If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Marie Osmond on Larry King Live last night.
On Mon, 9 Aug 2004 at 07:12:05, The Voice of Reason
wrote: Actually even being mildly fat impairs physical movement. Sorry, but that turns out not to be the case; I am an ice dancer and although I both need and want to lose weight, I am not allowing the fact that I carry excess body fat to prevent me from dancing. Both the lack of fitness combined with excess weight conspire to mean that the obese person has a lack of mobility. The worst part is that it's self-inflicted and so easily curable. Er, again, that turns out not to be the case. I read somewhere that a group of very seriously overweight people were, under medical supervision, put on a carefully calorie-controlled diet, with ample nutrients and enough calories to maintain a normal body-weight, but lose excess fat - and their bodies reacted just as though they were being starved, with all the symptoms of gross malnutrition. So it is not necessarily easily curable. Who said anything about unhealthy levels? You'll find that the most attractive levels of body fat are the healthiest. Again, that is not always the case. Women tended to be about 10-20 lbs heavier 50 years ago, yet if you look at some of the "bathing beauties" of the era, they are still beautiful. Plus there was no thought, then, of their being unhealthy. And, unless you consider being out of fashion harmful, it's not really an health risk. Fashions don't last thousands of years. Being fat will never be in fashion. Have you ever studied history of art, or, indeed, any social history? Had you done so, you would not have made such a statement. Also there are real health risks to being fat. Unless you live in a place hit with famines there is no purpose to obesity. I think you will find that there is a difference between being "fat" - i.e. maybe 10-20 lbs over what is now considered an ideal weight - and being "obese", when you may have anything up to 100 lbs to lose. If you exercise regularly, it will also not reduce your ability to move, run and hunt. If you exercise sufficiencly you will not be fat unless you deliberately over-eat, end of story. Again, not true. In this day and age it is all too easy accidentally to take in more calories than you need - there are so many "hidden" calories in ready-prepared food. Maybe all the fat acceptors should go and live in third world countries then, it's the only place fat people are going to be thought of as sexually desirable. Actually, it is less uncommon than you think, even in the so-called developed world. I have trimmed the excess cross-posts from this posting. -- Annabel Smyth http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html Website updated 7 August 2004 - for a limited time, be bored by my holiday snaps! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Marie Osmond on Larry King Live last night.
Annabel Smyth wrote in message ...
On Mon, 9 Aug 2004 at 07:12:05, The Voice of Reason wrote: Actually even being mildly fat impairs physical movement. Sorry, but that turns out not to be the case; I am an ice dancer and although I both need and want to lose weight, I am not allowing the fact that I carry excess body fat to prevent me from dancing. I said 'impairs' not 'completely stops'. You can dance, but nowhere near as good as if you lost excess body fat. My point is proven. obese person has a lack of mobility. The worst part is that it's self-inflicted and so easily curable. Er, again, that turns out not to be the case. I read somewhere that a group of very seriously overweight people were, under medical supervision, put on a carefully calorie-controlled diet, with ample nutrients and enough calories to maintain a normal body-weight, but lose excess fat - and their bodies reacted just as though they were being starved, with all the symptoms of gross malnutrition. So it is not necessarily easily curable. 'Read somewhere' isn't really good enough, you're going to have to do better than that. I know of no fat person who when changing to a proper diet with regular exercise can't lose weight. Who said anything about unhealthy levels? You'll find that the most attractive levels of body fat are the healthiest. Again, that is not always the case. Women tended to be about 10-20 lbs heavier 50 years ago, yet if you look at some of the "bathing beauties" of the era, they are still beautiful. How many of them were as fat as the obese people today? Fashions don't last thousands of years. Being fat will never be in fashion. Have you ever studied history of art, or, indeed, any social history? Yes. Also there are real health risks to being fat. Unless you live in a place hit with famines there is no purpose to obesity. I think you will find that there is a difference between being "fat" - i.e. maybe 10-20 lbs over what is now considered an ideal weight - and being "obese", when you may have anything up to 100 lbs to lose. There isn't even a reason to be 10 pounds overweight, it's just laziness. If you exercise sufficiencly you will not be fat unless you deliberately over-eat, end of story. Again, not true. In this day and age it is all too easy accidentally to take in more calories than you need - there are so many "hidden" calories in ready-prepared food. Then don't eat ready-prepared food. In my book eating processed pre-prepared food counts as laziness, which in turn leads to obesity. Maybe all the fat acceptors should go and live in third world countries then, it's the only place fat people are going to be thought of as sexually desirable. Actually, it is less uncommon than you think, even in the so-called developed world. I can't think of anywhere in the developed world where obesity is thought of as attractive. That is the case because if it were attractive, it would only be so as long as there was a shortage of food. In places with no food storage, anyone could become obese in order to become attractive, and so it would no longer be a distinguishing feature. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Annabel Smyth wrote in message ...
