ;)
Re: A rambling response....
Date: 2008-06-19 04:03 am (UTC)Yes, they were indeed, and in today's world, in real terms, she may be told that she will have trouble conceiving. Not a very fertile picture afterall?
It's one of my biggest fears.
Re: A rambling response....
Date: 2008-06-19 04:09 am (UTC)Periods are more likely to disappear in a person who is underweight / anorexic or undernourished, than a person who is overweight / obese.
And many of these women didn't necessarily always represent the fertility associated with pregnancy, but fertility associated with access to food and being able to indulge on fats (which was scarce and desirable back in the day, and still today in many Indigenous cultures - where a person who has access to a high fatty diet is considered 'healthier' than a person who does not).
There are no easy answers. Vilifying the fat or obese is no more useful than vilifying the thin. The difference is that the media consciously chooses NOT to vilify or blame the thin. Anorexics get help, thin people are celebrated, and there are even thinspiration communities celebrating being underweight on eljay; but the government is considering taxing the obese, refusing health assistance etc. A lot of people - even overweight people - vilify the overweight and fat, while turning a blind eye on problems with ALL body shapes. The media tells us to, and so we do it.
Re: A rambling response....
Date: 2008-06-19 04:24 am (UTC)Look, I totally agree with you here...
I am most interested in exploring why obesity appears to be a more prevalent trend in modern pagan circles than anything else. I guess as a sample, we're reflecting societal trends in general.
These days, having access to fats and oils is not a high symbol of status or wealth. Healthier food is more expensive and it's cheaper to fill up on junk (and frequently more enjoyable let me tell you) so how does it all fit in with the modern, neo-pagan view on diet ie meat v's vegetarian? There are no easy answers.
And without wading into the addordability side of things...don't even get me started on the continuing rich v's poor pagan divide :-) That's another topic entirely.
Forgive my harshness
Date: 2008-06-19 08:40 am (UTC)I suppose I take a very controversial viewpoint - obesity is unacceptable. Starved is unacceptable. Both have some fairly intrusive and unpleasant health risks, and just because anorexics (and particularly bulimics) are very likely to suffer similar problems as obese people doesn't make obesity a healthy lifestyle choice. At least with most of the people I've talked to, when you point out a skinny person that's an idol and have them confront/contemplate the idea of anorexia as a lifestyle choice, skinny is not so appealing anymore. I wish it got a lot more press, but I don't think it's as widespread outside of the modeling industry and teenage support groups.
The real key is activity, and most people tend to think of this in the form of exercise. What you eat will not matter near as much as how active a lifestyle you life. And that doesn't have to be pouring money into gym memberships. I think one of today's biggest problems regarding an active lifestyle is that a lot of work available and a lot of work spent trying to make a difference in some way is spent in front of a computer. Spending time to make a life on a computer is very useful... but it robs us of our time to move about, which makes exercise and the like a chore. :(
That being said, I'm technically obese according to my BMI. And I'm still not eating my best. I don't blame myself or others around me, and I don't think obese people need to blame themselves either. Blame has no place in health... all we need to do is recognize where we are and what we can do to live healthier. That is, if we want to life a healthier life and listen to our bodies needs... I don't really think the body functions as well when it's overweight, since the system would be somewhat out of balance, right? (Mine doesn't at least... I'm so freaking inactive.) And taking care of the body means that it wouldn't become an obstacle in empathizing with the spiritual... but I could be talking out of my ass.
Our science (always ruining the party) has given us relatively clear insight on our health, and I'm not sure it's a wise decision to stay obese because ancient cultures with no knowledge of organic chemistry and metabolism thought obesity was beautiful. I don't see how it's useful, except as an excuse.
Re: Forgive my harshness
Date: 2008-06-19 08:50 am (UTC)I don't know if I can forgive that kind of harshness, honestly.
To just blatantly rule a subset of humanity as being 'unacceptable,' is as unacceptable as saying that 'homosexuality' is unacceptable, I think.
It is that kind of bigotry which leads to the sort of marginalisations that we've seen in other subcultures (like, for example, the vilification of those who practice BDSM and kink), that we're now starting to see directed against the obese.
*shrugs* Just my take on it.
Re: Forgive my harshness
Date: 2008-06-19 09:14 am (UTC)I mean, it really is all someone's choice, and it's fine if they make that decision. I just hate the spreading of dangerously false information about eating disorders and health. Kind of like how I hate evangelists who say you'll go to hell if you don't accept Jesus as Lord and Savior (they have no proof!).
