Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ben Butler)
    You can't ban fat people from TV. It wouldn't reflect the reality of our society and would come across as being extremely discriminatory. Why not ban all the anorexic dolly girls who have one brain cell on these programmes such as Hollyoaks who are advocating something far worse? This thread sucks.
    Removing smoking from films and TV doesn't represent society, but it's been known to have positive results in helping to reduce the amount of smokers.
    There are far less anorexics in the world than the overweight, and this is not about being underweight, so don't digress & try to compare the two.
    (Original post by Aku-gila)
    That's the point, why isn't this about alcohol too? The points you are making about smoking & obesity can easily be applied to alcohol too. Do I need to name the problems caused by alcohol before you address this?

    It seems as though you have double-standards Mazty.

    The point about extreme sports was in regards to your parenting crap. If overweight parents are hypocrites, so are parents who take part in extreme sports using your logic.
    :facepalm:
    It's not about alcohol because that is not the topic. Why don't you say "WHY ISNT THIS THREAD ABOUT RELIGION?!!". Don't digress.
    Alcohol & extreme sports are not inherently bad, nor have the same social network effects as obesity, ergo your points about the two are utterly redundant.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)
    :facepalm:
    It's not about alcohol because that is not the topic. Why don't you say "WHY ISNT THIS THREAD ABOUT RELIGION?!!". Don't digress.
    Alcohol & extreme sports are not inherently bad, nor have the same social network effects as obesity, ergo your points about the two are utterly redundant.
    :facepalm2:

    As I said, your points for why obesity should be banned from T.V can also be applied to alcohol, so if obesity is to be banned from T.V, so should alcohol. Saying otherwise shows that you have double standards. I really don't know how to make this any clearer for you.

    As for the rest of your post, it's almost as though you are ignoring what I have said. To save my time, I'm just going to use copy and paste:

    The points you are making about smoking & obesity can easily be applied to alcohol too. Do I need to name the problems caused by alcohol before you address this?

    The point about extreme sports was in regards to your parenting crap. If overweight parents are hypocrites, so are parents who take part in extreme sports using your logic.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)
    But weak people exist, otherwise removing smoking from TV in Finland, France, Norway etc wouldn't of had the result it had.
    It is being advertised as being socially acceptable, just like when smoking was in Hollywood films. As you obviously must know, smoking is as good as gone from most films, and China is removing it from TV. They were not advertising it yet the WHO still deemed it a good move to remove smoking from films & TV.
    And it's something I firmly disagree with. Yes weak people exist but that's their own problem and not anyone elses, I don't see why I should suffer just because of them? What if I like Adele's music? Why should I be unable to watch her perform because someone somewhere may be influenced by her? She's a singer, not a role model.


    You say that now, but with people like James Corden and Adele promoting being fat/saying there is no problem with it, how long until it is cool? Is it so absurd to think that a young girl who wants to be like Adele may think that being fat therefore is at the very least acceptable, if not a good thing?
    Or it may make her think that she can suceed on her merits and not on her looks, which is a good thing.

    You can eat unhealthy food and still be in shape. Removing unhealthy food is not the problem. Now if being overweight was seen as being 100% unacceptable, would people still be keen to have that extra slice of pizza?
    Overweight people are often bullied and ridiculed but there are still overweight people. Unhealthy food contributes to it though, a lot of the time, the overweight people are from a lower socioeconomic background and they don't eat the right things. If you increased advertising of fresh fruit and decreased advertising of cheap unhealthy snacks, it would have more of an effect than banning fat people.

    If you don't think the government should censor anything from TV, you are misguided and have far too much trust in humanity - results of removing smoking adverts etc proves that controlling content can reap positive rewards.
    Oh I don't trust humanity at all, I believe humans are very flawed beings - I just believe it's not the governments job nor place to tell me who or what I can watch.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aku-gila)
    :facepalm2:

    As I said, your points for why obesity should be banned from T.V can also be applied to alcohol, so if obesity is to be banned from T.V, so should alcohol. Saying otherwise shows that you have double standards. I really don't know how to make this any clearer for you.

    As for the rest of your post, it's almost as though you are ignoring what I have said. To save my time, I'm just going to use copy and paste:

    The points you are making about smoking & obesity can easily be applied to alcohol too. Do I need to name the problems caused by alcohol before you address this?