On Mon, 9 Aug 2004 at 07:12:05, The Voice of Reason wrote: Actually even being mildly fat impairs physical movement. Sorry, but that turns out not to be the case; I am an ice dancer and although I both need and want to lose weight, I am not allowing the fact that I carry excess body fat to prevent me from dancing. I said 'impairs' not 'completely stops'. You can dance, but nowhere near as good as if you lost excess body fat. My point is proven. obese person has a lack of mobility. The worst part is that it's self-inflicted and so easily curable. Er, again, that turns out not to be the case. I read somewhere that a group of very seriously overweight people were, under medical supervision, put on a carefully calorie-controlled diet, with ample nutrients and enough calories to maintain a normal body-weight, but lose excess fat - and their bodies reacted just as though they were being starved, with all the symptoms of gross malnutrition. So it is not necessarily easily curable. 'Read somewhere' isn't really good enough, you're going to have to do better than that. I know of no fat person who when changing to a proper diet with regular exercise can't lose weight. Who said anything about unhealthy levels? You'll find that the most attractive levels of body fat are the healthiest. Again, that is not always the case. Women tended to be about 10-20 lbs heavier 50 years ago, yet if you look at some of the "bathing beauties" of the era, they are still beautiful. How many of them were as fat as the obese people today? Fashions don't last thousands of years. Being fat will never be in fashion. Have you ever studied history of art, or, indeed, any social history? Yes. Also there are real health risks to being fat. Unless you live in a place hit with famines there is no purpose to obesity. I think you will find that there is a difference between being "fat" - i.e. maybe 10-20 lbs over what is now considered an ideal weight - and being "obese", when you may have anything up to 100 lbs to lose. There isn't even a reason to be 10 pounds overweight, it's just laziness. If you exercise sufficiencly you will not be fat unless you deliberately over-eat, end of story. Again, not true. In this day and age it is all too easy accidentally to take in more calories than you need - there are so many "hidden" calories in ready-prepared food. Then don't eat ready-prepared food. In my book eating processed pre-prepared food counts as laziness, which in turn leads to obesity. Maybe all the fat acceptors should go and live in third world countries then, it's the only place fat people are going to be thought of as sexually desirable. Actually, it is less uncommon than you think, even in the so-called developed world. I can't think of anywhere in the developed world where obesity is thought of as attractive. That is the case because if it were attractive, it would only be so as long as there was a shortage of food. In places with no food storage, anyone could become obese in order to become attractive, and so it would no longer be a distinguishing feature. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Marie Osmond on Larry King Live last night.