Besides, homosexuality is not a risk to your health. Saying homosexuality is a healthy thing is not endangering anyone's health or well-being.
You're also using big words that a poor University failure doesn't understand. But I want to clarify that I'm in no way saying that the obese should be ostracized in any way for being overweight, or choosing to be overweight. And I think people who are mean or disrespectful or discriminatory to the obese are disgusting, just as I think anyone who's horrible to another living being is disgusting.
My irritation is only directed at people who promote obesity as a healthy lifestyle choice. It's a lifestyle choice, and there are certainly other unhealthier lifestyle choices (smoking for one *whistles*), but it's still not healthy. And if you honor and respect all life, why not respect your own body? I actually think human bodies benefit from meat, and depriving yourself is a sign of disrespect, especially if you haven't arranged for an equally nutritious vegetarian diet. But then, I agree with you in your post.
Re: Forgive my harshness
Date: 2008-06-19 09:27 am (UTC)Again, how is that any different than going 'I didn't say homosexuals were unacceptable, just homosexual behaviour.' It sounds more PC, but at the end of the day, it's still pretty brutal.
Besides, homosexuality is not a risk to your health.
Actually, statistically, it does slightly increase the chance of contracting HIV in Western culture. Also, those who are homosexual are more likely to (due to societal pressures) experience mental illness and be depressed / commit suicide.
While societal pressures are responsible for this, it still means that if you are homosexual, you are at a greater risk for mental illness, suicide, depression, and poor social networks at the very least.
But I want to clarify that I'm in no way saying that the obese should be ostracized in any way for being overweight, or choosing to be overweight.
When you call something 'unacceptable,' you are ostracising the behaviour, and by default, the person. When someone calls 'homosexual behaviour' unacceptable, the only way a homosexual person can really be acceptable, is if they don't voluntarily engage in that behaviour (an attitude that some Christian churches are fond of cultivating). And to be honest, I feel ostracised by those sorts of statements. I find your 'obesity is unacceptable' perhaps among the most hurtful statements I've heard about obesity for a long time. And I cop a lot of shit for the way I look.
Perhaps it's because when people openly insult me for the way I look, I know they are intentionally being mean. When someone says something having no idea just how damaging their wording can be, it is a symptom of a greater problem.
It is now okay to call obesity 'unacceptable,' well it was once okay to call a lot of other 'problematic behaviours' unacceptable too. Doesn't make it right or okay. Just means that you can do it and be completely unaware of how you're hurting others. Well, I'm not sure if it will change anything your end, but it would be remiss of me not to at least acknowledge that I - as an obese person - was hurt.
My irritation is only directed at people who promote obesity as a healthy lifestyle choice.
I think it's nice of you to point this out now, but your original statement wasn't 'obesity as a healthy lifestyle choice is unacceptable,' just 'obesity is unacceptable.' It might seem like semantics to you, but it's a big difference to an obese person like myself.
Re: Forgive my harshness
Date: 2008-06-19 09:48 am (UTC)No, it's not semantics to me. It's poor, inconsiderate, and unintentionally hurtful wording on my part. And I understand the huge difference those two phrases have. I'm really sorry.
> Actually, statistically, it does slightly increase the chance of contracting HIV in Western culture.
I'm sure this is true, but do you think it's out of context?
It also seems like a healthier homosexual culture has developed over the past decade. Before, I wouldn't hesitate to agree about all of the social pressures... I mean, to be homosexual in the 80's pretty much meant that you had to take part in the hedonistic, anonymous, and "deviant" behavior of the subculture, didn't it? But now, in American, you have homosexual Republicans who can lead almost as "normal" a life as heterosexuals. My logic might be a stretch though... but I am hoping that society is coming to accept homosexuality and so those social pressures will minimize greatly. :) One can hope.
When you call something 'unacceptable,' you are ostracising the behaviour, and by default, the person.
You're right, and this is where I was in the wrong. I honestly don't condemn the behavior, and I don't condemn you AT ALL. (You know I think you're beautiful.)
When someone says something having no idea just how damaging their wording can be, it is a symptom of a greater problem.
I'm an idiot with an inability to communicate properly? I am aware of this, and I have accidentally done this to other people. I expect them to automatically understand what I'm trying to say... and that's particularly unfair online. Again, I'm really sorry.
It is now okay to call obesity 'unacceptable,' well it was once okay to call a lot of other 'problematic behaviours' unacceptable too. Doesn't make it right or okay.
