Let's talk about fat.

mkgal1 · May 22, 2014

If she had stayed on that diet, she would no doubt have lost body fat, just like every other person in the world who was ever starved while working hard.

She would have lost body fat....no doubt....based on what?

Eating 1000 calories a day isn't the same thing as *not* eating at all. Where are you getting the idea that she'd eventually lose fat?

I've walked that walk......and, like I said, it took an increase in what I was eating to cause the fat to budge (opposite of what we intuitively believe).

Hetta · May 22, 2014

Actually, you lose lean muscle long before you lose fat. The body will hang onto fat until the bitter end.

mkgal1 · May 22, 2014

seeingeyes said:
In the OP I said "body fat is controllable".

Do you agree with that even if you do not agree that body fat is controllable by calorie restriction?

I had said earlier..."with the right information". It's difficult to wade through so many myths, though.

Also.....what CG brought up.....for many people, they can't afford to eat in a healthful way. Healthful foods are far more expensive than garbage food.

seeingeyes · May 22, 2014

Hetta said:
What is meant by "body fat"?

We all need some fat, of course. And some people carry more excess than others. Some people look better with a little meat on the bone, as they say.

But I'm specifically referring to gaining (noticeably) more fat than one had the day they met their spouse.

Hetta · May 22, 2014

seeingeyes said:
We all need some fat, of course. And some people carry more excess than others. Some people look better with a little meat on the bone, as they say.

But I'm specifically referring to gaining (noticeably) more fat than one had the day they met their spouse.

You do know that women naturally - because of biology - carry more fat than men, don't you? Look it up.

So, if some people look better with a little more meat, who decides how much? If a husband and wife are perfectly happy with each other, I don't see why it should bother anyone else. Look at Marilyn Monroe. I've heard that she would, in today's sizes, be a size 16. She would be obese! How hilarious.

I blame the 1960s. Until Twiggy and Jean Shrimpton et al came along, people had much healthier concepts of what was attractive in a woman. This whole 'heroin chic' is sickening. I found it incredibly ironic and also not very surprising when Kate Moss - who had been an integral part of the obsession with skinny for the past 20 years - was caught using class A drugs. Well of course. How else does one maintain skin and bone thinness like that? Heroin chic indeed.

seeingeyes · May 22, 2014

mkgal1 said:
She would have lost body fat....no doubt....based on what?

Eating 1000 calories a day isn't the same thing as *not* eating at all. Where are you getting the idea that she'd eventually lose fat?

I've walked that walk......and, like I said, it took an increase in what I was eating to cause the fat to budge (opposite of what we intuitively believe).

In the Minnesota Starvation Experiment (awesome book, by the way...it's about a study conducted after the siege of Stalingrad to determine the best way to feed those who had been starving for months under those conditions and the psychological effects of starving), the participants were all men, and they were given a severely reduced calorie diet over 6 months. (If I remember correctly, it was around 1500 calories, the control period beforehand had them at about twice that.) At the end of this "starvation period" the participants had lost an average of 25% of their body weight.

There was no one who didn't lose weight and there was no one who gained weight.

6 months is a long time to starve. The participants were initially allowed to go about their daily lives, but in short order they all had to be brought in to be strictly monitored, because every last one of them was "cheating on their diet". But once monitored, every one of them lost weight. There was no one who didn't lose weight and there was no one who gained weight.

seeingeyes · May 22, 2014

Hetta said:
You do know that women naturally - because of biology - carry more fat than men, don't you? Look it up.

Yes. I do know that.

Hetta said:
So, if some people look better with a little more meat, who decides how much? If a husband and wife are perfectly happy with each other, I don't see why it should bother anyone else. Look at Marilyn Monroe. I've heard that she would, in today's sizes, be a size 16. She would be obese! How hilarious.

Their spouse decides, I would think.

Attraction is generally the catalyst these days for two people getting to know each other and getting married down the line. There are lots of aspects to attraction, of course, but visual attraction to the body is certainly one of them.

