Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Keep Making Me Rich, Fatty

Keep Making Me Rich, Fatty
July 15, 2012, 04:03:20 PM
Buy Fast Food (poison your body) ->
Buy TV (poison your mind) ->
Buy Diet Pills (that don't work) ->
Buy Workout Programs (that you'll never do) ->
Buy Doctor Visits (who tell you to buy drugs) ->
Buy Prescription Drugs (that wont fix the problem) ->
Buy A Bigger Car (because you're too fat to walk) ->
Drive Yourself To Work (because you need money to buy fast food because you're too busy working hard to cook healthy)

http://www.businessinsider.com/industries-profiting-from-obesity-2012-6?op=1

Fat domesticated monkeys = profit

Re: Keep Making Me Rich, Fatty
July 15, 2012, 07:17:59 PM
Average dialogue on fat people between myself and most people I discuss the subject with -

Me - You know, I think while there are some obese people who are obese genetically or have a medical problem, I'd wager that about 85%-90% of obese people are obese by their own doing.

Person - Well you can't blame them! They have a problem mentally/physically/psychologically that compels them to eat!

Me - That is unfortunate, but I do not think that is true in most cases. People tend to eat what tastes good, not what's good for them. I say we should force obese people into fat camps where they are worked until they lose enough weight to be average/fit for their body type.

Person - But that's so unfair! Who are you to judge what they do? Why does it matter if they only hurt themselves?

Me - Well, because they don't. Their obesity causes various problems throughout society, from airlines to increased weight toilet seats to special accommodations in various public areas, obese people inadvertently make fit people pay more. Besides, why is it a bad thing if I want to gather them all up to lose weight? Isn't that ultimately helping them?

Person - WELL WHAT IF THEY'RE HAPPY THE WAY THEY ARE???? WHO ARE YOU TO CHANGE THEIR LIFE???? (or something similar, at this point the conversation shifts from logical discourse into ad hominem and emotional reaction)


Any excuse to cover up the fact that those people make bad decisions. Some I meet even feel sorry for them.  There's even an organization dedicated to ending "fat prejudice" (perhaps an ample trolling opportunity awaits?) - what a fucking laugh. Choke on your Big Mac, lardo. Good fucking riddance.

Re: Keep Making Me Rich, Fatty
July 15, 2012, 08:31:00 PM
Why does it matter if they only hurt themselves?
You can ignore literally every other argument these people make. The one quoted is the one overriding thought behind everything disgusting in our society. "It's not like he's hurting anyone, so it doesn't bother me." Or, "I'm not hurting anybody, so what do you care?"

If you want to change the way someone sees an issue in which this attitude informs their opinion, you need to change the attitude. Addressing the issue will be fruitless, even if using logic, statistics, and science - as you have seen. This is because the issue itself is irrelevant; it is surface veneer, mere canvas upon which  the currently-popular philosophy of "whatever" can be brought into vivid form and tint.

Which is why you hear variations of the same argument as a justification for all sorts of behaviors. Ask various individuals, as each question applies: Why do you eat so much? Why do you pursue promiscuity? Why do you use foul language? Why do you watch television? Why do you spend so much money on pointless things? In most cases, these individuals will not be slaves to gluttony, lust, wrath, sloth, or greed. I have yet to know someone personally who engages in such activities out of an active, overarching emphasis in their desire for them. They do not do these things because they "need" to. In almost all cases, people do these things not only because they want to, but also because they believe there is no reason to NOT do whatever they wish to do. Unless it hurts someone else. Obviously.

Point being, they are not hopelessly lost causes. They are not sinners for the sake of sinning. But they have been taught to assign no value to the concept of goodness as its own good. We populate a world in which goodness only matters when it prevents evil from befalling others; when we allow evil to befall us, no sin has been committed. This is a direct inversion of the original concepts of good and evil from which our current paradigm has emerged. It used to be that sin, evil, darkness, and death were creeping inevitabilities that stalked mankind endlessly, and had to be resisted actively, at every opportune moment, lest they consume him entirely. Now evil is thought to exist only when actively pursued, in the form of harming others.