"The Voice of Reason" wrote in message
om... I said 'impairs' not 'completely stops'. You can dance, but nowhere near as good as if you lost excess body fat. My point is proven. I think you should explain that to a Sumo wrestler, a weight lifter in the unlimited category or even a Judoka... In these sports, as long as they have a large lean mass, *any* extra mass helps perform better. Especially mass in the gutt, since it helps move the center of gravity in an advantageous position - slightly downward and forward. As long as extra body fat remains reasonnable, they can use it to great advantage. I doubt you would be able to even move 300lbs Judoka. On the other hand, he would have no problem at all to send you flying. And his body fat won't even prevent him from doing a split as easily as you do. Again, that is not always the case. Women tended to be about 10-20 lbs heavier 50 years ago, yet if you look at some of the "bathing beauties" of the era, they are still beautiful. How many of them were as fat as the obese people today? They would nevertheless be stigmatized as overweight or even obese nowadays. Even though they had the normal healthy woman body. Modern fashion magazines actually advertise bodies that are *unhealthy* for women. There are health risks associated with getting your BMI under the norm, and the large majority of fashion models have a BMI that is dangerously under that norm. Have you ever studied history of art, or, indeed, any social history? Yes. Ever seen a prehistoric venus? Or even some Renaissance paintings? I think you will find that there is a difference between being "fat" - i.e. maybe 10-20 lbs over what is now considered an ideal weight - and being "obese", when you may have anything up to 100 lbs to lose. There isn't even a reason to be 10 pounds overweight, it's just laziness. There is no reason to lose weight if you are 10 pounds overweight either. How do you define "10lbs overweight" btw? According to BMI? According to my BMI, I was slightly overweight at 18 when I had a six-pack showing on my abs. According to BMI, most high end sportsmen are obese. What criteria do you use? Body fat? Muscle definition? Having some fat is not an health risk, it's actually pretty healthy in old persons. It's also pretty healthy in a woman, the hour-glass body shape has the highest female hormones production and highest fertility ratio, unlike the no-butt body shape. Probably why normal men are attracted to this kind of body shape. Except to please you, noone has any reason to lose an extra as low as 10lbs. It doesn't make you any healthier, and it doesn't make you more attractive either. I can't think of anywhere in the developed world where obesity is thought of as attractive. It depends on what you call obese. Though if you check the alt.sex.binaries.* newsgroups, some people obviously find extreme obesity attractive. Overweight can be very attractive, and many people think so. Marilyn Monroe was thought attractive by a bunch of people, including an American President, but she would belong to the overweight category nowadays. I would rather date Marilyn Monroe than Kate Moss, I would be too afraid to break something with the later or hurt myself on a bone. If you visit live sex sites, the overweight models are often among the most popular, so it seems they do attract people. In places with no food storage, anyone could become obese in order to become attractive, and so it would no longer be a distinguishing feature. Anyone *with good genetics*, which is precisely why it was attractive in the first place, because it showed superior genetics. It also showed the power of the familly. They were so rich they could afford to buy extra food to make their daughters the most attractive. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"The Voice of Reason" wrote in message
om... I said 'impairs' not 'completely stops'. You can dance, but nowhere near as good as if you lost excess body fat. My point is proven. I think you should explain that to a Sumo wrestler, a weight lifter in the unlimited category or even a Judoka... In these sports, as long as they have a large lean mass, *any* extra mass helps perform better. Especially mass in the gutt, since it helps move the center of gravity in an advantageous position - slightly downward and forward. As long as extra body fat remains reasonnable, they can use it to great advantage. I doubt you would be able to even move 300lbs Judoka. On the other hand, he would have no problem at all to send you flying. And his body fat won't even prevent him from doing a split as easily as you do. Again, that is not always the case. Women tended to be about 10-20 lbs heavier 50 years ago, yet if you look at some of the "bathing beauties" of the era, they are still beautiful. How many of them were as fat as the obese people today? They would