I believe weight loss is possible. I have lost weight in the past.
It’s just that statistically it is extremely difficult to lose weight and keep it off for long periods of time.
And in some cases when people have disabilities and cannot exercise, they must rely on starvation diets or dangerous surgeries to lose weight.
Those are not healthy or desirable options. They are incredibly hard to maintain over long lengths of time. And they can lead to yo-yoing, eating disorders, busted staples, and other complications. Sometimes those options can be more dire than not losing weight in the first place.
You have the physics right, but you aren’t including every variable.
There is a complicated psychology to factor in. Things like depression can snuff out willpower and motivation. Food can be very addictive. It’s easier to gain than lose. So one might spend a week losing a few pounds, but then they have a couple of meals at a wedding or party and those few pounds come right back. Then one gets frustrated and thinks, “why am I bothering?” They eat their feelings and the cycle repeats.
The math is easy. The weight loss is hard.
Research has shown that 95 to 98 percent of attempts to lose weight fail and two-thirds of dieters gain back more than they lost. Why do you think the weight loss industry is a multi-billion dollar venture?
I’m sorry, but that makes me think it is a little more than just “fat people are lazy” or that we are fucking reptiles.
I see so many people lose a hundred pounds and immediately claim victory. Sometimes they will even deride other fat people and tell them it isn’t that hard. They parrot all the stereotypes saying it is a character flaw holding people back. Everyone is just “making excuses.”
“Maybe if they were better people, they’d be thin too!”
But that person doesn’t realize the stats are against them. Maybe they are the 5% that keep it off. Or maybe they’ll blow out their knee. Maybe they’ll get depressed. Maybe they’ll just miss eating cookies and pizza. And a few years later they are back where they started.
Circumstances matter.
These are not just excuses. Having problems is not weakness. It’s just bad luck. Not everything is always within our control.
No, I don’t subscribe to the typical “fat conspiracies” as you might call them.
I don’t believe everyone who is fat is healthy. And if they are healthy I know they have increased risks. And I know some people are unhealthy because they are fat. But thin people can be unhealthy too. Which means health is more than a number on a scale. So maybe weight loss isn’t always the only path to health.
I freely admit there is a line where the health risks are almost certain to come to fruition. I am not naive. I don’t say I have slow metabolism or bad genes or I’m big boned. I know it’s more complicated and most of those reasons do not always hold up well scientifically. Instead, I think it is a hundred little things that add up and contribute rather than a few common tropes.
Yes, I believe in body positivity. I don’t think shame is an effective motivator. I think respecting fat people will improve their health. I think the words “glorifying obesity” should never be spoken again. I think sometimes not losing weight is the best option for certain people. And in some cases, it might not be a viable option at all. So… not impossible. But maybe 99.99999% unlikely. I think people can make healthy decisions no matter what they weigh without the pressure of trying to shed mass. I think some fat people can be delusional but I think society and people like you help to fuel that.
If those are the conspiracies you think I ascribe to, then I am guilty as charged.
I got fat as a kid because I snuck food and didn’t know better. I have found over several decades that it is very hard for me to lose weight.
It just is.
I promise you.
I have on many occasions put in considerable effort to lose weight. I once lost 90 pounds on a starvation diet (basically what you described) and it was miserable. The hunger never went away. It felt awful all of the time. I doubt you would want to live like that perpetually. I sure didn’t.
I was balancing a delicate house of cards to keep the weight off. I ate rice cakes and crackers and salad and not much else. And you’re right, I was able to burn those calories as you described.
And then my best friend died.
I gained it all back in just a few months.
How does your math account for that?
How many kcal should I have eaten to satisfy my unbearable grief?
Yes, I personally am unhealthy because I am fat. I have diabetes and sleep apnea. But… my options suck. I don’t qualify for weight loss surgery. My CFS has become so intense that I can rarely escape my bed. My energy is so minimal that preparing meals is difficult. My money is so tight that I must buy food that is easy to cook and sold in bulk. I’d love healthier options. I’d love to get Blue Apron’s diabetic meal plan. But usually all I can afford is a giant frozen bag of chicken nuggets.
Got any equations for that?
Any fancy formulas to address that happenstance?
Also, I have food addiction issues and my depression has killed any sense of willpower I once had. But I need food to survive so it’s not like I can avoid eating.
Is there anything in the laws of thermodynamics to solve that?