    The point about extreme sports was in regards to your parenting crap. If overweight parents are hypocrites, so are parents who take part in extreme sports using your logic.
    ALCOHOL & EXTREME SPORTS ARE NOT INHERENTLY UNHEALTHY - OBESITY & SMOKING ARE

    Clear enough for you? Or going to ignore that major point again?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)
    This is not about alcohol do please do not digress.
    Is there any evidence suggesting that extreme sports reduces the average lifespan by 6-7 years, it causes a significant burden on healthcare and that it negatively influences those around the person who does said sport? As extreme sport is not inherently bad like being overweight, your point is redundant.
    Drinking is not inherently unhealthy. Your argument is ****.

    It is practical. Smoking adverts which was a massive sponsor of Snooker was removed and it still got by. No one watches these shows to see fat people, therefore they can be removed from TV. People also smoke in real life but this is purposely given very little, if any, air time, therefore why can the same not be done for the obese.
    Ban stress? What ****ing relevance does that have? Unless you have a peer reviewed paper backing your point up, it's nothing more than a hollow claim. Stress may not be unavoidable and is not necessarily unhealthy - unpleasant, yes, a health problem? Not at all on the scale of weight. Question is why would you want to watch a stressed person in the first place? :confused:
    You are incorrectly looking at what makes someone overweight. Junk food doesn't make someone fat - inactivity and overeating makes someone fat to begin with. Now if you had a smoker on screen and said smoker was not smoking, all you can tell is that a person is on screen therefore in no way, shape or form is smoking being promoted. However if you have someone overweight on screen, even if they are not eating, you can tell they are overweight which says it is therefore acceptable to be overweight as the person is on television. Due to the visual impact of weight, you can promote weight without having to witness eating.
    You can eat **** food and not be overweight making your argument about junk food invalid.
    Mate, none of that is right. You don't seem to have distinguished the difference between adverts and TV programmes. I'll let you take this as a win if your ego needs it, but seriously cba with this. It's just so... moronic.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 69Crazyfists)
    Mate, none of that is right. You don't seem to have distinguished the difference between adverts and TV programmes. I'll let you take this as a win if your ego needs it, but seriously cba with this. It's just so... moronic.
    With such an elaborate explanation of your thinking, I think it is your reply that is a bit off
    (Original post by Holly Hiskey)
    Hmmm, if I don't know many fat people then clearly the problem isn't as widespread as you think... just kidding, I know a few. I'm also pretty sure that none of them got fat because they used to watch Vicar of Dibley and decided that Dawn French would be their new role model.
    I agree to getting rid of fast food adverts on tv, but not all fat people. When you do get fat people on tv, their weight tends to be used as a joke, not as something to as[ire to.
    Also there are plenty of character traits associated with other weights, so you can't really use that, in the same way that you can't say that every single fat person is a lazy, undisciplined sack of ****. I also look how you haven't mentioned the other end of the spectrum- so you don't mind having underweight people on tv then?
    How are you going to enforce this? BMI? Does that mean that we won't be able to watch rugby on tv, since most of an international squad would probably be deemed overweight? How about historical programmes featuring say, Churchill, who was a bit on the plump side?
    With an increasing rate of obesity and the overweight, it may become more acceptable to be overweight, and seeing celebrities who are overweight is not going to help.
    I'm not quite sure why you are going on about character traits...The facts & figures in the first post are to do with health and cost instead of personality as that would be rather subjective and so pretty pointless to use as reasoning.
    This isn't about underweight people so don't digress. Personally I don't think they should be on TV and the fashion industry needs to be purged for promoting such an ill state of health and unfeminine image BUT that isn't the topic at hand & anyway anorexia is rarely ever linked to the fashion industry...
    Enforcement = done by doctors. Simple.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .Ali.)
    And it's something I firmly disagree with. Yes weak people exist but that's their own problem and not anyone elses, I don't see why I should suffer just because of them? What if I like Adele's music? Why should I be unable to watch her perform because someone somewhere may be influenced by her? She's a singer, not a role model.

    Or it may make her think that she can suceed on her merits and not on her looks, which is a good thing.

