Saying people's choices are terrible isn't cruel, it's the truth and most of the time the person already knows that. What is cruel is saying they are a bad example, or disgusting, or other commentary that focuses on the person's worth rather than their decisions.
An example of being healthy no, at least not on the surface. There is compelling research stating underweight might actually be more dangerous but either extreme isn't the pinnacle of health. The problem I have with the e-mail is that this reporter doesn't claim to be a fitness guru or example of health, someone went out of their way to assign a "duty" where one doesn't exist for her to do her job correctly.
How so?
Again how so?
In general private/public, commenting on physical characteristics is bad etiquette (or worse).
With public figures, entertainers, etc., it comes with the territory, and clearly this person made the choice to make this an issue on-air.
It's not theory, in the general population it's a fact. A fact. A fact. Which is of course how they rationalize it away, by denying it.
Habits, choice, working around ones genetics and preferences, shifting a diet and gradually aquiring healthier taste, things things take work, and some people avoid it. We all rationalize away the things we don't want to do to some degree. For some, this becomes basically a mental condition, a hardcore refusal to admit reality (and it's not just overeating, lots of people do this with lots of behaviors).
The issue here is that liberals want me, involuntarily, to pay for this persons healthcare. And if I have no choice in that, why the **** should you be free to overeat and not exercise, knowing this will cost me more? Chaining them to me (by me providing healthcare money for them) might seem like a good idea, until I drag them with me at a pace they can't keep up with. Then what, we'll have to restrict my freedom to require them to live moderately healthy if I'm paying their way? Surely this is reasonable!
My fault. It was genetics, not general medical conditions. The point still stands. Factor in whatever conditions you want, anyone with half a brain and an ounce of common sense and intellectual honesty will know that the vast, vast majority of obesity is caused by choices in lifestyle, and nothing more. I mean, we can literally trace back the rising rates to societal trends towards larger portions, higher calories, and more sedentary lifestyles. The timeline is precise. It's plain as day.
He's an ass. When I was in radio we got those types all the time always calling in to push their views, and frankly all these groups should be ashamed of themselves.This is a response from the person who wrote the letter:
"Given this country's present epidemic of obesity and the many truly horrible diseases related thereto, and considering Jennifer Livingston's fortuitous position in the community, I hope she will finally take advantage of a rare and golden opportunity to influence the health and psychological well-being of Coulee Region children by transforming herself for all of her viewers to see over the next year, and, to that end, I would be absolutely pleased to offer Jennifer any advice or support she would be willing to accept."
"Ken Krause is an anti-obesity crusader."
Kenneth Krause, personal injury lawyer, wrote letter to Jennifer Livingston calling her obese- Minneapolis - News - The Blotter
Yep. I probably have a better workout regimen than that guy, difference is I only share when asked.I frankly get turned off by any kind of crusader. Crusades aren't just for religions anymore.
Sure, and I can agree to that. My first take was that it was a reader comment section of the show but it looks like a contact e-mail she got. I actually don't blame her for her response, and yes becoming a public figure does invite unwanted scrutiny and contact but it doesn't excuse that kind of e-mail.
I disagree. The jackass had a right to contact her, but it doesn't excuse poor behavior.
True, but I don't think her public status is an excuse for it.