|
SlipUp posted:Project a little bit harder why don't you? Losing the required amount of weight to be healthy is an extremely long and hard process that could takes years and never truly ends. I hit the gym 3 times a week and I know where I see an overweight person there I think to myself "Good for them". For every car that threw trash, there were hundreds that didn't. Being fat is unhealthy, getting a visual warning every time people want to indulge in fast food or a bag of chips would only benefit them. If a picture of an obese person is triggering to an obese person I think they're the ones being unreasonable. I want obese people to live past fifty with all their limbs, joints, and organs intact. I myself have provided several studies, including two from the same NCBI database you posted yourself in these thread. How about actually engaging me rather than all the fat haters you think I represent? Again, folks like you just what to treat other people like poo poo. Your anecdotes are meaningless in the face of your arguments in favor of directly shaming people. Then you have the guts to conflate something as simple as "don't be an rear end in a top hat" with a bunch of bullshit statements that were never made? We can all read everything written here so you don't get to make poo poo up. I always find it just fascinating how folks like you are always so interested in the health of others to the point of wanting to treat them like poo poo if only it would help, but it only ever applies to people who are overweight.
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 13:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 07:33 |
|
|
Zodium posted:Yeah, fat people are just intrinsically irrational, there's no way we'll ever get them to stop engaging in base rate neglect, so let's instead try to make sure no one ever insults anyone. You keep bringing up the base rate fallacy as if humans are purely logical systems like the mythical homo economicus. I'm not saying 'fat people are inherently irrational' it's that being a lovely person to an obese person does nothing except make you a lovely person. It does nothing to make them lose weight. All you've done is hurt someone's feelings and done nothing to improve their health. You can whine all you like about not getting to insult obese people but without a logical reasoning as to why it would somehow cause weight loss all you're doing is creating a society of shitheads.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 14:06
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:You keep bringing up the base rate fallacy as if humans are purely logical systems like the mythical homo economicus. I'm not saying 'fat people are inherently irrational' it's that being a lovely person to an obese person does nothing except make you a lovely person. It does nothing to make them lose weight. All you've done is hurt someone's feelings and done nothing to improve their health. Weldon is at least implying that fat people are inherently irrational because they will always engage in base rate neglect, and then chalking it up to "human There is nothing absurd about saying that a fat person who gets insulted by one person at the gym while a hundred others say nothing should learn to cope with this, and any actual psychologist would go straight to dealing with this base rate neglect problem. The person doing the insulting should also shut the gently caress up, but that goes without saying. Yes, it's bad that people make other people feel bad, but I would be very worried if a fat friend of mine told me a story like that. Other people are not supposed to control how you feel to such a degree where one person out of a hundred can change your behavior to a point where your long-term health is in danger, and if they can, then you need to see a therapist. Now. Shaming is actually effective for some people and not for others depending on a variety of factors like coping skills, social support, psychological resilience, while "being fat" is not really a good predictor whether that would be the case for any particular individual. hth
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 14:33
|
|
|
Zodium posted:Weldon is at least implying that fat people are inherently irrational because they will always engage in base rate neglect, and then chalking it up to "human
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 14:38
|
|
|
Lyapunov Unstable posted:It's also human nature to regulate food consumption via leptin and ghrelin, which fructose (of which an incredible amount has been dumped into our food) bypasses. Infants aren't getting obese because of base-rate neglect, they're getting obese because the food supply is poisoned. Infants do not have the ability to obtain food independently. Stop talking about psychology. Please. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 14:40
|
|
|
Zodium posted:Infants do not have the ability to obtain food independently. Stop talking about psychology. Please.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 14:43
|
|
|