    Overweight people are often bullied and ridiculed but there are still overweight people. Unhealthy food contributes to it though, a lot of the time, the overweight people are from a lower socioeconomic background and they don't eat the right things. If you increased advertising of fresh fruit and decreased advertising of cheap unhealthy snacks, it would have more of an effect than banning fat people.
    Oh I don't trust humanity at all, I believe humans are very flawed beings - I just believe it's not the governments job nor place to tell me who or what I can watch.
    :facepalm:
    She is rich , famous & successful. That is enough to make her a role model for people. Your opinion doesn't dictate who is or is not a role model.
    That girl may not realise that, or more importantly, that it is normal and non-problematic to be obese.
    Junk food is not going to make someone overweight unless they chose to have an unbalanced diet and a sedentary lifestyle. Why ban something which is only problematic when abused? Going to ban pens because they can be used as a weapon? The problem is the user, not the item.
    Well you are clearly a selfish person. By removing fat people from TV you could be helping people, something the government should strive to do. You are more concerned about your own life than helping the lives of many. Personally I think that is morally deplorable.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)
    :facepalm:
    She is rich , famous & successful. That is enough to make her a role model for people. Your opinion doesn't dictate who is or is not a role model.
    But her job is a music artist. Nothing more, nothing less. It's ridiculous to put celebrities on such pedestals when they're just human beings. It's up to people's parents to teach them who they should look up to and aspire to be...you shouldn't dictate what everyone else can see and watch because a few bimbos have decided to try and be someone from Hello magazine or whatever.

    That girl may not realise that, or more importantly, that it is normal and non-problematic to be obese.
    She can read as much as anyone else, the information abour obesity is there. If she chooses not to take it, not my problem.

    Junk food is not going to make someone overweight unless they chose to have an unbalanced diet and a sedentary lifestyle. Why ban something which is only problematic when abused? Going to ban pens because they can be used as a weapon? The problem is the user, not the item.
    No but you can't deny that it's healthier to eat fresh fruit and veg than ready meals every night. Excersize and healthy eating is the way to combat it.
    Well you are clearly a selfish person. By removing fat people from TV you could be helping people, something the government should strive to do. You are more concerned about your own life than helping the lives of many. Personally I think that is morally deplorable
    This depends on your political opinion really doesn't it? I wouldn't say I'm selfish, I just think people should take responsibility for their own lives and if they're too stupid to or just don't want to, that's their issue that shouldn't impact on me. The government's job is to lead the country, not control every aspect of our lives such as what we watch on television.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    banning things doesnt solve problems...
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)
    ALCOHOL & EXTREME SPORTS ARE NOT INHERENTLY UNHEALTHY - OBESITY & SMOKING ARE

    Clear enough for you? Or going to ignore that major point again?
    OP, you are very dumb. Please tell me where is said extreme sports is inherently unhealthy. In fact, I said it wasn't:

    (Original post by Aku-gila)
    Extreme sports may not be unhealthy in itself, but it carries a lot of unnecessary risks for the individual.
    And once again, let's play the copy and paste game:

    The point about extreme sports was in regards to your parenting crap. If overweight parents are hypocrites, so are parents who take part in extreme sports using your logic.

    This is the third time I've had to tell you this. You said smokers & obese people would make bad parents for a reason which would also make people who take part in extreme sports bad parents. That's why I said this:

    (Original post by Aku-gila)
    A parent who takes part in extreme sports cannot tell their child to 'stay safe' without being a hypocrite either.
    So stop with this 'it's not inherently bla bla bla' and actually address the point for once. And you have the nerve to say I am ignoring your points? Hypocrite.