Hetta said:
I blame the 1960s. Until Twiggy and Jean Shrimpton et al came along, people had much healthier concepts of what was attractive in a woman. This whole 'heroin chic' is sickening. I found it incredibly ironic and also not very surprising when Kate Moss - who had been an integral part of the obsession with skinny for the past 20 years - was caught using class A drugs. Well of course. How else does one maintain skin and bone thinness like that? Heroin chic indeed.

Were you heroin-thin when your husband first fell for you?

ChristianGolfer · May 22, 2014

seeingeyes said:
And the amount of calories the doctor told your mother to eat was more than 1000 but less than what she was eating pre-diet, correct?

Well, not really.

My mom's weight has been up and down and up and down a lot in her life. As a result of many years of dieting, her body goes into starvation mode very easily. She gains weight without upping her caloric intake very much at all. Pre-diet she was probably eating between 1500 calories on most days and 2000 on splurges. Doctor told her to try for 1500-2000 but to try to make most of her food leafy greens.

If she had stayed on that diet, she would no doubt have lost body fat, just like every other person in the world who was ever starved while working hard. But that diet wasn't sustainable psychologically over the long term (especially since she was probably exhausted).

Maybe. You can't really say that. The thing is, it's not healthy for her either. Like you said, it's starvation.

Is claiming that body fat is a factor that is within the control of the individual really the same as saying that everyone who has extra fat on their body is lazy or stupid?

Not necessarily. But the dogmatic insistence that it's a simple matter of fewer calories = weight loss implies that people are lying or stupid when they don't experience it as a simple matter.

You're getting push back in this thread because you're coming across as being callous and judgmental, not willing to acknowledge that it's more complicated than that.

It may be within a person's control. Perhaps it is in most people's control. But there ARE some things that make it much more difficult than you're making it seem. And for some people, it really is out of their control, entirely.

I'm going to go ahead and guess that you've never had a significant struggle with weight in your life.

This is the over-correction that I was referring to in the OP. It is appalling the way that those with extra fat are treated, but that is not because extra fat is unavoidable or inevitable or uncontrollable, but because they are people made in God's image who should be treated with kindness and love and respect independent of shape.

Well, I agree. But as a fat person, I feel it's a little bit condescending when people tell me they love me even though I'm fat.

I think respecting people means believing them when they tell you their experiences and not judging them.

I have gained quite a bit of weight post baby. Well, I lost most of my pregnancy weight within a few weeks. Then the birth control I was on, in combination with nursing has caused me to gain a bunch over the last year. I would like to change that, but it's been a whole heck of a lot harder than ever before. I can't starve myself, I have to feed my baby. I can't go to the gym a bunch, I don't have time for that. Eating healthy is expensive (and some things just straight up not in the budget) and time consuming.

It may be technically within my control... but that doesn't make it practicable.

The good news is that my husband thinks I'm beautiful - says he hadn't even noticed the weight gain. And I'm comfortable in my own skin. I don't CARE if people think I'm fat. I own it. Yeah, I'm fat. Deal with it.

(I hope your mother is doing well now.)

Thanks. She has shingles right now and one of the medications has caused her to gain 10 pounds overnight. Plus she can't work out because she's in too much pain. She's pretty upset about it.

I wish she didn't feel like she needed to lose weight to be beautiful. It's stressing her out and that's not helping her heal.

Hetta · May 22, 2014

seeingeyes said:
Their spouse decides, I would think.

LOL. Why would you think that? Do you really think that? Is it your experience of marriage that your spouse "decides" things for you?

Attraction is generally the catalyst these days for two people getting to know each other and getting married down the line. There are lots of aspects to attraction, of course, but visual attraction to the body is certainly one of them.