Lyapunov Unstable posted:Not sure if sarcastic but yes exactly, the infant obesity surge should be a dead giveaway. The infant obesity surge is a dead giveaway that base rate neglect is valid reasoning, whereas not engaging in it is absurd? I don't even
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 14:47
|
|
|
"Fat people get insulted at gyms" is a very harmful meme. Where does it come from? Sitcoms or something? No-one talks to anyone at the gym. Fat people seem to assume that the gym is exactly like gym class at school (i.e. torture) and this really needs to be called out as untrue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 14:51
|
|
|
Zodium posted:The infant obesity surge is a dead giveaway that base rate neglect is valid reasoning, whereas not engaging in it is absurd? I don't even
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
Lyapunov Unstable posted:The methodology and detail with which psychologists typically analyze the effects of shaming on reducing obesity totally misses the point that the food supply is being poisoned with a substance that tastes delicious and bypasses the hormones that allow us to regulate our food consumption. THE FRUCTOSES BYPASS YOURE PRE FRONTAL BRAIN CONVEXES, MAKING U FAT. ITS HUMAN NATURE.  e: i'd mock your lacking understanding of behavior in more detail, but there doesn't seem to be anything of substance to engage with. making your post a sort of empty calories, if you will
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 14:58
|
|
|
you guys are going to keep coming up with convoluted reasons why each one of you is right and this is going to go on forever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 14:59
|
|
|
Zodium posted:THE FRUCTOSES BYPASS YOURE PRE FRONTAL BRAIN CONVEXES, MAKING U FAT. ITS HUMAN NATURE.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:00
|
|
|
Zodium posted:THE FRUCTOSES BYPASS YOURE PRE FRONTAL BRAIN CONVEXES, MAKING U FAT. ITS HUMAN NATURE. maybe being a Disciple of Lustig (or evangelizing about banning certain foods) is the wrong approach, but afaik fructose does do all those things
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
Like in fruit. Is fruit bad now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:07
|
|
|
Lyapunov Unstable posted:Do you actually have some argument against fructose's role in the rise of metabolic syndrome? Like I alluded to multiple times, it's completely irrelevant to whether base rate neglect is either valid reasoning or adaptive/healthy behavior (it's neither). I don't know why you keep bringing it up, here's the original post that started what you think you're replying to: Zodium posted:you're literally advocating base rate neglect as valid reasoning while explicitly rejecting actual valid reasoning There's nothing convoluted here. Unless you bridged the mind-body problem and are receiving your Nobel imminently, you can go ahead and get your weak biology arguments the gently caress out of my behavioral science, thanks. (And it's obviously, self-evidently wrong at the behavioral level, if you spent like two seconds thinking outside your myopic little metabolic bubble, since some people clearly are able to regulate their sugar intake.) The Real Foogla posted:maybe being a Disciple of Lustig (or evangelizing about banning certain foods) is the wrong approach, but afaik fructose does do all those things Maybe, we don't know. You can treat metabolic psychology with about the same respect as you would evolutionary psychology. It doesn't matter either way because it doesn't have anything to do with anything here. Zodium fucked around with this message at 15:11 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:07
|
|
|
This is my diet. Kale. Chicken breasts. Plain yogurt. Are there any sinful things in there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:09
|
|
|
~MUST DEFEND SELF FROM ALL PERCEIVED SLIGHTS~
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:13
|
|
|
What can I say, I know when I'm right and I like to rub it in when I am.  Shaming you into not repeating these arguments, hopefully.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
Psychologically, the vast majority of obese people are more healthy than people who insist they have a need to insult "fatties", because deriving pleasure from food is psychologically normal and deriving it from abstract cruelty is not.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:20
|
|
|
Zodium posted:What can I say, I know when I'm right and I like to rub it in when I am.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:24
|
|
|
Lyapunov Unstable posted:Yes you got me I no longer believe that increasing dietary fructose by several orders of magnitude is related to the obesity epidemic. do you talk like this in real life
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:24
|
|
|