That's also true. I'm not sure if I come across as though I'm a know-it-all, but I assure you that I'm always open to being corrected or called out.
Re: Forgive my harshness
Date: 2008-06-19 09:54 am (UTC)I do think that morbid obesity isn't a healthy lifestyle choice, anymore than being chronically underweight is.
I just... have a problem with the constant increase of the degradation, and acceptance of degradation of obese people. I see it, experience it, live it, and perversely it makes me want to lose weight even less than ever.
I have been persecuted for being bisexual, for being Wiccan, for being into BDSM, even for having PTSD and over the past year I have been increasingly persecuted for looking the way I look.
Funnily though it's not the doctors doing the persecuting, but people who act like doctors when they talk about all the health risks. My own doctor is fine with my weight, even told me I didn't have to lose weight before my surgery because it wouldn't have made that much of a difference. The surgeon, nurses and everyone else at pre-op didn't tell me to lose weight, even though I knew - and they knew - that I was officially 'obese' (I'm in the lower end, but I still am).
But my family? My friends? Complete strangers? *shrugs* It's only a matter of time before people think they're doing the right thing persecuting, vilifying or secretly disliking obesity and obese people; just like people thought they were doing the right thing persecuting and vilifying homosexuality.
And to be honest, I do think it's comparable. Persecution is persecution. There's a few other people on my Flist in a similar boat to me, and some of us are just tired of fielding more persecution for our choice to carry extra weight - than most of the people on my Flist would ever get for consciously choosing to practice BDSM / be homo/bi/pansexual / poly etc. etc. etc.
It just makes me incredibly sad, at the end of the day.
Re: Forgive my harshness
Date: 2008-06-19 10:21 am (UTC)I also think you're right in that there is something to compare. It might also be somewhat worse these days... I mean, when you're in kindergarten, no one picks on you for being the gay kid. But you have to suffer with the label "fat" all throughout your childhood. And people are less likely to believe that you're predisposed to be fat, even though "people are born gay." Gay seems to have mostly stopped being about willpower, but overweight people are still blamed for their "laziness."
Sometimes I wonder if my animosity towards authors who promote obesity as a healthy lifestyle is a misunderstanding. I haven't brought myself to read any of those books... for all I know, they could be exploring and revealing the myths about the persecution of the obese. I've always thought they were just writing excuses for the morbidly obese to become even fatter... so I really will have to open my mind and read what they have to say.
I mean, you're right. The way society views weight is unhealthy, but the way people treat each other... that's something I don't want to ignore.
Re: Forgive my harshness
Date: 2008-06-21 04:12 am (UTC)Contrary to the governments of the world propeganda departments, neither is obesity. Correlation does not equal causation.
Think about this rationally, if things like high blood pressure, diabetes, heart disease, et al were CAUSED by obesity, then ONLY people who are obese would get these things. Since there are a lot of skinny/normal people who get all of the above and more, then obviously, obesity doesn't cause it.
Obesity is also not necessarily a 'lifestyle choice'. In many of the above mentioned illnesses, obesity is actually a symptom of the disease. Did you know that for Insulin Resistance (a precourser to Type II Diabetes) obesity is one of the symptoms? How about hypothyroidism? How about how a lot of medicines (anti-depressants be most notorious) have a side effect of "increased weight" (to the tune of 50 lbs or more)? Some obese people eat less than some normal sized people do, and exersize as much or more, and still can't lose the weight.
Also on the lifestyle comment, do you really think anybody who is obese really wants to be obese? Do you really think, considering obese people are targeted for all sorts of bigotry and discrimination, that if there was a way to actually, honestly, lose weight and keep it off, they wouldn't take it? (Bariatric surgeries don't even have a good ratio here, only about 15% of the people who have some sort of bariatric surgery actually keep off the weight they lost.) Do you really honestly believe that every obese person in the world is just a fat slob, and therefor deserves everything they get (including doctors refusing to treat their real medical issues, and governments calling for such 'radical' measures as having doctors refuse to treat obese people -- which is already happening only not government mandated -- and other governments trying to enact laws that forbid people with a BMI of 25 or more from eating at ANY restaurant)? That's what it sounds like when you say, "Obesity is unacceptable."
Things that are being reported in the so-called studies aren't always true. A recent example of how studies get made up out of whole cloth can be found here: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Diet/story?id=4865889&page=1 This is the ONLY news source that told how the so-called study was even conducted, it was all statisticians who didn't even talk to one real, live person to see how much they ate in a day, for a control group or for the 'obese' group. Yet all other news sources had headlines of "Obesity the cause of global warming!" Um, no. Just no.