There is more to attraction than the visual. While the visual may engage the eye, if there is nothing but the visual, typically the attraction will not last. That is my experience anyway. I've met many attractive, glamorous men who bored me to tears. And some quite plain men who were fascinating and extremely sexy. I have always thought that you can all keep your Brad Pitt and the guy who plays Thor, I'll take Patrick Stewart ANY day. Women are more likely, ime, to give the less than attractive man a chance than the man is likely to give the less attractive woman a chance, because you know all men "deserve" a hot babe.

Were you heroin-thin when your husband first fell for you?

I was thin, yes. Not heroin thin because I never took heroin. Am I thin now? No. And I don't want to be. Thin is not necessarily healthy - nor is it particularly attractive on a middle aged woman.

seeingeyes · May 22, 2014

Hetta said:
LOL. Why would you think that? Do you really think that? Is it your experience of marriage that your spouse "decides" things for you?

I decided that my spouse was attractive to me, so I started talking to him. He decided that I was attractive to him, so he started talking to me. We got to know each other, found more things attractive about each other, and decided to get married.

Did your spouse decide that you were attractive to him at some point? Or did you just tell him that you were attractive?

Hetta said:
There is more to attraction than the visual. While the visual may engage the eye, if there is nothing but the visual, typically the attraction will not last. That is my experience anyway. I've met many attractive, glamorous men who bored me to tears. And some quite plain men who were fascinating and extremely sexy. I have always thought that you can all keep your Brad Pitt and the guy who plays Thor, I'll take Patrick Stewart ANY day. Women are more likely, ime, to give the less than attractive man a chance than the man is likely to give the less attractive woman a chance, because you know all men "deserve" a hot babe.

Agreed. I'm not much for pretty men myself.

But if my husband went out today and covered his butt in a giant my little pony tattoo, I would definitely consider that my business, even though it's his body. My opinion of the choices he makes that change the physical appearance of his body are relevant. If he chooses to do something to his body that makes him less attractive to me, I would at least like to have my input included in the decision.

Hetta said:
I was thin, yes. Not heroin thin because I never took heroin. Am I thin now? No. And I don't want to be. Thin is not necessarily healthy - nor is it particularly attractive on a middle aged woman.

I'm glad you were never on the heroin diet.

What if you decided to go on the sumo diet, start training and pound 20,000 calories a day of sushi and really pack it on for one last hurrah. Do you think that your husband has a right to an opinion on how that would change the look of your body?

mkgal1 · May 22, 2014

Christian Golfer mentioned a few things that make weight loss difficult (birth control; illness; medication; lack of time; expense).....and I can even think of more:

deficiency in vitamins necessary to support adrenal/metabolic systems

out-of-balance gut

food sensitivities

any more? Because I'm sure there are loads more that factor in.

Hetta · May 22, 2014

seeingeyes said:
I decided that my spouse was attractive to me, so I started talking to him. He decided that I was attractive to him, so he started talking to me. We got to know each other, found more things attractive about each other, and decided to get married.

You are talking about before marriage. I thought you were talking after marriage.

Did your spouse decide that you were attractive to him at some point? Or did you just tell him that you were attractive?

Both.

But if my husband went out today and covered his butt in a giant my little pony tattoo, I would definitely consider that my business, even though it's his body. My opinion of the choices he makes that change the physical appearance of his body are relevant. If he chooses to do something to his body that makes him less attractive to me, I would at least like to have my input included in the decision.

Seriously? How often do you see his butt? Now if he had a tattoo on his forehead I could understand the objection, but his butt?

What if you decided to go on the sumo diet, start training and pound 20,000 calories a day of sushi and really pack it on for one last hurrah. Do you think that your husband has a right to an opinion on how that would change the look of your body?

No he has no right. Any more than I have a right to remind him how those cigarettes are destroying his lungs. Or does the outside matter more than the inside?

mkgal1 · May 22, 2014

ValleyGal · May 22, 2014

Controlling body fat for some people means total deprivation of anything pleasurable. It is painful for me to exercise much. Walking is good for a little while, but then it hurts after a little bit. There are other things, like rowing, but you need money and a gym or club to do that. And even the rowing machine at the gym has foot-pedals that my one foot can't stay on very well. So because I can't get the exercise I used to, it is through diet that I need to watch my weight. For me, that means a maintenance intake of about 1300-1400 calories per day - and those calories need to come from nutritious foods, otherwise I won't get all my nutrients. That also means absolutely no empty calories - what it boils down to is, no white flour, yeast, baking powder, baking soda, sugars (except in fruit), sodium (there's already plenty added to everything anyway).

