Log in

View Full Version : Being fat under capitalism



Revy
31st August 2009, 19:29
Evidence of Social Discrimination

Social stigmatization of obesity stems from societal values on body type. This stigmatization can cause weight-based discrimination in employment and is not universally illegal. Society has the biggest influence on discrimination.

“Children as young as 6 describe silhouettes of the obese child as ‘lazy’, ‘dirty’, ‘stupid’, ‘ugly’, ‘cheats’, and ‘lies’….children and adults rate the obese child as the least likable…”(Stunkard, 1985, pg. 1062). Even the obese find themselves disgusting, thinking that the rest of society views them in contempt; this feeling has a high occurrence in women and especially adolescent girls (Stunkard, 1985). These views come from an idea that obesity is something people chose by eating too much and not exercising enough (Food, 1995).

The terms above are not the only names people think of when it comes to the obese. “’incompetent’ and ‘indulgent’” (Crossrow, 2001, pg. 208) are two more. Joseph Bellizzi and Ronald Hasty found that obese people have been described as having a weak will, possessing great amounts of guilt, not worth trust, and blamable (1998). Society often has a low opinion of those who are obese yet a high opinion of the thin. People who are thin are come across as good-looking, vigorous, and doers (Frierson, 1993).

Nicole Crossrow et.al found that people with obesity have a lower likelihood of getting service than thin people. Within the focus group used in the study, there were feelings that salespeople were less likely to help and waitpersons spoke and assumed before thinking. The waitperson would ask if the customer received the light menu or assumed the customer wanted Diet Coke (2001). These characterizations of and actions towards the obese provide a basis for employment discrimination.

Discussion: Employment Discrimination

Employment provides an outlet for social discrimination. There is evidence that obesity causes discrimination in work settings. With different reasons relating to obesity, employers have specific ways to avoid hiring obese people. Job placement and promotion are affected by obesity and gender compounds weight discrimination.

Why do Employers not hire those who are Obese?

Stereotypes can lead employers not to hire an obese person. People who are obese are seen as “less desirable employees who, compared with others, are less competent, less productive, not industrious, disorganized, indecisive, inactive, and less successful..” (Larkin, 1979, pg. 315-316). Employers have three main reasons to not hire an obese person. Employers use store image, insurance costs and future health conditions, and physical limitations as reasons not to hire obese people.

Image


Employers may be able to get away with using appearance as an excuse because it only becomes a problem if combined with an already protected class {4} (Roehling, 1999). The salesperson’s appearance may have an effect on a store’s image. A study done by Dennis Clayson et. al shows three student perceptions of stores with an obese sales associate. First is that the store was not as successful as other stores. Second, students perceived store management as having a lower effectiveness compared to other stores. Third, one obese sale associate causes the other sales associates to be viewed as less than the best of the main company (1996).

Employers concern themselves more with the fact that customers may not buy products from an ugly salesperson than with abilities of the obese applicant (Bellizzi, 1998). Many hiring decisions may be based on whether the applicant fits a representational image or specific mental projection of the job (Larkin, 1979). How the selling environment is perceived may be one of the bigger factors for not hiring obese people (Bellizzi, 1998). Image is a reason that obese people are not wanted as employees.


Insurance Costs and Future Health Conditions


Most often, the public sees the health of obese people as decreased. Many employers foresee costs associated with the obese: insurance premium increase, increase in absences, and having to pay for special accommodations (Roehling, 1999). In fact, many employers do not want to hire obese people because of increasing costs of health care (McEvoy, 1992).

According to Dr. Chernov, healthcare costs have risen an estimated 12-15% per year, which is higher than the inflation rate in the United States. The higher costs of health insurance could cause employers to drop health insurance plans or try to lower health care costs by only hiring people with fewer health risks. This latter reason stands on the logic that the healthier a workforce is, the less health care costs will be. In many cases, employers will stop covering certain things like morbid obesity surgery (2003).

However, employers assume that obese people are or will become less healthy, thus affecting the health care costs. An example from Sharlene A. McEvoy is the case of State Division of Human Rights on Complaint of Catherine McDermott v. Xerox Corporation. The Xerox Corporation refused to employ McDermott because of the higher likelihood she would have future health impairments. Even though there was nothing wrong with McDermott at that moment, she should not be hired because of future health problems (1992).

