• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Obesity in America Being Glamorized and should it be?

Is obesity being glamorized and should it be?

  • Yes it is and I see no problem with that.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Yes it is and there poses in issue in doing so.

    Votes: 7 28.0%
  • No it's not but I believe it should be.

    Votes: 2 8.0%
  • No it's not and it shouldn't be.

    Votes: 13 52.0%
  • Other - Please elaborate.

    Votes: 3 12.0%

  • Total voters
    25

Zinthaniel

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 30, 2013
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
1,112
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I want to start off by saying that I believe that beauty is entirely subjective and that everyone is beautiful depending on their own self-perception and the perception of the individual looking at them. That said It has become apparent that in the crusade to combat insensitive attitudes towards obese people that the reality of what obesity remains to be has been lost.

On facebook a plus sized model posted a photo of herself in a bikini. She is indeed beautiful and this thread is not about whether or not obesity is beautiful it's about the medical consensus regarding obesity. Being obese is health hazard, it increases the likelihood of a great many life shortening illnesses and diseases. So when in the comments of that photo I see people celebrating her for being an icon and symbol for those like her and others it becomes a tad worrying. It sends a very serious message that in effect demeans the medical aspects of obesity.

https://www.facebook.com/TessMunste...4634897583/954955297863509/?type=1&permPage=1

10441117_954955297863509_8270760891154452318_n.jpg


Then in this article, one of many, there is a very strong shift in perception of fitness and health with men. In it, titled "Real Men", the author establishes a new stereotype. Comparing photos of men who are a tad chubby and not fit to athletic counterparts the article insists that the former is an example of real men and "reality" and that the latter are absurd ideals being pushed on men. Insisting that athletic male models are the equivalent of the negative female model stereotype of "anorexic beauty". The true absurdity being that for men, who are anatomically and biologically engineered for easier muscle gain, being athletic is not in any way impossible or unrealistic especially at a young age.

If 'Real Men' Posed In Underwear Ads

qYgDK2F.jpg


The change in perception is all very jarring and worrisome. There is nothing wrong with promoting beauty in all it's forms, but if the cost is to ignore health and fitness so that we can become complacent with average health and fitness practices or worse complacent with being obese then what message is being sent out to the public, especially children?
 
Last edited:
Her face may be beautiful. Her body is not. Obesity is not beautiful. It may be socially acceptable these days, but beautiful, it is not. It is unhealthy, uncomfortable, and has a host of health problems associated with it.

As for glamorizing it, it doesn't matter either way to me. For myself, you could glamorize it to the maximum allowable, and I would still not find it acceptable for me. I would feel absolutely miserable.
 
I don't think it is being glamorized. I'd say the extreme opposite is being glamorized. The "pop culture" magazines glamorize being dangerously skinny and half-starving yourself to look "pretty."

However it is a legitimate medical problem, and a completely preventable one at that.
 
I don't think it is being glamorized. I'd say the extreme opposite is being glamorized. The "pop culture" magazines glamorize being dangerously skinny and half-starving yourself to look "pretty."

However it is a legitimate medical problem, and a completely preventable one at that.

I'm seeing an attempt to make obesity more glamorous for the past few years, and I believe it is because so many more people are overweight nowadays, and they want to still feel desirable and sexy, regardless of their willingness to control their weight. I think it's "normal" that is no longer seen as cool. :lol:
 
Not sure if it's being glamorized per se, but it's certainly being coddled to an unhealthy degree, at least from my perspective.
 
I don't think it is being glamorized. I'd say the extreme opposite is being glamorized. The "pop culture" magazines glamorize being dangerously skinny and half-starving yourself to look "pretty."

However it is a legitimate medical problem, and a completely preventable one at that.

I agree, but I have noticed that is becoming more and more admirable to ignore weight and respect beauty in all it's form. And it's there where a thin line is formed, because on one side Yeah if you are big and proud and happy then so be it, but at the same time being big comes with a cost. And when you promote pride in being overweight that sends message to impressionable minds. So where does a line need to be drawn is what I wonder.
 
Not sure if it's being glamorized per se, but it's certainly being coddled to an unhealthy degree, at least from my perspective.

Yeah, You actually used better words than I. Coddle is the perfect word.
 
I agree. I think it's kind of disturbing to try to make super morbid obesity "glamorous." Let's be honest, that's the category she'd fall into. At this weight, at her age, it's fairly likely she'll die in middle age.

