Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
wiregrind
Jun 26, 2013

Thin is a synonim of wealth?
There is no lower class? People who can't afford to eat well and who are on a permanent malnutrition "diet" are privileged at all?
Is what you mean by "thin" actual thinness? Or are you talking about a wealthy, fit person who can afford a good gym? That's not thin, that's called being fit, try "health privilege" "born with money privilege" "access to a medical staff privilege"

Hormonal conditions that make people gain more weight also have a lot of other problems, it's not healthy and it should be treated. When hormonal issues are stabilized people don't gain as much weight even if they eat the same ammount of food.

I also suppose we're talking of real overweight not imagined-overweight due to social pressure and bullying, where people feel overweight despite having a normal or near normal BMI. That's another problem entirely and I think OP's reasoning works well if addressing only those people. But you can't lump everyone together and tell them that they are all healthy when just a fraction of the people you're talking about are actually healthy.

You won't help the issue by justifying, naturalizing, or normalizing the conditon of people who can get help... You'd rather lie to a poor person with hormonal problems than giving them proper, free access to the medical staff that could help them?

Society must not bully or torture them, children and teenagers who were born with obesity aren't at fault; the parents are. Adults must be responsible for being healthy so the children aren't born obese since birth. Government must be responsible for not leaving poor people outside of a hospital.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

wiregrind
Jun 26, 2013

Ddraig posted:

For most of recorded history food has been at such scarcity that to commit the sin of gluttony was not just taking more than your fair share, it was literally taking food out of the mouth of someone else.

The world has more food now than it knows what to do with. So much is wasted that it's unbelievable. Scarcity does not enter the picture, the main problem is distribution.

The sin of gluttony has shifted from being a legitimate detriment to the health and well-being of others but to that of being considered a perceived display of lack of self control.
Change 'The world' with 'The First world' and try again

wiregrind
Jun 26, 2013

euphronius posted:

You pay an extra percentage of income tax equal to the amount over your ideal bmi.
increase the tax exponentially if it's an irresponsible parent giving health problems to their kid

wiregrind
Jun 26, 2013

computer parts posted:

A reminder that both of these proposals will disproportionately target poor minority women.

Well then I don't know. Maybe a good media / education campaign instead, to sensitize parents, so they in turn educate their kids about diet and nutrition.
Availability of government funded health programs for obese and overweight people. Also I think making clear in media and other public stuff the difference between underweight, a normal BMI range, overweight and obese. Push for positive body images in the bmi range or just slightly over it, but don't justify obesity.

To be honest if anyone would benefit from normalized obesity, it would be capitalist corporations.

wiregrind fucked around with this message at 02:25 on Nov 26, 2015

wiregrind
Jun 26, 2013

The Larch posted:

Do we get deductions if we're under our ideal bmi?

No because the goal isn't an anorexyc population

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

wiregrind
Jun 26, 2013

Effectronica posted:

The kind of society where everything used in daily life is in walking distance and all transportation is necessary for is traveling between arcologies is one that is extremely implausible to ever emerge.
You're the only one bringing up the idea of that utopian society. Using public transport rather than driving will still make people walk a lot more than if they were driving from door to door. Improve public transport and pedestrian walkways as another way to combat obesity.

  • Locked thread