In my experience, the discussion usually continues as such from the point you left it off:
"I'm not hurting anyone, so what's the problem?"
"You're hurting yourself."
"Who cares? That's MY choice if I want to do that. I'm an adult. I don't want to live forever. Etc. etc." (here, ironically, the tone often becomes childish and petulant)
There was a very long time during which this last statement would have been considered an admission of sin. Today it is considered... nothing. Just the way it is.

It doesn't matter how empirically wrong someone may be on an issue, Humanicide, or how definitively you can demonstrate their wrongness, because nobody forms their opinions on matters based on cold, hard data. Opinions are formed based on our innate values, and influenced by data. If you really want to change someone's opinion, that entails changing their whole way of thinking. Going into statistical data for insurance premiums (for example) will do nothing. You must show them that the way they see the world is wrong. And to do this you must first show them how the world really is - otherwise, they have no illuminated spots against which to compare their blind ones.

Re: Keep Making Me Rich, Fatty
July 15, 2012, 08:53:45 PM
Or, for the sake of being more accurate:

1
---
"Why does it matter if they only hurt themselves?"
"Because it's wrong."
At this point, the first person will usually reply to me as you indicated in your own post, questioning my validity as an arbiter of social mores. I.e., "WHO ARE YOU TO JUDGE?" In my experience, though it does not then usually devolve into ad hominem and emotional appeals - more often than not, it stops being a conversation about the right to harm oneself and becomes one about the validity of subjective vs. objective values. I consider this a positive development.


2
---
"Why does it matter if they only hurt themselves?"
"Because they're not just hurting themselves."
This can continue in one of two ways. The first is the route you took - using data. Mostly economic, in your case. You could also use data in a personal way, say, by pointing out that obese people who have children are going to cause all sorts of health problems in that child, both through genetics and upbringing. But it's still data. The second route one could take is to say that they're harming everyone around them, not in a quantifiable way, but simply by downgrading society overall. We could say the same about someone who goes for weeks with without a shower; he's only hurting himself, after all. In fact, he's hurting himself FAR less than the fatties. But he would get ostracized nonetheless - because he's GROSS. And because nobody wants to live in a nation of walking, greasy, sweaty fecal matter, that ostracization continues. If you think about it, the only real reason for this is because the smell would be unpleasant. Kind of like the sight of landwhales is unpleasant.


3
---
"Why does it matter if they only hurt themselves?"
"Does everyone have a right to hurt themselves?"
I've only ever mentioned this counter as an aside. It changes the discussion into one about suicide pretty quick. I don't like going in that direction simply because the whole concept of rights is, to me, bullshit. Although my position on this particular matter would still say that suicide is wrong, for various reasons - it just gets too complex too quickly, and we lose sight of the original argument.

Re: Keep Making Me Rich, Fatty
July 16, 2012, 09:58:56 PM
Istaros:  a lot of good points.  I think I could also put it this way:  the "war" going on in the house 3 houses down inevitably spills over into the house 2 houses down, then your neighbor's house, then your house.  At what point do you intervene?

We have to know how to "enforce" these sort of unofficial standards in a way that is not too invasive or "nosy."  I think the way to strike the balance between what business is totally private and what potentially becomes my business can only be done on a smaller community scale with the people you see everyday and relatives or friends living farther away.  The way you do it is through a sort of "rhythm" of the day, the week, the month, and the year.  By this I mean seeing your neighbors at church every Sunday, for instance, or seeing them every fall at the "fall festival," or even just seeing them at town meetings.  And of course, the point is, when you see them they don't look like derelicts, their kids are running around, etc - you keep your lawn nice, I keep my lawn nice, etc.  If something is going down the tubes, you have to go ask what the hell is going on, what can I do to help before it becomes a bigger problem?  The individual really does have a duty to take care of themselves for the sake of their neighbors, family, friends as much as for themselves.

EDIT:  I honestly think this may point to the importance of public/communal "ritual."  Communities simply need to "gather" on some sort of regular basis to almost "check up" on each other.  The simple rhythm of the seasons would inform us as to when the community would gather.  This probably helps explain really primitive religion or things like Stonehenge which is supposedly built in reference to the movements of the sun and the cycle of the seasons.  Who knows...