Lyapunov Unstable posted:Yes you got me I no longer believe that increasing dietary fructose by several orders of magnitude is related to the obesity epidemic. I wish. Have you ever had to explain evolutionary biology to someone who sort of casually believes in intelligent design? That's what this is like for me. Like, I literally don't have time to explain why trying to draw in metabolism makes no sense, so you're going to go on believing this nonsense no matter what I do. Why not just shame you? Cole posted:do you talk like this in real life Do you not? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:28
|
|
|
Zodium posted:I wish. Have you ever had to explain evolutionary biology to someone who sort of casually believes in intelligent design? That's what this is like for me. it is beyond my order of magnitude to use astonishingly pretentious dialect when participating in discourse.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:30
|
|
|
Lyapunov Unstable posted:Yes you got me I no longer believe that increasing dietary fructose by several orders of magnitude is related to the obesity epidemic. Good thing this hasn't happened or I would be worried.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:31
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:"Fat people get insulted at gyms" is a very harmful meme. Where does it come from? Sitcoms or something? No-one talks to anyone at the gym. Fat people seem to assume that the gym is exactly like gym class at school (i.e. torture) and this really needs to be called out as untrue. I feel like it's in the same category as "women get catcalled by complete strangers" and "people cross the street when they see a black guy coming the other way." As an average-weight white dude, I never see these things happen, so presumably they don't happen to anyone else either.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 16:22
|
|
|
Cool false dichotomy you guys got going in here, real productive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
Lyapunov Unstable posted:Yes you got me I no longer believe that increasing dietary fructose by several orders of magnitude is related to the obesity epidemic. So what's your explanation for places like Australia, Canada, and Mexico where they instead just increased sucrose also getting really fat? It's almost like it doesn't make any difference what molecule the 50 pounds of sugar you stuff in your face every month is made of.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 16:37
|
|
|
Kajeesus posted:I feel like it's in the same category as "women get catcalled by complete strangers" and "people cross the street when they see a black guy coming the other way." As an average-weight white dude, I never see these things happen, so presumably they don't happen to anyone else either. Can people on this thread attest to having been insulted in a gym for being fat? I have seen the other things you mention happen. But in a gym, people act like they are travelling to an introvert's convention via the New York Subway. They don't so much as exchange nods, never mind insults. Maybe some muscle-men gyms are judgmental. But those places are for people who are really, really dedicated to the cause of muscles. Probably best avoided for the casual exerciser.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 17:09
|
|
|
Weldon Pemberton posted:They don't have to cheer joggers on. People have the right to complain if something bad or unpleasant keeps happening to them, even if its only caused by 1 in 100 people. I also think it's just as weird to attribute a positive attitude to people as a negative one. Forums poster SlipUp may be thinking "good job, fatty" when he sees one on a treadmill but that doesn't matter at all to the fat guy, who can't read minds. No, I posted my thoughts because people were extrapolating a cultural attitude based off of one incident. It's exactly that my mind can't be read that I posted that. I don't think they have to be happy about it but giving up is exactly what that jerk wants. You said yourself there's the choice to push back and that is the right choice. That's all I'm saying. Assholes like the car dude... I'm kinda pissed we've even given him this amount of thought. He deserves none. Tesseraction posted:This sounds more like a lovely culture more than a problem with the concept of 'talking to people.' I'm not the psychologist, I wouldn't even know where to begin. I don't think giving up your self improvement because somebody threw thrash is a good idea and an even worse reason. I don't find issue with your negative vs positive stance, I just don't find my place in it. If I actually knew the person I'd be supportive, sure. If they want vindication for making the right choice the people who care about them would be the better place to find support. Alternatively, one of the more popular workout mantras I've heard is "Doing it for me." If obese people are trying to lose weight for vindication from society sure, I could see an anonymous prick being a heart breaker. This is a little simplistic admittedly but maybe they shouldn't care what people think and they should just care about themselves. Solkanar512 posted:Again, folks like you just what to treat other people like poo poo. Your anecdotes are meaningless in the face of your arguments in favor of directly shaming people. Seems like you're the only one wanting to treat