Will the Pythagorean Theorem cure addiction? Or depression?
You don’t know what you are talking about and it is insulting you think you can simplify this issue in a Tumblr ask.
Bottom line… effective long-term weight loss can be immensely complicated.
So maybe don’t go around patronizing fat people because you took a physics course.
The 95% of people who fail to lose weight would like to tell your laws of thermodynamics to go to hell.
I’d add the the person arguing with sirfrogsworth is acting on the assumption that a living body is a fairly simple machine, that does not react to its environment and, say, adjust its metabolism to burn fewer calories if fewer calories start coming in.
Exactly.
While most people’s natural metabolic rate is not hugely varied from person to person and typically does not factor much into issues of exaggerated weight loss or gain (as is the common myth), losing weight via starvation-style diets can create a sort of hostile metabolism.
“Losing just 3 percent of your body weight results in a 17 percent slowdown in your metabolism—a body-wide starvation response that blasts you with hunger hormones and drops your internal temperature until you rise back to your highest weight. Keeping weight off means fighting your body’s energy-regulation system and battling hunger all day, every day, for the rest of your life.“
I would encourage anyone who is fit or thin to read the above article. I know it is a really long read, but I would consider it a personal favor.
One of the most valuable things you can do as an ally is find ways to relate, empathize, and understand. I think this article might give you some insight in that regard.
It is not about how to lose weight. It is a detailed essay on why respecting and loving fat people can significantly improve their health. Both physically and mentally. It can help them respect and love themselves.
The article provides ample evidence that shame is actually the worst way to help those who struggle with obesity. And it shows that you can make healthy choices, reduce many risks, all without the pressure of losing weight.
If you are overweight I don’t think it is 100% necessary to read the article. I have a feeling you already know most of its contents. I found it emotionally difficult to read. So if you are having a poor mental health day, maybe skip it or save it for another day.
Also, don’t read the comments.
Even with tons of sourced research people cannot seem to get the message. Or they refuse to give up their current beliefs. Or they keep asking why an article that isn’t about how to lose weight doesn’t tell people how to lose weight.
They can’t comprehend the concept that hating fat people is literally making us sick.
This was circulating in a facebook group. There was no consensus as to who wrote this and what it actually meant.
Does anyone here know?
the dark science of dialectical materialism
The Time Cube version of diamat
to elaborate: this chart was attributed to: an occultist, the Time Cube guy, a leftcom from leftypol, and an analytic philosopher. no one presented any evidence
there’s more:
They’re actually doodles, straight out of Kautsky’s private journal, he was a genius you see
yo iirc these are the work of an infamously weird revleft poster who routinely posted similarly bizarrely formatted diagrams accompanied by equally weird text posts that i think were intended to explain the diagrams, but then i couldnt really be sure. the posts there were attributed to one
Miguel Detonacciones, who claimed to be part of a foundation for a dialectical encyclopedia or something. the posts took place over like, a decade along with a blog so its either a REALLY dedicated troll or the literal, physical manifestation of the expanding brain meme
personal highlights
i like the way he put “chameleonic” in rainbow colours, its little touches like that that elevate this to outsider art imo
an incomplete list of unsettling short stories I read in textbooks
the scarlet ibis
marigolds
the diamond necklace
the monkey’s paw
the open boat
the lady and the tiger
the minister’s black veil
an occurrence at owl creek bridge
a rose for emily
(I found that one by googling “short story corpse in the house,” first result)
the cask of amontillado
the yellow wallpaper
the most dangerous game
a good man is hard to find
some are well-known, some obscure, some I enjoy as an adult, all made me uncomfortable between the ages of 11-15
add your own weird shit, I wanna be literary and disturbed
The Tell-Tale Heart, The Gift of the Magi, The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calavaras County, Thank You Ma’am
the box social by james reaney. i remember we all had to silently read it in class, and you would hear the moment everyone reached the Part because some people would audibly go “what”
wHat did I just put my eyes on
“The Veldt” by Ray Bradbury
Not quite a short story, but read in class: “The Monsters are Due on Maple Street” from The Twilight Zone
Harrison Bergeron, Cat and the Coffee Drinkers
“Where are you going and where have you been” by Joyce carol oates
“The Pedestrian” by Ray Bradbury
the lottery by shirley jackson
i can’t believe Roald Dahl’s “The Landlady” wasn’t already mentioned
and also it’s not so much unsettling as more absurdist but “The Leader” by Eugene Ionesco definitely made me go wtf
Ett halvt ark papper. I cried so much.