One thing that also helps me to lose or maintain weight is evenly spreading those 1400 calories across 6 "meals" a day - not because of diabetes because my blood sugars have always been normal, but rather because it regulates the production of insulin, which curbs hunger.

So I am deprived on a maintenance diet - the "treats" I get are things like a chocolate fudge fibre bar (yuck!) or non-fat, non-sugar pudding - and that gets old after a while. No brownies, cheesecake, carrot cake, birthday cake, muffins, nanaimo bars, trifles, chocolate, candy, chips, pretzels, or anything fun or yummy or munchie.

Sure, people have control over their fat....when they are 20 and have no barriers to exercise and healthy living. But...here's another thing. Even in our "healthy" foods, we still have preservatives, chemicals, hormones, and all kinds of other stuff that fertilizes them - and then we consume them, which is altering our own body chemistry and hormonal balances. The more government allows all this, the more obese our bodies will be because we consume these things and don't even know it.

When I was 16, I could eat two big macs in one sitting without going and deliberately exercising. At 30, I was deliberately exercising (aerobic) for 60 minutes a day and anaerobic twice a week at the gym....and I could eat two big macs in one sitting. Never gained an ounce. When I stopped exercising, I could not even eat one big mac without putting on 5 lbs (I was 38). For a while there, I would save all my calories in a day so I could go out for dinner, and that would also make me gain weight, even though it was all I'd eat.

So control? Sure, if we have the money, resources, body type, physical ability, chemical and hormonal makeup, stop ageing, and have access to organic, whole foods that we have the scheduling ability to eat six times a day and have no desire to ever eat another lick of cream cheese icing or dressing on their salad ever again.

Weight is very, very hard to manage for some people and it frosts my hiney when skinny people think it's as easy as just eating less or getting more exercise. I don't wish weight issues on my worst enemy....but I sure do wish empathy on those who have little for those of us who struggle with it.

mkgal1 · May 22, 2014

Yes.....that's another road block....environmental toxins.

seeingeyes · May 22, 2014

ChristianGolfer said:
Well, not really.

My mom's weight has been up and down and up and down a lot in her life. As a result of many years of dieting, her body goes into starvation mode very easily. She gains weight without upping her caloric intake very much at all. Pre-diet she was probably eating between 1500 calories on most days and 2000 on splurges. Doctor told her to try for 1500-2000 but to try to make most of her food leafy greens.

That sounds very sensible.

ChristianGolfer said:
Maybe. You can't really say that. The thing is, it's not healthy for her either. Like you said, it's starvation.

And what happens to the amount of fat on a person when they starve for a long enough time?

ChristianGolfer said:
Not necessarily. But the dogmatic insistence that it's a simple matter of fewer calories = weight loss implies that people are lying or stupid when they don't experience it as a simple matter.

You're getting push back in this thread because you're coming across as being callous and judgmental, not willing to acknowledge that it's more complicated than that.

It may be within a person's control. Perhaps it is in most people's control. But there ARE some things that make it much more difficult than you're making it seem. And for some people, it really is out of their control, entirely.

I'm going to go ahead and guess that you've never had a significant struggle with weight in your life.

Full disclosure: That's correct. Though I did lose 20lbs last year and have kept it off.

One of the reasons that I think I don't have a significant struggle with weight is that food wasn't really a big issue in my house growing up. No "clean your plate", no "I've had a bad day, really need some ice cream", no "oh, I'm so fat, I'm worthless!" type commentary.

Changing that relationship with food seems to be a very difficult step.