This has definitely been a big thing in one branch of the "body acceptance" movement lately (which I don't think is truly accepting, but whatever). It's understandable, given that most people in this country are now overweight or obese. But instead of fixing it, they seem to want to make it the new beauty standard.

It is one thing to accept oneself, and to show different builds and types of people who are healthy, and to divorce oneself from the body being their only source of worth, or to even just be honest with oneself and say, "I understand the risks of being like this, and I'm ok with that."

But to tout it as... glamorous? Yeah, that's disturbing. It's JUST AS DISTURBING as trying to make an anorexic with a BMI of 13 look "glamorous." Deadly diseases are not glamorous. Anorexia isn't. Super morbid obesity isn't. And I'm sorry, I am just not going to pretend otherwise.

Why can't we get to the point where we don't need to glamorize the extremes? It's like tragedy porn. How about people who just look like people?

I'm less clear-cut on the set about men. I went to the link, and you know, a lot of those "normal guys" are actually normal. One is of the "brick ****house" variety -- you know, football big. They will always carry a bigger layer than most, but that's normal for them. And a couple of the other guys do actually have muscle definition and no noticeable paunch.

No, most normal guys don't have every muscle on their ribs defined, or an easily distinguishable whatever-pack, even if they are quite fit. That one I kind of agree with, though I do notice they've excluded the "wiry" body type, which a lot of younger men have until their 30's or so.

I would say on the whole most of the guys I've dated are fairly fit, and I only dated one who looked like any of those models. He was a professional aerialist, which is incredibly physically demanding. Way beyond just "being in shape." Working out even a couple hours every day won't get you a body like that.

So I don't think it's necessarily realistic to paint that as the ideal or the norm. You can be quite fit and not look like that.
 
Last edited:
I'm seeing an attempt to make obesity more glamorous for the past few years, and I believe it is because so many more people are overweight nowadays, and they want to still feel desirable and sexy, regardless of their willingness to control their weight. I think it's "normal" that is no longer seen as cool. :lol:

I think both extremes are being pushing to an unhealthy degree tbh. I agree that obesity is being glamorized to a degree, but you still have to bear in mind there is another extreme all the way on the other end: anorexia.

Both of which, IMHO, are preventable with a healthy diet and a reasonable amount of exercise. Hell, you probably don't even have to do the exercise. I know a woman who dropped near 100 pounds just by switching to organic foods and getting off her sodas.
 
I agree. I think it's kind of disturbing to try to make super morbid obesity "glamorous." Let's be honest, that's the category she'd fall into. At this weight, at her age, it's fairly likely she'll die in middle age.

This has definitely been a big thing in one branch of the "body acceptance" movement lately (which I don't think is truly accepting, but whatever). It's understandable, given that most people in this country are now overweight or obese. But instead of fixing it, they seem to want to make it the new beauty standard.

It is one thing to accept oneself, and to divorce oneself from the body being their only source of worth, or to even just be honest with oneself and say, "I understand the risks of being like this, and I'm ok with that."

But to tout it as... glamorous? Yeah, that's disturbing. It's JUST AS DISTURBING as trying to make an anorexic with a BMI of 13 look "glamorous." Deadly diseases are not glamorous. Anorexia isn't. Super morbid obesity isn't. And I'm sorry, I am just not going to pretend otherwise.

Why can't we get to the point where we don't need to glamorize the extremes? It's like tragedy porn. How about people who just look like people?

I'm less clear-cut on the set about men. I went to the link, and you know, a lot of those "normal guys" are actually normal. One is of the "brick ****house" variety -- you know, football big. They will always carry a bigger layer than most, but that's normal for them. And a couple of the other guys do actually have muscle definition and no noticeable paunch.

No, most normal guys don't have every muscle on their ribs defined, or an easily distinguishable whatever-pack, even if they are quite fit. That one I kind of agree with, though I do notice they've excluded the "wiry" body type, which a lot of younger men have until their 30's or so.

I would say on the whole most of the guys I've dated are fairly fit, and I only knew one who looked like any of those models. He was a professional aerialist, which is incredibly physically demanding. Way beyond just "being in shape." Working out even a couple hours every day won't get you a body like that.

So I don't think it's necessarily realistic to paint that as the ideal or the norm. You can be quite fit and not look like that.

