Is fat shaming ok?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by sw651
Do you have any evidence that they aren't?
Well no, though it does seem intuitively implausible. Why do you ask?
Original post by Implication
Well no, though it does seem intuitively implausible. Why do you ask?
Because you attempted to support your argument using a malformed question. If they answered yes, then you would've asked for proof of this. If they had answered no, then you would've claimed that they cannot use this as an example. Effectively there was no right answer.
Original post by sw651
Because you attempted to support your argument using a malformed question. If they answered yes, then you would've asked for proof of this. If they had answered no, then you would've claimed that they cannot use this as an example. Effectively there was no right answer.
What argument?
I simply asked him to justify his. I'm not sure what your problem with that is!
Original post by Implication
What argument?
I simply asked him to justify his. I'm not sure what your problem with that is!
I simply asked him to justify his. I'm not sure what your problem with that is!
Can you not read or are you being deliberately obtuse?! It is a malformed question!
Original post by sw651
Can you not read or are you being deliberately obtuse?! It is a malformed question!
It's not a 'malformed' question, whatever that means. He made a claim; I asked for evidence. That is perfectly rational and I'm afraid I can't understand why you're being so hostile.
Original post by Implication
It's not a 'malformed' question, whatever that means. He made a claim; I asked for evidence. That is perfectly rational and I'm afraid I can't understand why you're being so hostile.
A malformed question is a question asked in refute to a persons claim which cannot be answered either way because the asker would always be able to claim they are right.
As such your argument was not 'perfectly rational' as they couldn't answer without you being able to say they are wrong and that you are right.
Original post by sw651
A malformed question is a question asked in refute to a persons claim which cannot be answered either way because the asker would always be able to claim they are right.
How could I be 'right' about anything when I simply asked a question?
If I asked for evidence and the poster was able to provide it, then his argument could be considered sound. If not, not. It's that simple. You can call my question 'malformed' all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that it was a perfectly reasonable thing to ask if we're actually interested in determining the truth of the poster's conclusion. Which I am.
As such your argument was not 'perfectly rational' as they couldn't answer without you being able to say they are wrong and that you are right.
Again, I didn't make an argument. And the only situation in which they would be considered 'wrong' would be if they could not provide the evidence I asked for... which is exactly how it should be. Can't evidence your claim? Then don't expect people to believe it!
I'm genuinely completely baffled as to how you think pointing out a fallacious argument is somehow dishonest or not constructive. It is literally debate 101.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Implication
How could I be 'right' about anything when I simply asked a question?
If I asked for evidence and the poster was able to provide it, then his argument could be considered sound. If not, not. It's that simple. You can call my question 'malformed' all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that it was a perfectly reasonable thing to ask if we're actually interested in determining the truth of the poster's conclusion. Which I am.
Again, I didn't make an argument. And the only situation in which they would be considered 'wrong' would be if they could not provide the evidence I asked for... which is exactly how it should be.
I'm genuinely completely baffled as to how you think pointing out a fallacious argument is somehow dishonest or not constructive. It is literally debate 101.
If I asked for evidence and the poster was able to provide it, then his argument could be considered sound. If not, not. It's that simple. You can call my question 'malformed' all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that it was a perfectly reasonable thing to ask if we're actually interested in determining the truth of the poster's conclusion. Which I am.
Again, I didn't make an argument. And the only situation in which they would be considered 'wrong' would be if they could not provide the evidence I asked for... which is exactly how it should be.
I'm genuinely completely baffled as to how you think pointing out a fallacious argument is somehow dishonest or not constructive. It is literally debate 101.
Do you have trouble understanding the basic rules of debate yourself? You asked a question which could not reasonably be answered without you going "I'M RIGHT, TOLD YOU SO".
Actually, the poster was posting THEIR story and as such their thinking, they are entitled to an opinion even if you don't agree.
Now you are trying to whip out the long words to prove your intellectual worth. Everything you have said to me suggest you like to look smart by you complex use of the English language, but your arguments are uniformed and improper.
Original post by sw651
Do you have trouble understanding the basic rules of debate yourself? You asked a question which could not reasonably be answered without you going "I'M RIGHT, TOLD YOU SO".
I've just explained to you precisely how the poster could have given a reasonable answer: they could have explained why we should expect their experiences to be representative of others'. I've also repeatedly told you that I haven't made any claims about which I could be 'right': I'm simply questioning someone else's argument.
Actually, the poster was posting THEIR story and as such their thinking, they are entitled to an opinion even if you don't agree.
Yes, of course. I found their story very interesting. However, they claimed that 'overweight people really ought to be reminded of their weight' on the basis of their personal experience. My intention was to point out that this is not necessarily sensible unless we have reason to suppose that their experiences would be representative of others'.
Now you are trying to whip out the long words to prove your intellectual worth. Everything you have said to me suggest you like to look smart by you complex use of the English language, but your arguments are uniformed and improper.
I don't think I have used any particularly long words or anything 'complex'. I have tried to be very concise and to the point because you don't seem to be understanding what I am saying and are just being incredibly rude.
P.S. I'm not sure if you've noticed, but I'm actually making a monumental effort not to be as unpleasant to you as you are being to me.