Oh, and since we're talking about obesity, which obesity are we talking about? Today's BMI indicators, or the ones from 1997, BEFORE the governments changed the BMI's to make people who before that weren't obese, obese overnight. Here is the CNN article about what would happen in 1998, before that change went into effect: http://edition.cnn.com/HEALTH/9806/03/weight.measure/index.html .
There are lots of places you can go and at least find out the other side of the coin.
Re: Forgive my harshness
Date: 2008-06-21 07:19 am (UTC)Think about this rationally, if things like high blood pressure, diabetes, heart disease, et al were CAUSED by obesity, then ONLY people who are obese would get these things.
I don't think I'd ever argue that obesity caused these things, only that they increased the risk of developing them. And even that is a stretch... having too much fat does not mean high blood pressure, and cholesterol is one of the biggest risk factors for heart disease (even thin people can have extremely high cholesterol).
Obesity is also not necessarily a 'lifestyle choice'.
Not saying it is. Just as I don't think anorexia is necessarily a lifestyle choice. Or alcoholism.
Also on the lifestyle comment, do you really think anybody who is obese really wants to be obese?
I can't say that every obese person doesn't want to be obese. My father would love to lose weight, my boyfriend, I would... every overweight and obese person I know would love to slim down. Again, my irritation stems from people who are so "comfortable" being obese that they encourage others to become or stay obese, no matter what the medical community (family doctors, surgeons, etc.) has to say.
Do you really think, considering obese people are targeted for all sorts of bigotry and discrimination, that if there was a way to actually, honestly, lose weight and keep it off, they wouldn't take it?
I believe they would take it.
Do you really honestly believe that every obese person in the world is just a fat slob, and therefor deserves everything they get (including doctors refusing to treat their real medical issues, and governments calling for such 'radical' measures as having doctors refuse to treat obese people -- which is already happening only not government mandated -- and other governments trying to enact laws that forbid people with a BMI of 25 or more from eating at ANY restaurant)?
No way. Actually, I read an article recently about this atrocity... hard to believe.
Oh, and since we're talking about obesity, which obesity are we talking about?
I hate the way the BMI works, as it has so many flaws. Biggest one: what about the weight of muscles? I like the waist to hip ratio more, but it has its flaws as well. If we use the latter, I would (loosely - based on a picture in my head) consider obese to be 1.4 in women (healthy considered to be .8). I'm not sure about men, since their waist and hips are a bit different... (healthy is .9 - 1?).
Re: Forgive my harshness part 1
Date: 2008-06-21 07:34 pm (UTC)Can you show me one study, done with real people and NOT funded by the diet or anti-obesity industries, that shows this? I'll take even one. I can show you at least three that show it does not. Heck, I'll even give you this link from the National Center for Health Statistics (using information given by the Centers for Disease Control) that state that death rates DECREASED. Yes, even in our "obesity epidemic" where all the obese people are slated to die prematurely from "obese related illnesses", well, we're actually living longer as a species. That does mean even the obese people are (because it would really scew the statistics if obese people were dying pretty young). http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/08newsreleases/mortality2006.htm The most interesting findings (to me) were declining deaths in all of the following areas: Other declines were observed for chronic lower respiratory diseases (6.5 percent), stroke (6.4 percent), heart disease (5.5 percent), diabetes (5.3 percent), hypertension (5 percent), chronic liver disease and cirrhosis (3.3 percent), suicide (2.8 percent), septicemia or blood poisoning (2.7 percent), cancer (1.6 percent) and accidents (1.5 percent). Heart disease, stroke, diabetes, hyptertension (high blood pressure) are all considered "fat diseases". If it's really true that their is a higher risk of getting and dying from these things, then why, while obesity is increasing, death from so-called obesity related diseases are decresing?
From me:Obesity is also not necessarily a 'lifestyle choice'.
From you:Not saying it is. Just as I don't think anorexia is necessarily a lifestyle choice. Or alcoholism.
Actually, you did say that. In your first post on this subject, you said:
and just because anorexics (and particularly bulimics) are very likely to suffer similar problems as obese people doesn't make obesity a healthy lifestyle choice. At least with most of the people I've talked to, when you point out a skinny person that's an idol and have them confront/contemplate the idea of anorexia as a lifestyle choice, skinny is not so appealing anymore.