I understand what you are saying about men. However my contention is the notion that men who do look like the latter are achieving some sort of impossible goal and that it's not reasonable. I think that message is negative. And when they follow it up by insisting men like David Beckam are not "Real" it becomes all the more absurd. A real man is a real man no matter their size. We should promote athleticism whether or not your body will look like magazine covers is irrelevant, what is relevant is what excersie does for health.
 
I think both extremes are being pushing to an unhealthy degree tbh. I agree that obesity is being glamorized to a degree, but you still have to bear in mind there is another extreme all the way on the other end: anorexia.

Both of which, IMHO, are preventable with a healthy diet and a reasonable amount of exercise. Hell, you probably don't even have to do the exercise. I know a woman who dropped near 100 pounds just by switching to organic foods and getting off her sodas.

Interestingly, back in the early 1900's up until about the 50's, people were pretty darn thin, and it wasn't from anorexia. It was because they generally didn't have excess of anything, including food. It's only since the post-war period that Americans started living such lives of excess across the board, in huge numbers, and especially after the 60's. I love vintage clothing, and especially stuff from the 20s to 40s, and although I am a small woman, it is not easy or common at all to find dresses that will fit over my hips. The American average body has changed dramatically over the past few decades.
 
I understand what you are saying about men. However my contention is the notion that men who do look like the latter are achieving some sort of impossible goal and that it's not reasonable. I think that message is negative. And when they follow it up by insisting men like David Beckam are not "Real" it becomes all the more absurd. A real man is a real man no matter their size. We should promote athleticism whether or not your body will look like magazine covers is irrelevant, what is relevant is what excersie does for health.

It likely is impossible for, say, the guy who has the "brick ****house" build. It's probably impossible for the "wiry" man, who might get the definition, but will never have the bulk.

These kinds of ads don't really promote athleticism, any more than super thin models promote sensible eating. They promote in image -- a look.

Also, when considering what this article is responding to, we have to put this in the context for the way men display eating disorders -- which we are seeing more and more of. Men who are anorexic tend to rely less on just straight starvation, and more on extreme exercise. Do I think that's related to this idea that any guy can look like that? Yeah, I'd say it is.

I might tend to agree with you that the mainstream image promoted of men is less extreme -- and likewise, the "average" of men promoted in that article is also less extreme than it is in the women's body acceptance movement.

I don't agree that it's entirely realistic though. Just less impossible than the ideal for women.
 
Interestingly, back in the early 1900's up until about the 50's, people were pretty darn thin, and it wasn't from anorexia. It was because they generally didn't have excess of anything, including food. It's only since the post-war period that Americans started living such lives of excess across the board, in huge numbers, and especially after the 60's. I love vintage clothing, and especially stuff from the 20s to 40s, and although I am a small woman, it is not easy or common at all to find dresses that will fit over my hips. The American average body has changed dramatically over the past few decades.

I'm not even sure it's how much you're eating, but what you're eating. If your snacks consist of apples and salads, rather than twinkies and cookies, you won't have as much of a problem. If you get seconds of a grass-fed steak dinner, rather than seconds of pasta or microwave dinners, you won't have as much of a problem. I eat a considerable amount of food myself, but it's good food.
 
I'm not even sure it's how much you're eating, but what you're eating. If your snacks consist of apples and salads, rather than twinkies and cookies, you won't have as much of a problem. If you get seconds of a grass-fed steak dinner, rather than seconds of pasta or microwave dinners, you won't have as much of a problem. I eat a considerable amount of food myself, but it's good food.

For the most part, it's a numbers game. More intake in calories than expenditure in bmr plus activity, and you'll gain. More expenditure than intake, and you'll lose weight. I could live on twinkies and chips if I kept my calorie intake below a certain level. I would be very unhealthy, but I would be alive.
 
Obesity is not being glamorized. The things people are taking issue with nowadays are unhealthily skinny models and beauty standards only Photoshop can meet. Reducing the emphasis on being stick-thin does not mean obesity is being glamorized.
 
For the most part, it's a numbers game. More intake in calories than expenditure in bmr plus activity, and you'll gain. More expenditure than intake, and you'll lose weight. I could live on twinkies and chips if I kept my calorie intake below a certain level. I would be very unhealthy, but I would be alive.

Well living off of twinkies and chips would not exactly help your obesity problem. You could "live" off of them, sure I guess. But the goal here isn't simply living, but living healthy.