nevertheless be stigmatized as overweight or even obese nowadays. Even though they had the normal healthy woman body. Modern fashion magazines actually advertise bodies that are *unhealthy* for women. There are health risks associated with getting your BMI under the norm, and the large majority of fashion models have a BMI that is dangerously under that norm. Have you ever studied history of art, or, indeed, any social history? Yes. Ever seen a prehistoric venus? Or even some Renaissance paintings? I think you will find that there is a difference between being "fat" - i.e. maybe 10-20 lbs over what is now considered an ideal weight - and being "obese", when you may have anything up to 100 lbs to lose. There isn't even a reason to be 10 pounds overweight, it's just laziness. There is no reason to lose weight if you are 10 pounds overweight either. How do you define "10lbs overweight" btw? According to BMI? According to my BMI, I was slightly overweight at 18 when I had a six-pack showing on my abs. According to BMI, most high end sportsmen are obese. What criteria do you use? Body fat? Muscle definition? Having some fat is not an health risk, it's actually pretty healthy in old persons. It's also pretty healthy in a woman, the hour-glass body shape has the highest female hormones production and highest fertility ratio, unlike the no-butt body shape. Probably why normal men are attracted to this kind of body shape. Except to please you, noone has any reason to lose an extra as low as 10lbs. It doesn't make you any healthier, and it doesn't make you more attractive either. I can't think of anywhere in the developed world where obesity is thought of as attractive. It depends on what you call obese. Though if you check the alt.sex.binaries.* newsgroups, some people obviously find extreme obesity attractive. Overweight can be very attractive, and many people think so. Marilyn Monroe was thought attractive by a bunch of people, including an American President, but she would belong to the overweight category nowadays. I would rather date Marilyn Monroe than Kate Moss, I would be too afraid to break something with the later or hurt myself on a bone. If you visit live sex sites, the overweight models are often among the most popular, so it seems they do attract people. In places with no food storage, anyone could become obese in order to become attractive, and so it would no longer be a distinguishing feature. Anyone *with good genetics*, which is precisely why it was attractive in the first place, because it showed superior genetics. It also showed the power of the familly. They were so rich they could afford to buy extra food to make their daughters the most attractive. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Marie Osmond on Larry King Live last night.
On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 at 10:36:14, The Voice of Reason
wrote: Sorry, but that turns out not to be the case; I am an ice dancer and although I both need and want to lose weight, I am not allowing the fact that I carry excess body fat to prevent me from dancing. I said 'impairs' not 'completely stops'. You can dance, but nowhere near as good as if you lost excess body fat. My point is proven. How do you know? Have you seen me on the ice? Unless and until you have, you are in no position to comment. obese person has a lack of mobility. The worst part is that it's self-inflicted and so easily curable. Er, again, that turns out not to be the case. I read somewhere that a group of very seriously overweight people were, under medical supervision, put on a carefully calorie-controlled diet, with ample nutrients and enough calories to maintain a normal body-weight, but lose excess fat - and their bodies reacted just as though they were being starved, with all the symptoms of gross malnutrition. So it is not necessarily easily curable. 'Read somewhere' isn't really good enough, you're going to have to do better than that. I know of no fat person who when changing to a proper diet with regular exercise can't lose weight. Considering that for nearly 25 years I read 6 newspapers per day and several scientific journals per week, I can never remember my sources. Anyway, these people weren't fat, they were obese. Who said anything about unhealthy levels? You'll find that the most attractive levels of body fat are the healthiest. Again, that is not always the case. Women tended to be about 10-20 lbs heavier 50 years ago, yet if you look at some of the "bathing beauties" of the era, they are still beautiful. How many of them were as fat as the obese people today? You keep changing the rules - one minute you are talking about fat people, the next you are talking about obese ones. Which are you talking about? Most of the bathing beauties were probably as fat as fat people today, certainly. Fashions don't last thousands of