people like poo poo there bub. What the hell are you even talking about?? BarbarianElephant posted:"Fat people get insulted at gyms" is a very harmful meme. Where does it come from? Sitcoms or something? No-one talks to anyone at the gym. This. Cole posted:you guys are going to keep coming up with convoluted reasons why each one of you is right and this is going to go on forever. D&D.txt Kajeesus posted:I feel like it's in the same category as "women get catcalled by complete strangers" and "people cross the street when they see a black guy coming the other way." As an average-weight white dude, I never see these things happen, so presumably they don't happen to anyone else either. I'm sure it happens, but living in fear of ridicule is no way to live. Women, black guys, and obese people get my sympathy when poo poo like that happens, the ones that don't let it get to them get my respect for their courage. If I could tie it back to the earlier discussion of whether to be openly positive to people, if I saw somebody crossing the street to avoid a black guy I wouldn't cross it to walk past him to cancel it out. If I saw a woman get cat called I wouldn't yell "I respect you as a woman!" to try and cancel it out. Those things are weird. SlipUp fucked around with this message at 17:12 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 17:09
|
|
|
SlipUp posted:I don't find issue with your negative vs positive stance, I just don't find my place in it. If I actually knew the person I'd be supportive, sure. If they want vindication for making the right choice the people who care about them would be the better place to find support. Alternatively, one of the more popular workout mantras I've heard is "Doing it for me." If obese people are trying to lose weight for vindication from society sure, I could see an anonymous prick being a heart breaker. This is a little simplistic admittedly but maybe they shouldn't care what people think and they should just care about themselves. Humans are highly social. Trying to pretend that we aren't isn't going to get anyone anywhere. Other people's opinions of us and reactions to us play a huge role in motivation, which is a pretty important resource for trying to ignore a basic biological drive like hunger.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
Lyesh posted:Humans are highly social. Trying to pretend that we aren't isn't going to get anyone anywhere. Other people's opinions of us and reactions to us play a huge role in motivation, which is a pretty important resource for trying to ignore a basic biological drive like hunger. I don't disagree with you other than to also mention our opinions of ourselves is an important factor too. None of this is good justification for giving up and going home. Like I don't even understand what the problem is here? Some people are dicks, everybody gets treated like poo poo for some reason, every rear end in a top hat has an excuse. It's not worth giving up over. Should I say it is? Go home don't ever come out, they can't get you there? gently caress that. If you want to get healthy, do it for you, do it for the people who care about you. If you expect society to uniformly cheer you on otherwise it's not worth doing than I guess my response to that is "Ok". Fix your diet. Exercise. Try and save money. Seek therapy. Don't give up. Don't expect to be coddled. Find your own self worth. If people want to find an excuse to dwell and be miserable, be my guest but it's not me making people miserable. I'm just pointing out that they're dwelling, and miserable. e- Literally every jogger and biker has a horror story. Literally every single one. Small or large. e2- Maybe there's some misconception that I think it's easy because I was arguing earlier about what way was easiest. It's not easy. It's the hardest thing you will ever do. It will take you the rest of your life. There will be days you are so physically exhausted and maybe even hurt that you can't move. There may even be some puke involved. You will make a fool of yourself eventually, skinny or obese or in great shape. People should still do it. Find whatever dumb loving idea that got you there in the first place and hang on for dear life. SlipUp fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
That's not a useful way to approach an epidemic though. There are structural changes to our society that have caused this, none of which have any clear connection to an extreme drop in willpower across society. Since willpower is notoriously hard to increase (look at patient compliance on basically anything), it doesn't seem like it would be a particularly useful way to address the issue. Increasing availability of healthy foods and recreation, poverty reduction, regulations on food addictiveness, and so on are way more likely to be effective.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