I don't think a high intake of calories is inherently a bad thing as long as they aren't empty calories. If you're getting important vitamins and proteins from a high calorie diet, and you're exercising regularly, that kind of diet will not make you obese. It's empty calories like carbs, grains, and starches that are the real enemy. Your pastas, your twinkies, your cookies, your bread. Empty calories, coupled with infrequent or non-existent exercise routines, are the root cause of obesity in my experience.
 
I've always noticed on facebook, that women who are absurdly obese and men who are married to absurdly obese women, will put out posts like "Real men love women with curves" or "No one wants to cuddle a stick". Then there are the requisite photos of a curvy and sexy lingerie model who is a little overweight juxtaposed against Nicole Richie at her anorexic worst telling men that curvy women are sexier, as if men were lusting after Nicole Richie in droves (I know not one man who has ever mentioned her in regards to....well...anything). Honestly, I think men are much more accepting of women's bodies than women are of each others. We are not that picky. Yes, Kate Upton's of the world turn our heads. But that doesn't exclude us from finding other body types attractive.

As far as men having negative body images, it's out there I guess but I'm not sure if it is a growing problem or if there is just more awareness it exists in small numbers. If anything, our egos are more performance driven than being dominated by weight scales.
 
Not yet mentioned is PPACA and its total acceptance of obesity as a normal health condition. While the First Lady goes on a crusade to fight obesity, our President's signature health care madness refuses to allow insurance premiums to be adjusted upward for obesity - yet they may be for age which is neither preventable nor reversible. The official government message seems to be that it is cool, or at least acceptable, to let your body accumulate excess fat even though it has known and serious negative heath consequences.
 
Not yet mentioned is PPACA and its total acceptance of obesity as a normal health condition. While the First Lady goes on a crusade to fight obesity, our President's signature health care madness refuses to allow insurance premiums to be adjusted upward for obesity - yet they may be for age which is neither preventable nor reversible. The official government message seems to be that it is cool, or at least acceptable, to let your body accumulate excess fat even though it has known and serious negative heath consequences.


Yeah, the coddling is doing some damage. Whether or not people agree that it is being glamorized, I def believe we are well on our way to that. And subjectivity of beauty put aside there is danger in sending that sort of complacent message to the public, especially youth.
 
I want to start off by saying that I believe that beauty is entirely subjective and that everyone is beautiful depending on their own self-perception and the perception of the individual looking at them. That said It has become apparent that in the crusade to combat insensitive attitudes towards obese people that the reality of what obesity remains to be has been lost.

On facebook a plus sized model posted a photo of herself in a bikini. She is indeed beautiful and this thread is not about whether or not obesity is beautiful it's about the medical consensus regarding obesity. Being obese is health hazard, it increases the likelihood of a great many life shortening illnesses and diseases. So when in the comments of that photo I see people celebrating her for being an icon and symbol for those like her and others it becomes a tad worrying. It sends a very serious message that in effect demeans the medical aspects of obesity.

https://www.facebook.com/TessMunste...4634897583/954955297863509/?type=1&permPage=1

10441117_954955297863509_8270760891154452318_n.jpg


Then in this article, one of many, there is a very strong shift in perception of fitness and health with men. In it, titled "Real Men", the author establishes a new stereotype. Comparing photos of men who are a tad chubby and not fit to athletic counterparts the article insists that the former is an example of real men and "reality" and that the latter are absurd ideals being pushed on men. Insisting that athletic male models are the equivalent of the negative female model stereotype of "anorexic beauty". The true absurdity being that for men, who are anatomically and biologically engineered for easier muscle gain, being athletic is not in any way impossible or unrealistic especially at a young age.

If 'Real Men' Posed In Underwear Ads

qYgDK2F.jpg


The change in perception is all very jarring and worrisome. There is nothing wrong with promoting beauty in all it's forms, but if the cost is to ignore health and fitness so that we can become complacent with average health and fitness practices or worse complacent with being obese then what message is being sent out to the public, especially children?
I haven't encountered any media which glamorises obesity.
 
The biggest issue I have is that this woman is considered plus size:

plus.jpg

Give me a ****ing break. :roll:
 
I haven't encountered any media which glamorises obesity.

DO you watch mainstream channels? Bravo, Mtv, Vh1, Fox, Ktla, some recent romance movies - etc. It's great that obesity is no longer mocked, but it inching into something different.

I mean your older, it's a generational thing. It may be that the things you watch and the stuff that appeals to you wouldn't give you an accurate perception of how today's generation perceives obesity.
 
Back
Top Bottom