years. Being fat will never be in fashion. Have you ever studied history of art, or, indeed, any social history? Yes. Then why do you say this? Have you never seen pictures of Rubens' nudes, for instance? Also there are real health risks to being fat. Unless you live in a place hit with famines there is no purpose to obesity. I think you will find that there is a difference between being "fat" - i.e. maybe 10-20 lbs over what is now considered an ideal weight - and being "obese", when you may have anything up to 100 lbs to lose. There isn't even a reason to be 10 pounds overweight, it's just laziness. No, it's that women are usually expected to be 20 lbs *under* their ideal weight, for fashion sake. Think Renee Zellweger in Bridget Jones - she wasn't *fat*, just rather an attractive shape - but everybody made such a fuss about how fat she had to get to take the role. Then, when it was over and she shed those surplus pounds, she looked like a famine victim and we were told how marvellous she looked. Not. If you exercise sufficiencly you will not be fat unless you deliberately over-eat, end of story. Again, not true. In this day and age it is all too easy accidentally to take in more calories than you need - there are so many "hidden" calories in ready-prepared food. Then don't eat ready-prepared food. In my book eating processed pre-prepared food counts as laziness, which in turn leads to obesity. I don't. Eat much ready-prepared food (I don't say none). But some people do, for a variety of reasons. Maybe all the fat acceptors should go and live in third world countries then, it's the only place fat people are going to be thought of as sexually desirable. Actually, it is less uncommon than you think, even in the so-called developed world. I can't think of anywhere in the developed world where obesity is thought of as attractive. Among the Ghanaian community in London, perhaps? That is the case because if it were attractive, it would only be so as long as there was a shortage of food. In places with no food storage, anyone could become obese in order to become attractive, and so it would no longer be a distinguishing feature. Then do you think people like Callista Flockhart and Renee Zellweger are attractive? -- Annabel Smyth http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html Website updated 7 August 2004 - for a limited time, be bored by my holiday snaps! |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 at 10:36:14, The Voice of Reason
wrote: Sorry, but that turns out not to be the case; I am an ice dancer and although I both need and want to lose weight, I am not allowing the fact that I carry excess body fat to prevent me from dancing. I said 'impairs' not 'completely stops'. You can dance, but nowhere near as good as if you lost excess body fat. My point is proven. How do you know? Have you seen me on the ice? Unless and until you have, you are in no position to comment. obese person has a lack of mobility. The worst part is that it's self-inflicted and so easily curable. Er, again, that turns out not to be the case. I read somewhere that a group of very seriously overweight people were, under medical supervision, put on a carefully calorie-controlled diet, with ample nutrients and enough calories to maintain a normal body-weight, but lose excess fat - and their bodies reacted just as though they were being starved, with all the symptoms of gross malnutrition. So it is not necessarily easily curable. 'Read somewhere' isn't really good enough, you're going to have to do better than that. I know of no fat person who when changing to a proper diet with regular exercise can't lose weight. Considering that for nearly 25 years I read 6 newspapers per day and several scientific journals per week, I can never remember my sources. Anyway, these people weren't fat, they were obese. Who said anything about unhealthy levels? You'll find that the most attractive levels of body fat are the healthiest. Again, that is not always the case. Women tended to be about 10-20 lbs heavier 50 years ago, yet if you look at some of the "bathing beauties" of the era, they are still beautiful. How many of them were as fat as the obese people today? You keep changing the rules - one minute you are talking about fat people, the next you are talking about obese ones. Which are you talking about? Most of the bathing beauties were probably as fat as fat people today, certainly. Fashions don't last thousands of years. Being fat will never be in fashion. Have you ever studied history of art, or, indeed, any social history? Yes. Then why do you say this? Have you never seen pictures of Rubens' nudes, for instance? Also there are real health risks to being fat. Unless you live in a place hit with famines there is no purpose to obesity. I think you will find that there is a difference between being "fat" - i.e. maybe 