Yet, one cannot tell who will develop a disease because of obesity and many obese will live a life without contracting obesity-related diseases (Allison, 2001). Dr. Chernov agrees, saying that a person who has a higher risk of getting certain diseases just means that he/she has a greater chance of getting these diseases. It does not mean an obese person will get the diseases or that a thin person will not (2003).


Physical Limitations


According to Sharlene A. McEvoy, physical limitations of an obese person may be the most legitimate reason not to hire an obese person. Physical fitness can be pertinent to jobs connected with strenuous physical activity (1992). There are several examples of these jobs. First, policemen, firemen, and military jobs require physical fitness in order to get through the training regimen required (Chernov, 2003).

Dr. Chernov illustrates the second example. Lance Armstrong’s trainer, Chris Carmichael, has calculated the effect of the Tour de France winner gaining the 20 pounds that Lance Armstrong lost during cancer therapy. If Armstrong gained that weight back, it would take him 3 minutes longer to do one of the Hors Category climbs of the Tour. These climbs are steep, winding, and quite difficult (2003). If Armstrong did gain those 20 pounds back, it would cause his job performance to go down.

A third example is that of the case Green v. Union Pacific Railroad as described by Sharlene McEvoy. Union Pacific had set certain standards of physical fitness for the entire Union Pacific system. Each job category had its own set of medical standards that all applicants must meet. Green applied to transfer into the fireman’s job but was denied because he had a weight problem, blood pressure on the verge of hypertension, and a spine with advance stages of osteoarthritis {5}. The courts agreed with Union Pacific because Green may not be efficient or safe in his present physical condition (2001). Green’s health might prevent him from doing his job well, so it makes sense for Union Pacific not to hire him.

However, employers have to be careful about using physical limitations as an excuse. Mark V. Roehling wrote about two court cases to illustrate this point. In both cases, the obese applicants were examined by employer selected doctors. These doctors based their recommendations of not hiring on obesity typecasts instead of on the applicants’ actual job abilities. Also, many employers have denied overweight applicants jobs because of the perception that the applicants could not do the job, not on the fact that they could not actually do the job (1999). Also, employers may view a person’s mental power and abilities negatively, thus not hire (Bellizzi, 1998). Employers may be able to use physical limitations as a reason, but this reason should be backed up.

Weight, Job Placement, and Promotion


If an overweight person is hired, there is discrimination when it comes to job placement and promotion. The question is, would employers hire an obese person, but place them in a job that required less contact with the general public? The answer: yes. A study found that people who were seen as obese were fit for challenging jobs when it involved sales via the telephone (Bellizzi, 1998). Employers would not place obese employees in a place to interact with the general public because of the belief that customers may not want to do business with ugly obese people (Bellizzi, 1998).

Another study has found that the perception of store success and the store’s image are affected negatively by obese employees (Clayson, 1996). Also, overweight people were rated lower for placement in a job specifically described as sales job but were rated equally for a general position (Roehling, 1999). Face to face contact causes discrimination in the job placement of obese people. An obese person is less likely to receive a promotion recommendation and even had less subordinate acceptance and selfconfidence than other candidates for promotion (Bordieri, 1997).

James G. Frierson describes the case of Gimello vs. Agency Rent-A-Car systems, which illustrates employer-based promotion discrimination. The employee, Gimello, was fired on the excuse that he was not performing his job. To the contrary, Gimello received commendations, raises in pay, a promotion and was evaluated well. The problem came when a new regional director felt that Gimello should not be promoted because he was oversized and overweight. The director also claimed that Gimello’s weight was problematic and that the employee was slobby (1993). Obese employees receive lower evaluations as subordinates and are seen as undesirable coworkers (Roehling, 1999).


Gender and Weight Discrimination


Obesity has become a major force in the hiring process. Yet there is a compounding factor in weightbased discrimination: gender. Gender may cause more discrimination than weight alone, as women have the most difficulty with their weight. Women with an ideal body type have a weight lower than the standard weight for females (Roehling, 1999).