    Oh, and drinking alcohol is inherently unhealthy. Who told you otherwise?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)
    With an increasing rate of obesity and the overweight, it may become more acceptable to be overweight, and seeing celebrities who are overweight is not going to help.
    I'm not quite sure why you are going on about character traits...The facts & figures in the first post are to do with health and cost instead of personality as that would be rather subjective and so pretty pointless to use as reasoning.
    This isn't about underweight people so don't digress. Personally I don't think they should be on TV and the fashion industry needs to be purged for promoting such an ill state of health and unfeminine image BUT that isn't the topic at hand & anyway anorexia is rarely ever linked to the fashion industry...
    Enforcement = done by doctors. Simple.
    Let's be fair, there aren't that many fat celebrities in comparison with slim ones. Straight off the top of my head I can think of: Adele, Chris Moyles, James Corden and Dawn French. For slim ones: Cheryl Cole, Kate Hudson, Kate Winslet, Keira Knightly, Carey Mulligan, Sienna Miller, Natalie Portman, Winona Ryder, Girls Aloud, The Saturdays, The Wanted, JLS etc etc. Of those ones, who do think people aspire to look like?
    Sorry, maybe it wasn't you who was talking about character traits.
    No, it isn't about underweight people- I wsa under the impression that it is about health and cost. Whilst anorexia probably isn't as common as obesity, it still has a negative impact on health and will therefore bring about costs to the health service. It may "rarely" be linked to the fashion industry (source?) but surely if you're all for banning every fat person on tv you may as well cut out some overly skinny people as well. What about other forms of media? Will you be allowed fat people in magazines?
    And what exactly will the doctors be looking at? Fat percentage? Overall nutrition of their diet? Amount of exercise done per day? Presumably a combination, but even so I suspect that you'd cut out quite a large portion or average sized people who don't eat well or exercise.
    Also about junk food adverts- how are they not important? If stopping smoking adverts lowers rates of smoking, surely removing adverts for junk foods would lower the number of people eating unhealthy, extremely calorific foods?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aku-gila)
    OP, you are very dumb. Please tell me where is said extreme sports is inherently unhealthy. In fact, I said it wasn't:

    And once again, let's play the copy and paste game:

    The point about extreme sports was in regards to your parenting crap. If overweight parents are hypocrites, so are parents who take part in extreme sports using your logic.

    This is the third time I've had to tell you this. You said smokers & obese people would make bad parents for a reason which would also make people who take part in extreme sports bad parents. That's why I said this:

    So stop with this 'it's not inherently bla bla bla' and actually address the point for once. And you have the nerve to say I am ignoring your points? Hypocrite.

    Oh, and drinking alcohol is inherently unhealthy. Who told you otherwise?
    For ****s sake, a overweight parent is only a hypocrite because they are in a diseased state promoting health. That is not true of a person who does extreme sport. How is that hard to understand? What is an unnecessary risk? That is completely subjective - driving instead of walking may be deemed by some as an unnecessary risk, however many people choose to do it.
    Your logic is utterly ****. A person who does extreme sports is not inherently unhealthy, ergo this does not make them a hypocrite if they promote health. They would only be a hypocrite if they told their child not to participate in extreme sports due to the risk involved.
    If you can't understand this you are simply in a state of denial for whatever reason and refusing to see sense.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7177506.stm
    Get an education.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .Ali.)
    But her job is a music artist. Nothing more, nothing less. It's ridiculous to put celebrities on such pedestals when they're just human beings. It's up to people's parents to teach them who they should look up to and aspire to be...you shouldn't dictate what everyone else can see and watch because a few bimbos have decided to try and be someone from Hello magazine or whatever.

    She can read as much as anyone else, the information abour obesity is there. If she chooses not to take it, not my problem.

    No but you can't deny that it's healthier to eat fresh fruit and veg than ready meals every night. Excersize and healthy eating is the way to combat it.
    This depends on your political opinion really doesn't it? I wouldn't say I'm selfish, I just think people should take responsibility for their own lives and if they're too stupid to or just don't want to, that's their issue that shouldn't impact on me. The government's job is to lead the country, not control every aspect of our lives such as what we watch on television.
    That's wonderful and all, but not how everyone things. You seem to think that you are the only person in the world, or that everyone thinks like you...People do put celebrities on pedestals - never seen Bieber fans?
    Not your problem sure, but this isn't about you as you don't seem easily influenced, this is about safe guarding those that are.
    If someone had one big mac a year, is that unhealthy? Or one a week with a balanced diet? Junk food is not inherently going to cause weight gain unlike smoking which will **** your lungs up.
    Yes people should take responsibility etc BUT sadly that isn't going to happen and the mindless masses do need guidance. Look at it this way - less fat people, less NHS costs, less taxes for you to pay. Good yah?
    (Original post by Doyle&TheFourFathers)
    banning things doesnt solve problems...
    Tell that to France, Norway etc who saw a drop in smokers when they banned adverts.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)

    Tell that to France, Norway etc who saw a drop in smokers when they banned adverts.
    thats not a solution, its just an improvement.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)
    anorexia is rarely ever linked to the fashion industry...
    .
    I think you missed a trick there
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)
    For ****s sake, a overweight parent is only a hypocrite because they are in a diseased state promoting health. That is not true of a person who does extreme sport. How is that hard to understand? What is an unnecessary risk? That is completely subjective - driving instead of walking may be deemed by some as an unnecessary risk, however many people choose to do it.