10-20 lbs over what is now considered an ideal weight - and being "obese", when you may have anything up to 100 lbs to lose. There isn't even a reason to be 10 pounds overweight, it's just laziness. No, it's that women are usually expected to be 20 lbs *under* their ideal weight, for fashion sake. Think Renee Zellweger in Bridget Jones - she wasn't *fat*, just rather an attractive shape - but everybody made such a fuss about how fat she had to get to take the role. Then, when it was over and she shed those surplus pounds, she looked like a famine victim and we were told how marvellous she looked. Not. If you exercise sufficiencly you will not be fat unless you deliberately over-eat, end of story. Again, not true. In this day and age it is all too easy accidentally to take in more calories than you need - there are so many "hidden" calories in ready-prepared food. Then don't eat ready-prepared food. In my book eating processed pre-prepared food counts as laziness, which in turn leads to obesity. I don't. Eat much ready-prepared food (I don't say none). But some people do, for a variety of reasons. Maybe all the fat acceptors should go and live in third world countries then, it's the only place fat people are going to be thought of as sexually desirable. Actually, it is less uncommon than you think, even in the so-called developed world. I can't think of anywhere in the developed world where obesity is thought of as attractive. Among the Ghanaian community in London, perhaps? That is the case because if it were attractive, it would only be so as long as there was a shortage of food. In places with no food storage, anyone could become obese in order to become attractive, and so it would no longer be a distinguishing feature. Then do you think people like Callista Flockhart and Renee Zellweger are attractive? -- Annabel Smyth http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html Website updated 7 August 2004 - for a limited time, be bored by my holiday snaps! |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Marie Osmond on Larry King Live last night.
"Lictor" wrote in message ...
"The Voice of Reason" wrote in message om... I said 'impairs' not 'completely stops'. You can dance, but nowhere near as good as if you lost excess body fat. My point is proven. I think you should explain that to a Sumo wrestler, a weight lifter in the unlimited category or even a Judoka... In these sports, as long as they have a large lean mass, *any* extra mass helps perform better. We were discussing dancing, not sumo wrestling or heavyweight weight-lifting, those are the exceptions that prove the rule. They would nevertheless be stigmatized as overweight or even obese nowadays. Even though they had the normal healthy woman body. Modern fashion magazines actually advertise bodies that are *unhealthy* for women. There are health risks associated with getting your BMI under the norm, and the large majority of fashion models have a BMI that is dangerously under that norm. Modern fashion magazines are aimed at women, the women in there are not necessarily what is attractive to men, but rather to women. I think you will find that there is a difference between being "fat" - i.e. maybe 10-20 lbs over what is now considered an ideal weight - and being "obese", when you may have anything up to 100 lbs to lose. There isn't even a reason to be 10 pounds overweight, it's just laziness. There is no reason to lose weight if you are 10 pounds overweight either. There is: when you're lighter your movement is easier and you look better. For example compare a six-pack of abs to a wobbly gut. How do you define "10lbs overweight" btw? I personally don't measure how fat someone is by their weight, but rather than their body-fat percentage. According to BMI? No, only an idiot even mentions BMI in a discussion of how fat someone is. I can't think of anywhere in the developed world where obesity is thought of as attractive. It depends on what you call obese. Though if you check the alt.sex.binaries.* newsgroups, some people obviously find extreme obesity attractive. Well, I hadn't taken fetishists into account! In places with no food storage, anyone could become obese in order to become attractive, and so it would no longer be a distinguishing feature. Anyone *with good genetics*, which is precisely why it was attractive in the first place, because it showed superior genetics. No, it's because food was scarce. Anyone can put on weight, it's simply a matter of eating more food than can be used by the body. It also showed the power of the familly. They were so rich they could afford to buy extra food to make their daughters the most attractive. It showed wealth and power as they had more access to the food and didn't need to do physical work. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Lictor" wrote in message ...
