VeggieBoards banner
1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
448 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
There was an interesting review on the radio today of a book entitled 'Calories and corsets' by Louise Foxcroft.

Basically the premise being put forward is that dieting has always been a moral and political issue as opposed to a personal one.

She claims that this is particulary marked in times of war or financial austerity where both women and men are pressured through political rhetoric and media pressure to fulfill a moral obligation to maintain a healthy body weight.

She believes that at such periods personal responsibility to diet and achieve a healthy body weight for the sake of our own well being is over ridden by an implied moral responsibility to do so in order to maintain a healthy population.

She explains that this is seen in practical terms in times of war as ensuring a supply of healthy, fit men for canon fodder.And a supply of healthy, fit women to cope with the demands of industry and maintaining households while the men are away. And in times of economic hardship as ensuring a workforce that is healthy and has the stamina to cope with increased workload and decreasing food supply.

She maintains that politically it is also reinforced with the knowledge that an overweight population will require greater food production and greater medical intervention due to the effects of disease and ill health associated with obesity. Important considerations when a population is in crisis.

Do you agree with her theory?

Do you believe that we have both a personal and a moral responsibility to diet?

Or neither?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
448 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibbleforlola View Post

Sounds like a primer on fat shaming to me.
Louise Foxcroft wrote the book following a period of hospitalisation for annorexia Kibble... she was expressing the ways that politically and through the media we are either covertly or overtly shamed into viewing dieting as a moral responsibility to the population as a whole.

Dieting as a moral responsibility is neither her standpoint or mine . She is merely alerting us to the tools that are used to shame us into dieting in the first place
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,067 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by happyhippy View Post

Louise Foxcroft wrote the book following a period of hospitalisation for annorexia Kibble... she was expressing the ways that politically and through the media we are either covertly or overtly shamed into viewing dieting as a moral responsibility to the population as a whole.
So it's about how others fat-shame? Interesting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,067 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by happyhippy View Post

Well I thought so...but apparently not.
I'm confused.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Envy View Post

What is the definition of "fat-shaming" anyhow?
Basically, it boils down to telling people they are horrible human beings and moral failures for being over a size 6. Or 12. Or 2. Or whatever subjective size the shamer thinks you should be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,992 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibbleforlola View Post

Basically, it boils down to telling people they are horrible human beings and moral failures for being over a size 6. Or 12. Or 2. Or whatever subjective size the shamer thinks you should be.
But saying that being overweight generally has negative effects on one's health is not fat shaming then?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,537 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Envy View Post

But saying that being overweight generally has negative effects on one's health is not fat shaming then?
The distinction isn't too clear, you're right.

Modern-day Western Culture seems to be built around fat-shame, IMHO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,992 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scorpius View Post

The distinction isn't too clear, you're right.
Yes.

What do you think fat-shaming is?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scorpius View Post

Modern-day Western Culture seems to be built around fat-shame, IMHO.
What makes you say that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,067 Posts
I'm not really interested in getting involved in a debate about fat-shaming and what it is and is not. So I'm just going to say this. We do a lot of things that could be considered 'bad' for us. Very few, if any, get the same amount of hand-wringing that fat does. Weight is a complicated issue, and it is affected by a helluva lot more than what we put in our mouth. Genetics, physiology, psychology all play a role, and then some. Treating someone like they are less-than just because they are heavier than the ideal (or thinner than the ideal) is not acceptable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,061 Posts
I went to IKEA for the first time, yesterday and I couldn't help but notice that there was a high percentage of obese shoppers. It is not healthy for people to be overweight, and it is an unnecessary drain on our resources, just like smoking and alcoholism. Shaming individuals is pointless and cruel, but something has to be done on a societal level. McDonalds needs to go and exercise needs to somehow be integrated into people's lives.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,795 Posts
Rather than shaming there ought to be financial incentives for peeps to be/keep fit... say you get back some of your health insurance premium if you meet certain targeted goals.

No question though that a healthy weight population is better for the individual and society in the long run. If something isn't done soon to reverse our expanding waistlines we can kiss medicare and socialized medicine (for those that have it) goodbye as they will be unsustainable (if they are already not so).
 

·
Beanitarian
Joined
·
1,001 Posts
The article in the OP sounds more like religious dogma than anything else--body is a gift from god(dess)(es), body is a temple, you'll go to Hell if you abuse it, etc. This is what I've heard from various flavors of fundies.
 
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top