In a focus group studying weight stigmatization, women reported having more negative experiences than did men (Crossrow, 2001). Women tend to fluctuate in weight and have a greater chance for weight change; women also had worse physical functioning according to this weight change (Hemingway, 1998).

Women with a high employment factor, such as being a full-time manager, had a lower possibility for being obese and lower BMI than women who had a lower employment factor (Ball, 2002). A survey found that “16% of employers surveyed said they would not hire obese women under any conditions, and an additional 44% would not hire them under certain circumstances” (Stunkard, 1985, pg. 1063). Gender itself has an effect because employers were less likely to hire women than men (Dugoni, 1994).

Since the 1970’s, there have been claims of weightbased sex discrimination in the airlines (Frierson, 1993). Sharlene McEvoy provides the perfect example of this. In the case Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., Laffey was a stewardess who claimed that weight restrictions for flight attendants were different for men than women. If a female flight attendant exceeded female weight restrictions, then the attendant would either be suspended or fired. It was decided that the only reason for the airline to discriminate on the basis of weight would be if the women could not perform the job; thus in no other way could the airline discriminate against females on the basis of weight (1992).

A second example also comes from McEvoy. American Airlines also placed weight restrictions against female flight attendants, but their pilots had no weight restrictions. The airlines claimed that the sex-based weight limitations were attributable to airline image and that an overweight flight attendant may not be able to perform the flight safety procedures. Also, the only ones who could be suspended or fired for weighing too much were flight attendants (1992).

Other factors can show that women have a harder time with jobs as overweight people. It has been shown that women who were even slightly obese earned much less than non-obese women but there was no difference between obese and non-obese men (Roehling, 1999). Another study showed that women who were obese or overweight experienced more discrimination than men who were obese (Dugoni, 1994).


read more here (http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/academics/hohonu/writing.php?id=111)

Revy
31st August 2009, 22:22
Feminists have paid attention to this issue, but there's a lot of crickets in our corners about it.

But it doesn't mean all thin people are viewed highly. As someone who has been on both sides of the scale, very fat and very thin, I had to deal with being constantly accused of having an eating disorder and being talked down to. I even took appetite stimulants which I was being deceptively told (by my own mother) were anti-depressants. And of course the pressure to eat more, is it any wonder I became fat again? All that weight loss was for nothing.

Our society enforces an authoritarian model of "normality". This is why the media fawns over "average" women. It's not about celebrating people of all sizes, it's about making them conform.

bromide
1st September 2009, 07:11
Our society enforces an authoritarian model of "normality". This is why the media fawns over "average" women. It's not about celebrating people of all sizes, it's about making them conform.
The media doesn't fawn over the average woman though. In the US, the average woman is a size 14 which is considered highly overweight by the media. I can't speak for men, but I'd say that for women rather than enforcing what is actually average, there is a distinct bias towards thinness to the point of glorifying people who are considerably underweight. This makes sense from a capitalist perspective, because then you can ply very normal people with diet pills, weight loss programmes, packaged meals, vitamin milkshakes, diet books, slimming undergarments, and all other manner of unnecessary crap.

An aside of this is that one of my sisters became very ill the year before last and while she was never overweight, she went down to 100 lbs (45kg), this for a person who is 5'8" (173 cm). Of course at that point our mother and family members started commenting on how pretty she was looking.

Merces
3rd September 2009, 15:20
I don't necessarily feel being fat is a direct reuslt of capitalism. Alot of it stems from biology and genetics of an individual, and also his or her choices in life.

kharacter
3rd September 2009, 15:50
Reminds me of Gene Hoglan. He is not a thin person at all, but he is an amazing drummer, who must have practiced countless hours (so he's not lazy), and drumming death metal is a physical workout of both arms and legs (so he's not lazy). Even if it was that a person was fat solely because they didn't do exercise, it would be mad to judge them so harshly on that alone, when they could be living life with all the passion in their hearts

Revy
3rd September 2009, 16:25
I don't necessarily feel being fat is a direct reuslt of capitalism. Alot of it stems from biology and genetics of an individual, and also his or her choices in life.

I wasn't saying it was caused by capitalism.

Muzk
3rd September 2009, 17:58
and also his or her choices in life.