ChristianGolfer said:
Well, I agree. But as a fat person, I feel it's a little bit condescending when people tell me they love me even though I'm fat.

Well, I love you because you are snarky.

ChristianGolfer said:
I think respecting people means believing them when they tell you their experiences and not judging them.

Who have I judged?

ChristianGolfer said:
The good news is that my husband thinks I'm beautiful - says he hadn't even noticed the weight gain. And I'm comfortable in my own skin. I don't CARE if people think I'm fat. I own it. Yeah, I'm fat. Deal with it.

Good.

ChristianGolfer said:
Thanks. She has shingles right now and one of the medications has caused her to gain 10 pounds overnight. Plus she can't work out because she's in too much pain. She's pretty upset about it.

I wish she didn't feel like she needed to lose weight to be beautiful. It's stressing her out and that's not helping her heal.

That's rough.

What makes us feel beautiful truly comes from the inside. I hope she finds it, whatever else happens.

seeingeyes · May 22, 2014

Hetta said:
You are talking about before marriage. I thought you were talking after marriage.

Well, I'm speaking of a continuation of before into after. Like, if your husband suddenly decided to wear nothing but zoot suits though he was a snappy dresser when you met, that would affect your physical attraction to him.

Hetta said:
Seriously? How often do you see his butt? Now if he had a tattoo on his forehead I could understand the objection, but his butt?

How often do you see your husband's butt?

If he had it on his forehead, that would effect a lot of other things...like employment or relationships with the neighbors or something. On his butt, I'm the only one who would see it. It would have zero effect on his life other than what I thought of it. That's why I used it as an example.

Hetta said:
No he has no right. Any more than I have a right to remind him how those cigarettes are destroying his lungs. Or does the outside matter more than the inside?

Well, if you told him, "You're killing yourself! Quit smoking!" And he said "nope", then you would have to decide how important it is to you to be married to a non-smoker.

And if you told him, "You've put on 100lbs since we met! Lose some weight!" And he said "nope", then you would have to decide how important it is to you to be married to a man that refuses to lose weight.

Just because physical attributes are not the most important thing in a marriage, doesn't mean that they are irrelevant.

Hetta · May 22, 2014

seeingeyes said:
Well, I'm speaking of a continuation of before into after. Like, if your husband suddenly decided to wear nothing but zoot suits though he was a snappy dresser when you met, that would affect your physical attraction to him.

He wears some things I don't like. <shrug>

How often do you see your husband's butt?

Not when it matters so far as sexual attraction is concerned.

Well, if you told him, "You're killing yourself! Quit smoking!" And he said "nope", then you would have to decide how important it is to you to be married to a non-smoker.

Divorce him because he smokes? Wow. No. I wouldn't do that.

And if you told him, "You've put on 100lbs since we met! Lose some weight!" And he said "nope", then you would have to decide how important it is to you to be married to a man that refuses to lose weight.

I wouldn't talk to him like that. Neither of us orders the other around. I would find that very sad.

Just because physical attributes are not the most important thing in a marriage, doesn't mean that they are irrelevant.

Obviously to you they are very relevant, but we are not all the same.

seeingeyes · May 22, 2014

Hetta said:
Obviously to you they are very relevant, but we are not all the same.

Important enough to discuss on a marriage board? Yep.

Not sure what the snideness is about.

Hetta · May 22, 2014

seeingeyes said:
Important enough to discuss on a marriage board? Yep.

Not sure what the snideness is about.

It was not meant in a snide way, simply as a fact that it is obviously very important to you, and just as obviously to others not as much, which is to be expected, because we are all different in what we prefer. I don't see snideness in that, more that I was summing something up.

Let's talk about fat.

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33

I'll find my way home

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33

Newbie

I'll find my way home

Newbie

Newbie

ChristianGolfer

Guest

I'll find my way home

Newbie

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33

I'll find my way home

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33

Well-Known Member

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33

Newbie

Newbie

I'll find my way home

Newbie

I'll find my way home

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency