You may or may not know this but I am 100% bi-sexual. Me and a girlfriend of mine got into a debate about what is pretty and what is not. So as I often say now, "OFF TO THINK ATHEIST INTERWEBS TO ASK RATIONAL PEOPLE!"
So here I am with a few questions:
I will be at work most of the day but I will be able to read most of your responses on my phone.
Sex sells and plastic even more and that's a fact. But that doesn't mean that you should embrace it and encourage girls to adapt to it because it would be so healthy for them if they could.
Well, that's kind of what I said. You need to attack the problem at the girl. The world won't change, at least not in time to help anyone in the long term. And if the price is giving up ideals which are out of reach, that is too high a price to pay. We should always be striving toward something which is out of reach. We should just learn at the same time to be realistic. We can't all be a 6 foot tall fashion model, and Superbowl champion quarterback, or the person who cures cancer, and we need to learn to strive toward ideals without beating ourselves up when we fall short. We need to teach our girls to strive toward health even in the face of unrealistic ideals.
I repeat that I have no issue with that. It would be great if it would work.
It's our only hope, but if we want to have a positive impact on women's health overall, we should be discouraging women from overeating, not wringing our hands about anorexia.
You talk like it's an either/or option. Both practices are unhealthy, and lead to or are derived from some pretty bad body consciousness or self-image issues. Not everyone needs to be at the peak of fitness, but striving toward general health from all directions would be a good thing.
You have bought into myths perpetuated by an industry that makes billions and billions and billions of dollars convincing people about the dangers of being overweight. It is actually possible to be overweight and healthy. And, indeed, the actual science is not nearly as conclusive as we've been told (sold?) about the overall health and longevity impact of being overweight (except probably for people who are at 40 BMI or more) as the industry would have us believe. This book does a pretty good job of reviewing the science and debunking many of the myths http://www.lindabacon.org/HAESbook/ .
Yes, I am absolutely on board with healthy living but that is not actually what is being promoted by these "dangers of obesity" pitches - we have an extreme cultural bias towards viewing thin as attractive (which most women internalize) - and, sure, the words may say health and wellness and fitness, blah, blah, blah but the images say be thin, for example this ad campaign for fitness centers using female models who do not look particularly fit: http://q.equinox.com/articles/2011/12/terry-richardson-campaign?soc.... It is possible to be overweight and healthy - we just don't want to accept that truth because what we really want is to be attractive (and attractive = thin) not healthy. It just sounds less shallow to say that we are after health.
RE: "It is possible to be overweight and healthy"
With all due respect Cecilia, carrying extra weight adds extra work to the heart and squeezes blood vessels, constricting them and reducing blood flow. There's simply no way that can be healthy.
Of course there's hype out there, and I'm not condoning it. Men are accused of wearing the same outfits forever, while women are stereotypically accused of shopping at every opportunity. Much of that is because women are targeted by ad hype and made to feel that if they don't wear the latest, they're somehow less worthy.
Much of American advertising is geared to play on the insecurities of women, which implies advertisers believe women to be less secure and more capable of being manipulated than men, and to a degree this is true, because our society, that begins in the family unit, doesn't seem - at least as yet - to value the emotional security of girls as much as boys.
This is changing, and I'm happy to see it, but we've still a long way to go,
But whether men or women, there's nothing healthy about being overweight. That's a myth generally perpetrated by overweight people.
Please do some research the science, as I said, is not nearly as slam dunk as we have been led to believe...and, pray tell, who are these "overweight people" perpetuating this myth? A woman who is 5'3" and weights 160 pounds is considered overweight. End of discussion, she is doomed. I know this is anecdotal evidence but what if that women has excellent cholesterol levels, blood pressure, eats a healthy diet (mostly plant protein, e.g., black beans, lentils, etc, quality carbs - quinoa, brown rice, quality fats - olive oil, etc, we all know what a healthy diet is) does 5-6 hours of high intensity cardio and lifts weights, does yoga? In our society we will still say that she is not, can't possibly be (shocking to even think it) healthy...because she is fat. And the reason we think that is that we are so brainwashed to believe that thin = healthy it is painful for us to think otherwise, hurts our brains. And, yes, even that woman I described has a difficult time accepting herself as healthy even though on an intellectual level she knows she is. Again, there is research that shows that her health and longevity prospects are just fine, thank you very much, we just don't hear about it much because where is the $$$ in that?
It is not slam dunk, as you say. Some that we may consider overweight could be healthier than thinner peers. However, the fact is that weight is generally a good indicator of overall and long term health.
I think you are missing the point in all of this.. It is clearly not healthy to be obese, but this is somewhat of a moot point as I would assume this is a fairly agreed upon point. It is less than desirable to be overweight vs normal weight, and moving from being overweight to within normal bounds is not exactly outside the reach of anyone.
Your comparison between a slender person who has shitty dietary (and other) habits vs an overweight person with good habits is not a valid comparison. You have to compare ceteris paribus (all else equal) for validity, and if you do so it is clear than anyone within normal weight will have better health than someone who is overweight (and substantially better than an obese person). In addition, I don't believe i.e. smokers are exactly heralded as paragons of good health either (full disclosure: I do smoke on occasion).
Weight issues tend to be more focused on by females, though one has to take into consideration that females get these issues not because of males since the female reference groups is other females. In addition, the fashion industry is generally innovated by homosexual males which use models that resemble young men's bodies, an ideal impossible for females to comply with. Indeed, most males prefer at least some 'meat on the bones' (I can easily add more euphemisms) on women since this is a sign of higher probability of reproductive success.
Tying it back to the picture, that woman does not have a weight issue. Her body is certainly within the normal range, especially considering that she is probably holding her breath for the photo, it's been 'shoped, and thus appearing more slender than she really is. An anorexic body would have much more visible ribs and her bellybutton would not be squished laterally.
I am not clearly missing the point of all of this and you would realize that if you had a better idea of the full conversation. Since you have clearly not read all of my posts in this discussion, I am not inclined to address what you posted since you don't seem to understand the position I have put forth collectively within just the past few pages of discussion. Two posts only, really, and this was the short one. I don't want to recap every previous point in order to make a point later on in an ongoing conversation. It would be tedious and time consuming.
It was @Cecilia :)
It was @Cecilia :)
Well, that explains why it made little sense as a reply to me. Also, it explains this egg on my face. Mea culpa and apologies.