Why do you think children can objectively analyze a situation and do the best possible thing? And, McDonalds and the like do massive child propaganda. Happy meal? Playgrounds?

and then its down to capitalism in itself again

ÑóẊîöʼn
3rd September 2009, 19:55
I think the whole issue is a natural development of how capitalism works rather than an outright, conscious conspiracy to screw over others in the name of profit. Thin models are used by the fashion industry, which hires the advertising industry to blitz the public with their products to promote them. But because the average diet is so rich thanks to a well-developed for-profit food industry, most people simply aren't thin enough to look good in such clothes. So they turn to diets, pills and assorted nonsense which is also sold for a profit. It's more profitable to sell people a constant stream of pills than to give them one-off advice or surgery, as well as the alluring idea that one can lose weight without changing diet, activity levels or lifestyle.

So it's not the people involved really (although doubtless some of them are slimy turds), it's the system that is fundamentally broken.

Lacrimi de Chiciură
12th September 2009, 08:34
Feminists have paid attention to this issue, but there's a lot of crickets in our corners about it.

But it doesn't mean all thin people are viewed highly. As someone who has been on both sides of the scale, very fat and very thin, I had to deal with being constantly accused of having an eating disorder and being talked down to. I even took appetite stimulants which I was being deceptively told (by my own mother) were anti-depressants. And of course the pressure to eat more, is it any wonder I became fat again? All that weight loss was for nothing.

Our society enforces an authoritarian model of "normality". This is why the media fawns over "average" women. It's not about celebrating people of all sizes, it's about making them conform.

But just because the average person is overweight, doesn't make it "right." Obesity is a medical condition that can have serious negative consequences on people's health. It should be discouraged because it is bad for you, similar to smoking tobacco or alcoholism. For sure it is unfair to discriminate against people because they're fat or they smoke, but the fact is it's unhealthy.

If anything, the obesity epidemic is a product of capitalism, with fast food restaurants and marketing super-processed unhealthy foods to kids, etc. And the food industry has to be bigger than the diet industry.

Spark
12th September 2009, 09:05
Problems with weight are largely related to diet and lifestyle. Visit an Ethiopian village, and it would be unlikely to come across an obese person.

Jimmie Higgins
12th September 2009, 11:06
Nice post Stancel. Maybe I missed it but the only thing I would add is the ideological component of "fatness". In the US, fatness is used as a scapegoat and given as a justification for not adopting a universal health system. In the debate around healthcare, the obese worker is the "welfare queen" of the debate; why should you have to pay more taxes for the consaquences of people's bad lifestyle choices, goes the argument.

Heart disease and diabeties are big health problems in the US and so rather than talking about the way our food is processed and pakaged in profitable but unhealthy ways (as comrades have pointed out in this discussion) health is turned into a moral issue about glutteny and laziness.

Unfortunately many comrades here echoed similar moralistic views on this issue which (nothing against them) just shows how widespread this view is.

Problems with weight are largely related to diet and lifestyle
Problems with weight are largely related to diet and lifestyle
It should be discouraged because it is bad for you, similar to smoking tobacco or alcoholism.Yes, it is similar to alcohol and tobacco in that the ruling class tries to use vices as a scapegoat for more systematic problems in capitalism that comrades have pointed out in other posts.

Radical demands regarding the obese should include full universal health care so that things like heart disease and diabetes will be caught earlier on, expanded programs for working class and low income children (breakfast before school, free student lunches that are fully funded and actually healthy), increased breaks and shorter intervals sitting or doing repetitive actions for workers while on the job, more vacation time, and so on.

manic expression
12th September 2009, 13:37
Problems with weight are largely related to diet and lifestyle. Visit an Ethiopian village, and it would be unlikely to come across an obese person.

Obesity largely hits working-class populations the hardest, since mass-produced food is unhealthy and healthier food costs a ridiculous amount (at least in the US). There's a reason people call Whole Foods (which does, IMO, have much better food than most supermarkets) "Whole Paycheck". Workers are finding it ever harder to afford healthy eating, and life expectancy stats support this strongly.

Bringing Ethiopia into the discussion doesn't get us very far, to be honest.

Killfacer
12th September 2009, 17:18
Obesity largely hits working-class populations the hardest, since mass-produced food is unhealthy and healthier food costs a ridiculous amount (at least in the US). There's a reason people call Whole Foods (which does, IMO, have much better food than most supermarkets) "Whole Paycheck". Workers are finding it ever harder to afford healthy eating, and life expectancy stats support this strongly.

Bringing Ethiopia into the discussion doesn't get us very far, to be honest.

I don't think that's true really. I spent my childhood eating fish fingers, mashed potato and beans. It's neither expensive or fattening. The idea that people are obese because they don't eat organic lentels and whole foods seems to be missing the point somewhat.

Anyone can eat less and in a healthy way without spending a fortune on vine ripened sicilian tomatos etc

I'm struggling to feel sorry for fat people.

Oneironaut
12th September 2009, 17:59
I don't think that's true really. I spent my childhood eating fish fingers, mashed potato and beans. It's neither expensive or fattening. The idea that people are obese because they don't eat organic lentels and whole foods seems to be missing the point somewhat.

Anyone can eat less and in a healthy way without spending a fortune on vine ripened sicilian tomatos etc

I'm struggling to feel sorry for fat people.

I agree with you that you can still live a healthy lifestyle and not have to eat lentels all day long. And I feel like Manic Expression wasn't trying to imply that. The issue is what other alternatives people have to shopping at whole foods. First off, the cheapest food available to many people is fast food, and its damn convenient. This is also the most unhealthy food out there. But most people can't necessarily afford another option, besides going to the one inner-city grocery store with expired food on the shelves for 1/3 more the price than if you went out to the suburbs to get food (at least in the states).

Killfacer
12th September 2009, 20:29
I agree with you that you can still live a healthy lifestyle and not have to eat lentels all day long. And I feel like Manic Expression wasn't trying to imply that. The issue is what other alternatives people have to shopping at whole foods. First off, the cheapest food available to many people is fast food, and its damn convenient. This is also the most unhealthy food out there. But most people can't necessarily afford another option, besides going to the one inner-city grocery store with expired food on the shelves for 1/3 more the price than if you went out to the suburbs to get food (at least in the states).

Most people in the UK can afford to buy fish fingers, beans and oven chips. A meal for 3 would probably cost like 4 quid.

Beans (heinz, because i know how to treate myself): 56p - one can (enough for 3 kids, although i have one for myself)
Fish Fingers (Birds eye budget) £1- 10 fingers
Chips (asda oven chips) £1 - 2kg

Meal at macdonals - £3.50... each.

Oneironaut
12th September 2009, 20:51
Most people in the UK can afford to buy fish fingers, beans and oven chips. A meal for 3 would probably cost like 4 quid.

Beans (heinz, because i know how to treate myself): 56p - one can (enough for 3 kids, although i have one for myself)
Fish Fingers (Birds eye budget) £1- 10 fingers
Chips (asda oven chips) £1 - 2kg

Meal at macdonals - £3.50... each.

And if I don't like fish fingers? Just kidding... you are right that there are ways to avoid getting fat on a budget. I just think due to a combination of social factors, like a fast paced schedule with little lunch time to actually make something healthy and cheap, people are often just finding themselves going through the drive through.

Jimmie Higgins
12th September 2009, 21:07
I don't think that's true really. I spent my childhood eating fish fingers, mashed potato and beans. It's neither expensive or fattening. The idea that people are obese because they don't eat organic lentels and whole foods seems to be missing the point somewhat.

Anyone can eat less and in a healthy way without spending a fortune on vine ripened sicilian tomatos etc

I'm struggling to feel sorry for fat people.
Where do you live? In the US, it is very difficult in poor neighborhoods to get any decent food.

So I leave my neighborhood where probably a 3rd of people are obease and then I got to my job in (white) Berkeley where unless you are a student in the dorms or crowed 5 to a two bedroom appartment, you are a yuppie professional with a million dollar home. To give you an ides of the type of people who live in Berkeley, a regular customer where I used to work writes fro Forbes magazine and is a talking head on the Forbes show on FOX news... "libereral Berkeley":rolleyes:. Another regular customer was Michael Chabon who wrote things like "Wonder Boys" and the screenplay to "Spiderman 2". It definately stands out when you see an overweight person in their 30s, 40s or 50s in Berkley where many people seem to have endless time to shop at organic food stores and spend their days talking on cell phones at coffee shops.