Your first reply to Pia said:
I mean, it really is all someone's choice, and it's fine if they make that decision. While you didn't use the term "lifestyle" in there, by saying it's a choice implies (especially after what you said previously about obesity being a lifestyle choice) that it's a lifestyle.
Re: Forgive my harshness part 2
Date: 2008-06-21 07:35 pm (UTC)Family is not the criteria that most people use, or should use, to decide what's best for their health. My mother starved me from the time I was 8 until 14, telling me that at 90 lbs and 5'2" I was obese and unhealthy. A lot of doctors are prejudiced against the overweight (much less the obese). I've already pointed out how flawed the so-called data is that the doctors are using to scare people into losing weight... Headlines that read that OMG TEH FATTIES are causing global warming, world economies to go down, etc, that didn't have one piece of datum that came from an actual living human being. And surgeons will take one look at a person who is overweight or obese and tell them that their issues are all due to their obesity and if they just lost x amount of weight, they'd feel so much better. (Go here to read first hand accounts of doctors who've done just that: http://fathealth.wordpress.com/)
I've never heard anybody who is overweight encourage anybody else to be overweight. The FA (Fat Acceptance) and HAES (Health At Every Size) movements are not about getting everybody to be obese. It's about 1) acccepting yourself for who you are, at the size you are, to stop trying to starve yourself to hit a societal ideal that you may never fit into (because different bodies come in different sizes or because (general) your obesity is actually caused by a health problem), and 2) to promote the idea that just because I'm fat, that doesn't make me unhealthy. Nobody can tell by looking at me if I'm healthy or not, yet, everybody thinks they can. If cholesterol and blood pressure check okay, and stress tests have been done, and I work out 6 hours a week as well as lead an active life besides that, and am STILL fat, how can I still be unhealthy?
hate the way the BMI works, as it has so many flaws. Biggest one: what about the weight of muscles? I like the waist to hip ratio more, but it has its flaws as well. If we use the latter, I would (loosely - based on a picture in my head) consider obese to be 1.4 in women (healthy considered to be .8). I'm not sure about men, since their waist and hips are a bit different... (healthy is .9 - 1?).
We agree on the BMI. But I brought that up to show how the standards changed. In 1997 as much as 33 million people were not overweight (by today's standards). In 1998, overnight, those same people became overweight. The people who in 1997 were merely overweight became obese in 1998. There isn't an "Obesity epidemic" going on. What is going on is a scewing of the data that's out there, including redefining what is even the criteria to consider somebody obese. There is something very wrong with this.
And can you please tell me how a hip to waist ration defines "health"? Again, assuming that there are measures of health which require doctors visits to check (blood pressure, cholesterol, stress tests, glucose tests, etc all come out normal or good), which one cannot see. So, how is that person with a 1.8 or 2 ratio unhealthy if every medical indicator says shi isn't unhealthy?
This is what is going on in the world today. Straw man arguements (well, the obese want everybody to be obese), diagnosis determined by size, governments trying to marginalize us. Then when the obese people stand up and say, "Um, no, we're not taking the bs anymore" we get accused and ridiculed even more.
Re: Forgive my harshness part end
Date: 2008-06-21 07:35 pm (UTC)And yeah, you said your wording was "inconsiderate, horrible, and not what you meant", but you keep using the same words. Maybe you don't realize how deep the popular culture's ideal has gotten into your mindset? (this is not meant in a mean way, just an observation)
Re: Forgive my harshness part end
Date: 2008-06-22 04:09 pm (UTC)I didn't go to the effort of trying to find a study... I couldn't figure out what kind of study to look for. Even statistics on death rates doesn't say too much... I mean, we're dying less from diseases that many obese people are supposed to have. But maybe that's more of a reflection on the medical community than on our weight. And how is a study going to distinguish overweight individuals that are most likely overweight due to medications or hereditary or glandular problems... before any health complications (heart disease, etc...) develop? And how is that study supposed to definitively say that these people came down with the disease due to their weight? I'm just not convinced it's possible to prove, without a doubt, that overweight individuals are more prone to disease just because they're overweight. I mean... you convinced me by asking me to find a study.
So, how is that person with a 1.8 or 2 ratio unhealthy if every medical indicator says shi isn't unhealthy?
That's not what I meant. You asked which obesity I meant, and I've never used the BMI calculator seriously, so pre-1998 or post, I don't enter that into the picture.
What I meant by a waist to hip ratio was to give a clearer visual as to what I personally consider obese. And even then, it's only a visual description.