Lyesh posted:That's not a useful way to approach an epidemic though. There are structural changes to our society that have caused this, none of which have any clear connection to an extreme drop in willpower across society. Since willpower is notoriously hard to increase (look at patient compliance on basically anything), it doesn't seem like it would be a particularly useful way to address the issue. I've mentioned poverty reduction several times and my saving money approach is my interpretation of the individuals solution to that problem. (So would be getting a good job too but there's the rub.) In terms of exercise we should be promoting recreation. I was discussion food regulation before we got off on this tangent. I gave a response to the individuals problem as indicated in an anecdote, you're taking my individualistic response and painting it as my opinion on societal approach. Our disagreement is entirely your interpretation. E- What can society do about trash throwers? Bust them if they get caught but besides that the nothing that can realistically be done. SlipUp fucked around with this message at 20:00 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
Sorry about that. I'm just generally irritated with the personal responsibility thing (and the conflation of fatness with slothfulness) because I don't think it's a particularly useful approach for a lot of people. It's also completely useless from the angle of obesity as a social problem. The things to do about trash throwers are to not be one and to not put up with your friends doing it. Whipping trash at people is a much easier urge to contain than hunger.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 20:14
|
|
|
Lyesh posted:Sorry about that. I'm just generally irritated with the personal responsibility thing (and the conflation of fatness with slothfulness) because I don't think it's a particularly useful approach for a lot of people. It's also completely useless from the angle of obesity as a social problem. I don't think society can definitively solve this problem, short of say rationing. We can make it easier in places. People should still have the freedom to be fat or skinny. (A lot of things will predispose you to the larger side. It's a harder choice to stick to than people let on.) e: lyesh posted:The things to do about trash throwers are to not be one and to not put up with your friends doing it. Whipping trash at people is a much easier urge to contain than hunger. Agreed. SlipUp fucked around with this message at 20:23 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
Lyesh posted:Sorry about that. I'm just generally irritated with the personal responsibility thing (and the conflation of fatness with slothfulness) because I don't think it's a particularly useful approach for a lot of people. It's also completely useless from the angle of obesity as a social problem. I think we can all agree that throwing trash is not really effective at anything, but there's a big loving chasm between "don't throw trash" and "take thin privilege and health at any size more seriously." Psychologically healthy people don't allow one stranger out of a hundred who happens to act like an rear end in a top hat to dictate their behavior. They shouldn't even have to feel bad about it because that's not abnormal. And this is actually something we can do something about on the victim end, because it's just people engaging in base rate neglect, so we can "treat" with CBT. It doesn't mean the jerk isn't a jerk, but we don't have a treatment for being a jerk yet. The "obesity epidemic" is a stupid term to begin with, because it's an "epidemic" caused by the sudden removal of an essential dynamical constraint on eating behavior (nutritional availability went to infinity overnight on a cultural scale), moving nutrition management from something that was primarily regulated environmentally to a primarily self-regulated behavior. So it's an epidemic that shares exactly no characteristics with disease or anything medical. An epidemic in the sense that twerking or the Macarena is an epidemic, i.e., it's a social and cultural thing through and through. I'm not suggesting we're dishonoring the mos maiorum or something here, only that it's just not useful to call it an epidemic. Zodium fucked around with this message at 20:43 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:Not to downplay the depression that can be caused by negative self-image, but looking at muscular dudes and going "wow I'm out of shape *joins gym for 2 sessions then quits" is a slightly different beast to women looking at skinny models and going "wow I'm fat and disgusting *forces self to vomit meals*" I'm not saying that this is really a major societal health problem, but some guys are so obsessed with their appearance that they take hormones and horse drugs to become more muscular and ruin their bodies. It's actually pretty difficult & takes a lot of dedication to look like the cover of a men's fitness magazine. You've got to carefully monitor your diet and consistently improve and put a lot of effort into your lifting workouts. This is to be contrasted with losing weight when you are obese, where all you have to do is to eat less. The first 10 lbs are way easier to lose than the last 10 in terms of effort. Of course this is ignoring things like the inertia of bad habits, etc. Edit: VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV Nevvy Z posted:Everyone keeps saying "x is easy" but no one really has an agreed upon definition for "easy". That goes for both individual people everywhere trying to do the 'easy' thing and for posters on this board arguing about what is "easy" without saying what "easy" actually means. Maybe "easy" isn't a useful word in this discussion. Yes, obviously "easy" is a matter of opinion, like almost everything discussed on this politics message board. silence_kit fucked around with this message at 18:47 on Dec 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