"The Voice of Reason" wrote in message om... I said 'impairs' not 'completely stops'. You can dance, but nowhere near as good as if you lost excess body fat. My point is proven. I think you should explain that to a Sumo wrestler, a weight lifter in the unlimited category or even a Judoka... In these sports, as long as they have a large lean mass, *any* extra mass helps perform better. We were discussing dancing, not sumo wrestling or heavyweight weight-lifting, those are the exceptions that prove the rule. They would nevertheless be stigmatized as overweight or even obese nowadays. Even though they had the normal healthy woman body. Modern fashion magazines actually advertise bodies that are *unhealthy* for women. There are health risks associated with getting your BMI under the norm, and the large majority of fashion models have a BMI that is dangerously under that norm. Modern fashion magazines are aimed at women, the women in there are not necessarily what is attractive to men, but rather to women. I think you will find that there is a difference between being "fat" - i.e. maybe 10-20 lbs over what is now considered an ideal weight - and being "obese", when you may have anything up to 100 lbs to lose. There isn't even a reason to be 10 pounds overweight, it's just laziness. There is no reason to lose weight if you are 10 pounds overweight either. There is: when you're lighter your movement is easier and you look better. For example compare a six-pack of abs to a wobbly gut. How do you define "10lbs overweight" btw? I personally don't measure how fat someone is by their weight, but rather than their body-fat percentage. According to BMI? No, only an idiot even mentions BMI in a discussion of how fat someone is. I can't think of anywhere in the developed world where obesity is thought of as attractive. It depends on what you call obese. Though if you check the alt.sex.binaries.* newsgroups, some people obviously find extreme obesity attractive. Well, I hadn't taken fetishists into account! In places with no food storage, anyone could become obese in order to become attractive, and so it would no longer be a distinguishing feature. Anyone *with good genetics*, which is precisely why it was attractive in the first place, because it showed superior genetics. No, it's because food was scarce. Anyone can put on weight, it's simply a matter of eating more food than can be used by the body. It also showed the power of the familly. They were so rich they could afford to buy extra food to make their daughters the most attractive. It showed wealth and power as they had more access to the food and didn't need to do physical work. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Marie Osmond on Larry King Live last night.
Annabel Smyth wrote in message ...
I said 'impairs' not 'completely stops'. You can dance, but nowhere near as good as if you lost excess body fat. My point is proven. How do you know? Have you seen me on the ice? Unless and until you have, you are in no position to comment. I know, because fat is heavy and weighs you down. However good you are now, you would be better if you had more discipline. Also, you appear to be trying to excuse your weight. If you were capable of losing the weight you would just do it rather than argue that being fat is beneficial. This goes for everyone on these newsgroups who tries to argue that being fat isn't bad. There isn't even a reason to be 10 pounds overweight, it's just laziness. No, it's that women are usually expected to be 20 lbs *under* their ideal weight, Expected to by who? Most men don't like under-weight women, but they don't like them over-weight either. for fashion sake. Think Renee Zellweger in Bridget Jones - she wasn't *fat*, just rather an attractive shape - but everybody made such a fuss about how fat she had to get to take the role. No, she was fat. She was supposed to be fat, it was part of the role. Then don't eat ready-prepared food. In my book eating processed pre-prepared food counts as laziness, which in turn leads to obesity. I don't. Eat much ready-prepared food (I don't say none). But some people do, for a variety of reasons. Yeah, these are the reasons: 1) Laziness. I can't think of anywhere in the developed world where obesity is thought of as attractive. Among the Ghanaian community in London, perhaps? I haven't been down that way so I can't comment. That is the case because if it were attractive, it would only be so as long as there was a shortage of food. In places with no food storage, anyone could become obese in order to become attractive, and so it would no longer be a distinguishing feature. Then do you think people like Callista Flockhart and Renee Zellweger are attractive? Not the former but the latter. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Marie Osmond on Larry King Live last night. | ClabberHead 4.01 | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | August 9th, 2004 03:17 AM |
Marie Osmond on Larry King Live last night. | LucaBG | General Discussion | 0 | August 8th, 2004 08:16 AM |
Dr Weil on Larry King | Preesi | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 2 | January 14th, 2004 06:18 PM |
Sarah Ferguson on Larry King | S t a c i | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 6 | October 22nd, 2003 08:53 PM |
Saturday Night Live Atkins Mention | Pook! | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 2 | October 22nd, 2003 08:56 AM |