I mean, if I was on the fence about obesity being unhealthy before, you and
Maybe you don't realize how deep the popular culture's ideal has gotten into your mindset?
You're probably right... although it's my own fault; I can't blame popular culture.
Here's a bit of my background:
I worry about my father... he's probably "morbidly obese" and so he finds exercising and being too active really unpleasant. And his health suffers. :( I mean, the only obese person I know (face-to-face) without a health complication is my boyfriend... even my blood pressure has started a major incline since gaining a lot of weight.
I mean, now I can apply what I've learned and observe that it's not because of the weight gain - but most of it is probably due to lack of activity (others being food choices, genetics, and whatnot).
And... you know, before I bury my head further up my ass... I'm sorry. I just... I'm not a good person to debate with, and I'm not very comfortable continuing this thread.
Re: Forgive my harshness part 2
Date: 2008-06-22 04:07 am (UTC)I have put on a lot of weight over the past two years, and constantly thought that many of my health problems were because of it. But my blood sugar has been perfect, my cholesterol is low, my blood pressure is normal (it used to be low, actually, and has stabilised so I no longer get vertigo when I stand up).
And when I asked my doctor 'don't I need to lose 10 kilos for my surgery or something?' she laughed and said, 'studies so far actually show that it doesn't make that much of a difference on survival rates or how you go in physiotherapy (PT), it's your commitment to getting fit again that will make a difference.'
I exercise between 4-8 hours a week. It's not as much as I'd like, but it's more than many of my friends do. I eat healthy - I mean sure I do eat ice cream and chocolate, but the bulk of my meals are high in vegies and proteins, and moderate to small sized servings.
Watching Joy Nash' YouTube Fat Rants made me realise that I AM getting fitter, and I DO lead a healthier lifestyle than my rake-thin friend Mat who consumes two tubs of Yogo (chocolate custard) for breakfast every morning, and thinks that a kilo bag of M&Ms is okay to consume in one sitting.
It's made me realise that I am fat, not overweight, not 'slightly obese.' I'm fat. And I'm physically quite healthy (most of my health problems are side effects of PTSD). I'm also getting fitter by the day.
I am starting to, and struggling to realise now that I don't need to lose weight to be a good, healthy, fit person. As much as I love curves in other women, I have hated them in myself for so long... because of the prejudice of the media and others. And like you, I'm tired of feeling guilty or pressured for something I should never have been made to feel guilty or pressured about in the first place.
It's interesting what the studies reveal, isn't it?
Re: A rambling response....
Date: 2008-06-19 05:15 am (UTC)*sighs*
Re: A rambling response....
Date: 2008-06-19 05:37 am (UTC)Friends of mine are still seeking a successful IVF cycle, even after losing weight to get her BMI down from 48 to 40.
She was told her weight was a contributing factor and it was, but not in isolation to other fertility problems they have.
Re: A rambling response....
Date: 2008-06-19 05:46 am (UTC)It's one of my biggest fears.
I think in this day and age, much like controlling our consumption of resources, it's in humanity's best interest to control our populations as well.
I am childfree-by-choice and will remain so, thanks to better reproduction choices via modern chemistry.
Re: A rambling response....
Date: 2008-06-19 05:58 am (UTC)Do you cop alot of flak from friends/parents for your choice?
I think 'choice' is the most important thing for me...I'd hate to think that my lifestyle or nature would be able to take away my choices about my own fertility, but if that were to happen, I'd live with it. I wouldn't pursue IVF.
Re: Childfree = Carefree (Almost)
Date: 2008-06-19 02:07 pm (UTC)My sisters offered to pay me to have a kid and give it to them. Almost everyone I meet assumes that 'I don't have kids... YET'. People also call me selfish and tell me that one day I'll be ready to 'grow up and start a family', and some people w/kids are condescending nitwits who assume they can treat me like a child because I don't have any - holey moley, I'm 34!.
My husband had a vasectomy at 20, years before we even met & there was one discussion w/his parents about the possiblity of him having it reversed so we could give the mother-in-law a grandchild. I think the look of death I threw at her was enough to let her know that was a big fat no chance.
I do try to tone down my own preachiness - I hurt a good friend of mine by openly voicing my disapproval of large families on my blog (she's overweight, too - no affect on her fertility at all, she's got 6 kids), my political stance on welfare-moms, the financial unfairness that the child-free suffer from, the virtues of Zero Population Growth policies, etc.