Everyone keeps saying "x is easy" but no one really has an agreed upon definition for "easy". That goes for both individual people everywhere trying to do the 'easy' thing and for posters on this board arguing about what is "easy" without saying what "easy" actually means. Maybe "easy" isn't a useful word in this discussion.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
fishmech posted:What? I have no problems with telling them how: you tell them to eat the same stuff they eat now, just less of it. And the why is "because then you won't be fat". This doesn't require a phd dissertation. quote:Define healthier food first. Because dollars to donuts what you think is healthier is in no way meaningfully better to eat to excess then the stuff they're already eating. I should have realized ahead of time that you were going to fishmech the hell out of everything and written out everything in absurd detail, possibly in crayon, so even you couldn't pretend to misunderstand. Some food is healthier than others, in the sense of providing more important nutrients, or more conducive to weight loss/maintenance, in the sense of having fewer calories, ON A PER VOLUME BASIS. This is important for several reasons. First, we humans expect a certain volume of food, both socially and biologicaly. If we could somehow eat 3000 calories (and all vital nutrients) in a single capsule, one per day, we would be miserable and hungry and feel awful. Since we are not bleep bloop robots, this is an intolerable situation for the vast majority of the population. There are foods that can keep us satiated without providing too many calories for our weight goals, but what they are, and even that they exist, is non-obvious. Furthermore, such micronutrient dense, macronutrient light foods do tend, as a rule, to be more expensive than their higher caloric density counterparts. Examples might be dark greens vs iceberg lettuce or lean cuts of meat vs cheaper, fattier meats. Similarly seafood is generally more expensive, yet POUND FOR POUND healthier than many other meats in terms of both nutrient content and caloric density. Chicken breasts are many times the price of chicken thighs. Therefore to be equally satiated, one must spend more money on breasts or consume more calories of thighs. This shouldn't be a revelation. There is also a social factor at play. Many people don't have to work as hard to stay fit, and others simply have fewer responsibilities and find exercising easier to fit into their lives. Some are simply morr active because their hobby just happens to be an active one, and they gain a beneficial but unintended weight benefit. Many of these people unknowingly put peer pressure on friends, family and coworkers to drink more, eat more, try some of this appetizer, or just choose restaurants where eating filling but lower calorie meals is all but impossible. They aren't researching fitness and calories and weight loss BECAUSE THEY DON'T NEED TO. Smokers and nonsmokers alike know about second hand smoke, lung cancer, and the fact that there are programs to help you quit, because they were advertised (fairly heavily) to everyone, not a self-selected group. People who don't have, or don't think they have, a weight problem are often discouraging out actively harming the attempts of others AND THEY MOSTLY DON'T REALIZE IT. It is a social problem and requires a non individualistic solution. Your nutritional libertarianism is, like all libertarianism, only functional in ideal conditions using soulless automatons in a frictionless supermarket and does not obtain in the actual world. Helps you be smug, though, I guess. Edited only to fix swype autocorrects The Bloop fucked around with this message at 18:47 on Dec 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 07:33 |
|
|
Yo check it out, all fat people drink soda all the time, and soda is more expensive than water in almost all of the US and Canada by virtue of water costing like nothing at all and everyone having free access to water in their own home. This isn't economic, it's just fat people being dumb as poo poo. Also you're saying in the same post that not only are these fatsos so poor that they can't afford food that isn't garbage, they are also being forced to eat out at restaurants every night and intake like 4000 calories worth of expensive rear end restaurant food every night instead of learning how to cook.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 18:59
|
|