(edited 8 years ago)
Fat shaming is not okay. Neither is smoker shaming or alcohol shaming. Who do people think they are? Live and let live. Everybody knows those things are bad for you. It is not your business what other people choose to do.
May be it indirectly effects everyone through the health system but that is a fundamental disadvantage of the health system we have. There may be some moral hazard. But it is not a reason to attack person liberty or shame people for their choices.
I'm a free person and I will do what I want to my own body. If you don't want to pay for my health care, fine. Go and lobby your Mp about changing the health care system. Don't come and try to shame me.
May be it indirectly effects everyone through the health system but that is a fundamental disadvantage of the health system we have. There may be some moral hazard. But it is not a reason to attack person liberty or shame people for their choices.
I'm a free person and I will do what I want to my own body. If you don't want to pay for my health care, fine. Go and lobby your Mp about changing the health care system. Don't come and try to shame me.
Original post by Sternumator
Fat shaming is not okay. Neither is smoker shaming or alcohol shaming. Who do people think they are? Live and let live. Everybody knows those things are bad for you. It is not your business what other people choose to do.
May be it indirectly effects everyone through the health system but that is a fundamental disadvantage of the health system we have. There may be some moral hazard. But it is not a reason to attack person liberty or shame people for their choices.
I'm a free person and I will do what I want to my own body. If you don't want to pay for my health care, fine. Go and lobby your Mp about changing the health care system. Don't come and try to shame me.
May be it indirectly effects everyone through the health system but that is a fundamental disadvantage of the health system we have. There may be some moral hazard. But it is not a reason to attack person liberty or shame people for their choices.
I'm a free person and I will do what I want to my own body. If you don't want to pay for my health care, fine. Go and lobby your Mp about changing the health care system. Don't come and try to shame me.
Strong.
Posted from TSR Mobile
A person’s weight can be a very sensitive subject. Discussing it has become taboo in society and many people get quite defensive if it is brought up in conversation. However, as I am sure you are aware, there has been a recent shift in public opinion with what is being called the “body positive” movement. The essential idea is that people that are obese or overweight have been marginalised in society and enjoy a lower quality of life because of the pressures put on them by the rest of society to conform to a “normal” body type. That it is time that people whom are overweight are made to feel more included in society as a whole.
Whilst I agree with this a statement; there is a culture of body weight focused abuse. Where the anti-Semites say Jew, the white supremacists say black, the “body shamers” say fat. I find myself unsure about the implications of a body positive society and how that would affect the welfare of the people within it.
Obesity is something that has been studied a lot. It has been repeatedly found that an increase in weight cause huge pressures on many of the bodies major systems, as well as causing horrible diseases like cancer and diabetes. Living a lifestyle that causes diabetes can’t be a good thing. Yet we are eating, as a society, more than we ever have. It is so very human to know that by living in a certain way we are destroying our bodies, yet we do not change. What would be the impact of having a society where there wasn’t a social stigma about the concept of obesity? We would surely see a rise in the number of people that are overweight and thereafter a rise in stuff like diabetes and heart disease.
In a world where people make choices about their lifestyle that benefit their long term health instead of caving in to impulses which benefit their short term enjoyment, then maybe a body positive society would make more sense to me. The vast majority of people being of a weight which doesn’t significantly negatively impact their health, yet also being tolerant of people that find difficult to lose or gain weight due to medical or serious psychological reasons. A society with this sort of balance sounds like a decent enough place to me. However it’s not going to happen.
Humans only began to settle cities a few thousand years ago and agricultural stability in the west has only been achieved in the last 100 or so years. Our ancestors roaming the plains and forests of Africa tens of thousands of years ago couldn’t afford to give up food when it was available. That would mean death, a state of existence that not many are fond of. Perhaps the availability of food has increased but our attitudes have not.
Whilst I agree with this a statement; there is a culture of body weight focused abuse. Where the anti-Semites say Jew, the white supremacists say black, the “body shamers” say fat. I find myself unsure about the implications of a body positive society and how that would affect the welfare of the people within it.
Obesity is something that has been studied a lot. It has been repeatedly found that an increase in weight cause huge pressures on many of the bodies major systems, as well as causing horrible diseases like cancer and diabetes. Living a lifestyle that causes diabetes can’t be a good thing. Yet we are eating, as a society, more than we ever have. It is so very human to know that by living in a certain way we are destroying our bodies, yet we do not change. What would be the impact of having a society where there wasn’t a social stigma about the concept of obesity? We would surely see a rise in the number of people that are overweight and thereafter a rise in stuff like diabetes and heart disease.
In a world where people make choices about their lifestyle that benefit their long term health instead of caving in to impulses which benefit their short term enjoyment, then maybe a body positive society would make more sense to me. The vast majority of people being of a weight which doesn’t significantly negatively impact their health, yet also being tolerant of people that find difficult to lose or gain weight due to medical or serious psychological reasons. A society with this sort of balance sounds like a decent enough place to me. However it’s not going to happen.
Humans only began to settle cities a few thousand years ago and agricultural stability in the west has only been achieved in the last 100 or so years. Our ancestors roaming the plains and forests of Africa tens of thousands of years ago couldn’t afford to give up food when it was available. That would mean death, a state of existence that not many are fond of. Perhaps the availability of food has increased but our attitudes have not.
(edited 8 years ago)
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