    Your logic is utterly ****. A person who does extreme sports is not inherently unhealthy, ergo this does not make them a hypocrite if they promote health. They would only be a hypocrite if they told their child not to participate in extreme sports due to the risk involved.

    If you can't understand this you are simply in a state of denial for whatever reason and refusing to see sense.
    Wow Mazty, just wow. You love to put words into my mouth, don't you? When did I say that people who engage in extreme sports are 'in a diseased state promoting health'? When?

    Once again:

    (Original post by Aku-gila)
    A parent who takes part in extreme sports cannot tell their child to 'stay safe' without being a hypocrite either.
    A person who engages in extreme sports is unnecessarily greatly increasing their own risk of suffering from an injury or even death. If they tell their child to be stay safe, that would make them a hypocrite since their own activities contradict the whole idea of 'staying safe'.

    Do you want me to actually find you the definition of a hypocrite?

    You think I didn't know that? LOL

    Did you even read your own link? A little alcohol can be healthy. Being a little bit overweight isn't going to cause the problems and complications you included in your original post. The extent to which the obese people who are at risk deviate from the norm is not 'a little', but very substantial. The equivalent deviation in terms of alcohol would have extremely damaging effects, such as liver complications and increased risk of cancer to name a few. Let's not forget the social and family problems it can also cause. This quote is from your own link, and it sums things up pretty nicely for me:

    However, UK experts warned people should not be encouraged to drink, as too much alcohol can be very damaging.
    And when alcohol is mentioned in the media, do they show the use of only small quantities of alcohol for the purpose of increasing health benefits? No, they don't. If you want to ban obesity because it is 'promoting a dangerous and preventable way of life', you have to do the same with alcohol because it does exactly the same. In fact, it is much worse since it is often portrayed as being 'cool' whereas obesity isn't, making it much more appealing to viewers.

    I have had a very good education thank you, and I just used it to thoroughly destroy your pathetic argument
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aku-gila)
    snip
    Risk of suffering =/= unhealthy.
    How is that hard to understand? :confused:
    Alcohol is not inherently bad for you, unlike excessive weight.
    Your logic is non existent. Is this because you are overweight or parents are overweight? I'm just trying to figure out why you are trying to warp logic so badly.
    (Original post by Doyle&TheFourFathers)
    thats not a solution, its just an improvement.
    Well an improvement is inherently a good thing. Yes it's not a solution, but it's an improvement....
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)
    Risk of suffering =/= unhealthy.
    How is that hard to understand? :confused:
    Alcohol is not inherently bad for you, unlike excessive weight.
    Your logic is non existent. Is this because you are overweight or parents are overweight? I'm just trying to figure out why you are trying to warp logic so badly.
    That seems to be the route you take when people on here destroy your arguments - they must be fat. Well no, I am in the normal range and so are my parents. You are just wrong.

    And no matter how often I show you why, you simply ignore what I say and continue to whine about my flawed logic or some bullcrap. Why don't you quote exactly what was wrong about my last post so we can pinpoint it and discuss it, k?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)
    Alcohol is not inherently bad for you, unlike excessive weight.
    Your logic is non existent. Is this because you are overweight or parents are overweight? I'm just trying to figure out why you are trying to warp logic so badly.
    Whoa there. Alcohol is not inherently bad for you?


    Alcohol:

    - Kills brain cells
    - Impairs judgement
    - Depending on dose/length of drinking can lead to respiratory failure or death
    - Memory impairment
    - ****s up your liver (hepatitis, cirrhosis)
    - Cardiomyopathy
    - Increased risk of cancers (e.g. Breast cancer, mouth, esophagus, pharynx, larynx, colorectal cancer, liver cancer, stomach and ovaries.)
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by No Future)
    Whoa there. Alcohol is not inherently bad for you?


    Alcohol:

    - Kills brain cells
    - Impairs judgement
    - Depending on dose/length of drinking can lead to respiratory failure or death
    - Memory impairment
    - ****s up your liver (hepatitis, cirrhosis)
    - Cardiomyopathy
    - Increased risk of cancers (e.g. Breast cancer, mouth, esophagus, pharynx, larynx, colorectal cancer, liver cancer, stomach and ovaries.)
    I've tried telling him this, he just can't understand :no:
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.