Ночь у мазара, А. Шалимов
A Sound of Thunder by Ray Bradbury
I Have no Mouth, and I Must Scream by Harlan Ellison
The Lottery by Shirley Jackson
All Summer in a Day by Ray Bradbury
Some of Us Had Been Threatening Our Friend Colby, by Donald Barthelme
I read Ray Bradbury’s “All Summer In A Day” in seventh grade (it wasn’t assigned, I was just going through my textbook for new stuff to read) and as a bullied kid with SAD, it Fucked Me Up.
An Ordinary Day with Peanuts, by Shirley Jackson
Eh, this was more like community college, but The Star by Arthur C. Clarke
Lamb to the Slaughter by Roald Dahl
and this story that I can’t remember the name of and can’t find, though it might be by O. Henry? it’s about a bunch of demons who want to stop Santa Claus from going through with Christmas, and he must travel through the mountains they inhabit to escape their vices? (good christ I can’t remember the name for the life of me)
Ok but the laughing man and a good day for bananafish but j.d. Salinger
The City (195) Ray Bradbury. An intense commentary on colonialism and space exploration. I read it for a sci fi survey class.
Another short story I read in that sci fi class was Vaster than Empires and More Slow (1971) by Ursula K. Le Guin. A commentary on humanity and how human we believe ourselves to be. Also, an interesting commentary on mental health.
In the Woods Beneath the Cherry Blossoms in Full Bloom, written in 1947 by Ango Sakaguchi. It made my skin crawl the first time I read it.
It’s Please Like Me an Australian show by comedian Josh Thomas and you can watch it on Netflix and you definitely should it is amazing! It deals with mental health and queer relationships in a really normalizing way, but also a lot of humour.
My wife and I were were talking the other day and, I don’t remember what we were even talking about, but the idea came up that we would need an oreo for. I joked about getting one from my secret stash. This is where she made her mistake. She said “oh right, like you could have an Oreo stash without me knowing about it.”
I’m sorry?
That’s a challenge.
Oreos aquired.
I’m going to hide them in a super simple place at first
But be sure to follow this post while I chronicle all the ways and places I hide them and also how I plan on taunting her with cookies while she can’t find the package
She is out of the house for a moment so it’s time to enjoy a few cookies
And find a new hiding spot
Hehehe
They up there
Normally I’m a Oreos with milk kinda guy, but I’ll take coffee if coffee is available
Now to hide them right under her nose
She never looks under the TV for anything. Tonight when we are watching Halloween Wars I’ll have a big dopey grin on my face
Time to up the stakes. It was fun having em here and hiding them around her while she didn’t know what was happening. Bit now it’s time for her to be in on the game she is playing
Four cookies packed in her lunch. Game on
I’ve been cleaning house today and feeling like I’ve done a pretty good job. Time to reward myself with some delicious Oreos
Aaaaand put them where she would never find them in a million years
🙂
Got up early this morning and helped pack everyone’s lunch. Pulling a damn Oprah over here
You get some cookies! You get some cookies! Everyone gets cookies!
Then a devious idea struck me…
I put the remaining Oreos in a baggie to hide by themselves. Now to “hide” the package where it will probably be found…
And pin the actual stash to the inside of the closet wall
If you two weren’t already married I’d beg you to marry her because you two are obviously perfect for each other and I love this post with all my heart
This guy’s dopey grin at his success at hiding oreos is exactly what I’m here for
You like that eh? Well you are going to love today’s installment
Look at that. So sad. So few Oreos left
Guess I’ll just pin em right to the middle of the wall in the middle of the living room. She’ll never find em there
Oh, guess I should put this back up
Bwa ha ha ha! You guys! You guys don’t understand! I was planning on doing this and when I got home and looked at it I was like “aww, it’s too thin. They won’t fit.” I even TOLD my wife this and how I was disappointed that I wouldn’t be able to hide them back there.
But then I looked again. They dooooo
Thank you all so much for the love. I knew y’all would like this, but I had no idea you would like it THIS MUCH. People calling us “goals” and stuff… Man…. It’s kinda hard to take in ya know? Anyways: if this post gets Over 9000™ before I get off work today I will pick up Halloween Oreos on my way home and this will not stop
i told ya we’ve canceled discourse n we’ve moved on to homesteading skills
it’s just choppin wood and harvesting vegetables and herbs from here on out
amen!
unironically this
Please hit me with more homesteading concept drawings
Good reference material here.