Please tell me again that class plays no part in obesity in the US. If you believe this line of thinking about personal choice being the main factor, then you also have to think that blacks and latinos make worse choices than middle class whites... that the working poor are stupider or lazier than the skinny professionals.

Jimmie Higgins
12th September 2009, 21:09
Speaking of Whole Foods - don't go there if you can - protest there instead. The owner of Whole Foods is rabbidly anti-labor and gives money to anti-healthcare reform organizations. I think the Teamsters are calling for a boycott.

manic expression
12th September 2009, 21:26
I don't think that's true really. I spent my childhood eating fish fingers, mashed potato and beans. It's neither expensive or fattening. The idea that people are obese because they don't eat organic lentels and whole foods seems to be missing the point somewhat.

Anyone can eat less and in a healthy way without spending a fortune on vine ripened sicilian tomatos etc

I'm struggling to feel sorry for fat people.

Next time you're in the US, go to a regular supermarket and see how many products you can find without high fructose corn syrup. It's really quite surprising how widespread that stuff is, at least stateside.

Oneironaut
12th September 2009, 21:53
Speaking of Whole Foods - don't go there if you can - protest there instead. The owner of Whole Foods is rabbidly anti-labor and gives money to anti-healthcare reform organizations. I think the Teamsters are calling for a boycott.

There is one beautiful thing about Whole Foods (at least the one I go to) is that they are almost always in yuppie parts of town and are easy as hell to steal from.

Jimmie Higgins
13th September 2009, 00:40
There is one beautiful thing about Whole Foods (at least the one I go to) is that they are almost always in yuppie parts of town and are easy as hell to steal from.Ha! I would give you 20 "thanks" hits for that one.

Orange Juche
13th September 2009, 02:24
Anarchism makes me phat!

Killfacer
13th September 2009, 14:27
The outraged Gravedigger


Where do you live? In the US, it is very difficult in poor neighborhoods to get any decent food. I think the bit where i said "in the UK" should tell you where i'm from.


So I leave my neighborhood where probably a 3rd of people are obease and then I got to my job in (white) Berkeley where unless you are a student in the dorms or crowed 5 to a two bedroom appartment, you are a yuppie professional with a million dollar home. To give you an ides of the type of people who live in Berkeley, a regular customer where I used to work writes fro Forbes magazine and is a talking head on the Forbes show on FOX news... "libereral Berkeley":rolleyes:. Another regular customer was Michael Chabon who wrote things like "Wonder Boys" and the screenplay to "Spiderman 2". It definately stands out when you see an overweight person in their 30s, 40s or 50s in Berkley where many people seem to have endless time to shop at organic food stores and spend their days talking on cell phones at coffee shops.So?
:confused:


Please tell me again that class plays no part in obesity in the US. If you believe this line of thinking about personal choice being the main factor, then you also have to think that blacks and latinos make worse choices than middle class whites... that the working poor are stupider or lazier than the skinny professionals.Tell you again? I never said it in the first place, all i was saying was that it's possible in the UK to eat well on a budget without getting fat. Stop making things up.

I believe class is certainly a major factor for Obesety in the UK aswell. The reason isn't because fat people can't afford nutritious food though.

Invincible Summer
18th September 2009, 21:51
Here's a really useful article: http://agonist.org/ian_welsh/20071101/why_eating_healthy_costs_more_than_eating_unhealth ily
and a handy graph: http://agonist.org/files/active/1/agricultural%20subsidies.jpg

Basically, there are gov't subsidies for what we need to eat less of. That gives people more of an incentive to grow lots of corn to create high-fructose corn syrup, feed for meat & dairy, etc.

Plus, as mentioned by others, "health food" stores are usually in wealthier areas of town and the prices are augmented accordingly.

mannetje
18th September 2009, 22:23
Where do you live? In the US, it is very difficult in poor neighborhoods to get any decent food. Don't they have outdoor markets in the usa? In the netherlands we have them everywhere. it's full of healthy products and much more cheaper than a supermarket.

Oneironaut
18th September 2009, 22:53
Don't they have outdoor markets in the usa? In the netherlands we have them everywhere. it's full of healthy products and much more cheaper than a supermarket.