My brain during sane hours of the day: “I have a good job with benefits, a stable social network with supportive friends and family, and I’m a nerd who thrives on advanced technology. Also, I dislike the taste of fish.”
My brain on Tumblr at 3:30am: “Y’know, abandoning all technology and leaving civilization behind looks like a lot of fun! And I could teach the kids how to build a fish trap!”
Honestly if you’re female and you’re called for jury duty and during the elimination process you’re asked if you’ve ever had any adverse experience with a man (harrassment or rape or any other male violence) just fuckin lie and say no. Then vote that fucker guilty
Women survivors are barred from serving on a jury but rapists are not even questioned. There can be no doubt that this is a major reason rapists walk free. Men have never played fair. It is time for women to start beating them at their own game. Our lives depend on it.
As someone who wants to be a prosecutor one day… I agree.
OK NO. NO NO NO NO NO. I am a defense attorney. I am a woman. I am also a sexual assault survivor. THAT BEING SAID I HAVE BEEN THINKING ABOUT THIS POST ALL WEEK AND IT’S SOOOOO FUCKING WRONG ON SO MANY LEVELS.
It’s wrong not for any bullshit rape apologist shit, btw, it’s wrong BECAUSE THIS SHIT WILL LITERALLY FUCK YOU OVER AND FUCK OVER ANY RAPE VICTIMS TOO. Here’s why:
(bear in mind this advice is gonna be MD specific since that’s where I practice)
1) FIRST THINGS FIRST. Don’t fucking lie. Don’t you dare fucking lie when you’re being questioned at jury duty. Why? OK well first: you’re swearing to tell the truth under penalty of perjury. What that means is yes, you will face criminal charges. Criminal charges which, btw, will keep you off of any juries in the future.
Here’s the thing, people (the law enforcement authorities and the defense counsel) WILL be able to find this out especially if you have ever filed a formal police report and/or spoken publicly about it. Yes, even on facebook. This ALSO means that if the fact that you lied about this is found out mid-trial it’s grounds for a mistrial with prejudice, if not a straight dismissal. Which means that hey, look, EVERYTHING HAS TO START ALL OVER AGAIN, THIS TIME WITH NEW JURORS.
2) The second thing is this: in many states, you don’t just get dismissed after answering affirmatively. The voir dire process in MD works like this:
A) prosecutors and the defense come up with a list of questions to ask potential jurors. These are typically a combination of blanket questions you would ask at any trial (ex: have you ever been convicted of a crime in this jurisdiction) and specific questions tailored to the hearing in particular (like the question above). Both attorneys get the chance to view each other’s questions and object to any particular questions that the other team may have.
B) So we’re at jury selection. Both attorneys argue preliminary whether or not questions get to be asked or not, submit the questions to the judge, and decide how to do the striking. (all at once submitted on paper, or alternating).
B1) “striking” means asking to get rid of a juror. A strike can be peremptory, i.e., you can strike for whatever reason you want and don’t have to justify it, automatically. Or you can have a strike FOR CAUSE. There are a limit to how many peremptory strikes/challenges you can have, depending on the jurisdiction, and the type of crime. And you may or may not have to justify those strikes and turn them into “for cause.”
B2) generally if, during a question, a juror answers in the affirmative, the judge will ask you to go up to the bench to privately discuss it with the judge, and both attorneys. In this case they will ask if you or somebody you know was a victim. They will also ask if the incident occurred in the same jurisdiction and possibly involved the same arresting officers. They will THEN ask you if you feel so strongly that it will affect your ability to be IMPARTIAL–that is, will you still be able to only consider the facts presented to you in the court, and be able to judge something as proven beyond a reasonable doubt or not, or will you be biased?
B3) If you say “I am so biased” then yeah, the judge will excuse you right away. But if you say “No I think I can do it. I can be impartial.” you’ll be asked to return to your seat.
C) The questions are now done. The attorneys then go through their strikes. Like I said, they have a limited number of the peremptory ones. And there are other limits too. You can’t strike jurors on the basis of a “protected class” (i.e.: race, gender, religion etc.) and anything that SHOWS that an attorney is doing so a can be objected to by the other attorney. There doesn’t have to be a “pattern” but that helps (i.e. striking three women in a row). Every time a juror gets called and somebody requests a strike, the other attorney can either object or not. So it’s up to each attorney to protect the jurors they want (and btw other than the questions, in MD, the info you get as an attorney is the juror’s name, age, job, and where they live, and their spouse’s job). If there’s a disagreement then the judge will hear arguments either way. If it’s a protected class argument, the attorney who has been striking has to come up with a different reason to justify and that’s got to be something UNRELATED to the protected class (ex: if you struck two Black guys in a row you can’t say “oh well I didn’t want THESE Black guys I wanted the other ones” because that’s still BASED ON RACE).
————
3) SO HERE’S WHY IT’S SO FUCKED UP TO EVEN SUGGEST THIS SHIT AS A WAY TO “SOLVE THE PROBLEM”
A) as I said above, you don’t want to fucking lie.
B) also BEING A CONVICTED FELON, BTW, AND OTHER TYPES OF CONVICTIONS, DISQUALIFIES YOU FROM BEING ON THE JURY. So…convicted rapists? yeah, they can’t actually serve. THIS IS LITERALLY A QUESTION ON THE JURY DUTY FORM AND IS A QUESTION ASKED AT EVERY STAGE OF SELECTION.
C) ALSO, in a couple of the posts I’ve seen they’ve mentioned this question was only asked for women. I’m not sure really if I, as an attorney, would have phrased a question in a gendered way like this SINCE IT’S BASICALLY BEGGING FOR A CHALLENGE AS A PROTECTED CLASS OBJECTION. So fine, if it’s asked gender neutral? That’s OK, but as I said, you won’t get dismissed instantaneously (at least not in MD) as it’s not one of those automatic questions the court asks (i.e.: are you a citizen etc.). And so (again, in Md, Idk about other states) If you say “yes I can be impartial” then fine. Sit your ass down and wait for an attorney to strike you.
D) so if you DO have an attorney striking you, I would ABSOLUTELY object to any attorney who systematically struck ALL THE WOMEN from a jury panel. Because fuck that that’s a protected class that fucking SO DEMONSTRATIVE of a violation of the law. IT’S GENDER BASED. Whoever the prosecutor was who allowed a defense attorney to get away with that shit just wasn’t doing their fucking job.
E) And in terms of this post? about nobody caring? Fuck that if I was a prosecutor I would absolutely ask if any person (”PERSON” DAMN IT NOT JUST MEN BECAUSE THE WIVES/SISTERS/MOTHERS etc. OF MEN WHO ARE ACCUSED OF RAPE ARE ALSO FUCKING BIASED) had ever been accused of rape or sexual assault or knew somebody who did etc. That’s just good lawyering. It’s sloppy not to do so.
F) And as a defense attorney, NGL, I would want to know the answer too, in order to make sure to challenge those strikes.
——-
I get it. I fucking get it. And some of these things will depend on how fucked up your judge is and how good the other side is. But this shit about “OH HEY JUST LIE” FUCK ME NO. DO NOT FUCKING DO THIS.
I’m so fucking furious that people are spreading this like it’s a good damn idea and something that will work. Honestly this is so fucking stupid and dangerous to me that I’m suspicious–is this for real? Or is this somebody trying to false information troll people?
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DO NOT DO THIS. Answer your questions truthfully and let the lawyers do their damn job. Yes, it sucks, but at the end of the day, people in this country are INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. And your job, as a juror, is to ASSESS ONLY THE FACTS AND ARGUMENTS PRESENTED TO YOU, AND TO SEE IF THE STATE WAS ABLE TO PROVE THAT THIS PARTICULAR SUSPECT DID IT. AND THEY DID IT BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
THe fact is, not all rape cases go to trial. And the ones that do, DISPROPORTIONATELY charge men of color (in particular, Black and Latino men). You cannot believe in equality, fight against racism, protect the constitution AND ALSo try to do this shit. It’s fucked up and completely inconsistent and yet another way to fuck with the justice system. doing this will probably allow more alleged rapists to go free than it will allow for equality in jury selection.
TL;DR: this shit is really fucking bad advice and not the way to actually go about doing things. stop giving people legal advice IF YOU AREN’T A LAWYER. ESPECIALLY IF THAT LEGAL ADVICE that will actually put them in jail, people.
artherra 