In some places. We call them farmers' markets. In my city they would have one every saturday downtown. The other days of the week we wouldn't have any farmers' market though.

mannetje
18th September 2009, 23:00
In some places. We call them farmers' markets. In my city they would have one every saturday downtown. The other days of the week we wouldn't have any farmers' market though.
where I'm from the most markets are also once in a week.

La Comédie Noire
19th September 2009, 01:38
The media makes losing weight seem like going to the moon. It's actually very easy, once you realize you don't need a 2000 calorie a day diet to function normally.

For instance, I lost 45 pounds in a matter of 5 months by changing my diet, especially stopping my intake of soda.

You really don't realize how much you eat as an American till you stop yourself.

redasheville
19th September 2009, 03:41
The media makes losing weight seem like going to the moon. It's actually very easy, once you realize you don't need a 2000 calorie a day diet to function normally.

For instance, I lost 45 pounds in a matter of 5 months by changing my diet, especially stopping my intake of soda.

You really don't realize how much you eat as an American till you stop yourself.

Again, it is worth pointing out that fatty, sugary food is cheap, available in poor areas. Pound for pound, sugar is the cheapest thing in a grocery store. Plus fatty food tastes good (debatable obviously) and people comfort themselves with food...to cope with stress, depression and other things brought on by capitalism.

As Gravedigger is no doubt aware, in West Oakland (a poor, mostly black neighborhood) THERE ARE NO GROCERY STORES. Not one. Liquor stores (by the way alcohol is more calorie dense that fat) sure...but no actual grocery stores.

Stress at work makes you gain weight. When you're stressed out it triggers a "feed or breed" response. Guess what, most people don't have a willing sexual partner on hand for whenever they get stressed out, but they generally have food available! Your body will actually store the energy because it assumes that stress is the result of running from a saber toothed tiger or a dinosaur or something (:cool:). So, working at a shitty stressful job all day will make you gain weight.

Plus, regarding your point about how easy it is to lose weight...think about this. When you become fat, what is actually happening is that your fat cells are swelling. Your fat cells will actually remain swollen so once you're overweight it becomes harder and harder to shed pounds. This is a biological response to the potential threat of starvation.

Top this all off with poor food in schools given to poor children...and you've got a population set up to be unhealthy. Just an anecdote, back in North Carolina, I knew a 1st grade teacher who taught mostly poor children. She gave a whole lesson on how to eat healthy. They kids were excited. They go to the cafeteria and what are they served? Chili cheese fries.

I could go on and on.

Point is, capitalism makes people unhealthy, physically and mentally.

palooko
19th September 2009, 05:01
Plus, as mentioned by others, "health food" stores are usually in wealthier areas of town and the prices are augmented accordingly.


This is because health food stores and organic farms are owned by the same corporate conglomerates who own conventional farms and processing factories, at least in America anyways. California alone produces about $600 of organic produce, most of it coming from just five farms. Five or ten years ago, when the major food producers saw that organic/health food was coming into vogue, what do you think they did? They smelled higher prices charged for less product, and started producing organic crops and healthy products. Nearly all organic crops in the United States are either grown, distributed, or sold by exactly the same companies who produce conventional crops. They don't care which one you buy. You're not striking a blow at anyone, except at your own pocketbook.

synthesis
23rd September 2009, 04:15
I don't necessarily feel being fat is a direct reuslt of capitalism. Alot of it stems from biology and genetics of an individual, and also his or her choices in life.

In a narrow sense, that's true, but capitalism can certainly be linked to obesity, albeit not in the conspiratorial way that people tend to assume.

I'm referring to the rate of obesity in America; for example, miners in West Virginia had a propensity to use lard for practically everything. The strenuous work they did every day demanded a diet rich in fat and protein.

When West Virginians started working behind a desk instead of a shovel, the diet remained the same, and now more than 30% of West Virginians (http://www.montrealgazette.com/health/obesity+rates+balloon+Survey/1752144/story.html) are clinically obese. This pattern remains true for much of America.

revolt4thewin
29th September 2009, 01:22
Cheap food these days give me gas like every time when we here about when the fed bails out wallstreet with trillions of taxpayer dollars while millions starve overseas.