It's Not Weightism. You're Just Obese.

While the Democrats publicly grapple with their own faux liberalism -- who's a "lucky" black man and what's a "typical" white person -- researchers at Yale university would have you believe there is another, insidious "ism" that is even more widespread than racism, sexism and age bias.

They call it Weightism.

Let's call it discrimination against, oh, Plus Sized-Americans.

According to the researchers whose report is published in the International Journal of Obesity (and, yeah, there really is such a thing) apparently Weightism is so prevalent because, unlike other isms "there are no federal laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of weight, and only Michigan has such a law."

Sorry, but it's a little...no, actually it's a whole lot insulting to equate girth with race, gender, age or sexual orientation; aspects of ourselves with which we were born and over which -- except, apparently, for Jimmy Kimmel -- we have no control.

I can't change my race or my gender. Despite my best efforts and millions of dollars spent trying to locate the fountain of youth, I just keep getting older. Yet, same as millions of Americans I can moderate the number of Big Macs I shove in my pie-hole.

But in the Everybody-Give-Me-A-Hug victim culture in which we live, the obese want a spot at the table along with those who face discrimination based on the way that God or Nature or our Intelligent Designer created us.

For the vast majority of those who are obese -- those with a Body Mass Index over 30 -- their size is their choice. They choose to take in more calories than they burn. They choose to take in high fat calories over low-fat ones. They choose to fad diet, if they choose to diet at all. They choose to go back to their poor eating habits when those diets failed rather than get down to the hard chore of eating right and exercising.

That's not meant to abase the obese. I don't advocate ridicule (mostly). Obesity in America is a serious issue. The affects of which, like smokers with secondhand smoke, are felt beyond the individual offender. According to the Center for Disease Control "a study of national costs attributed to both overweight (BMI 25-29.9) and obesity (BMI greater than 30) medical expenses accounted for 9.1 percent of total U.S. medical expenditures in 1998 and may have reached as high as $78.5 billion ($92.6 billion in 2002 dollars)."

The heavy get heavier, and you and I pay for it.

But if they choose to get big, if they choose to bilk us, why in the world would we choose to mollycoddle with laws which encourage the obese to continue to both live an unhealthy lifestyle and stick us with the bill?

There is no reason.

And there is no need.

For those whose obesity is the result of some actual medical condition, should they find themselves discriminated against they can seek redress under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

A lawyer familiar with the ADA told me that "despite the absence of any laws specifically addressing obesity as a disability, courts can interpret the ADA to include obesity, since it defines "disability" broadly and doesn't enumerate any specific disabilities it covers."

Such individuals deserve protection, and they've got it. But let's not water down the fight against real bigotry and prejudice by adding unhealthy lifestyles to the mix.

Comments

[dapperd72]

I beg to differ that Ridley's comments are harsh or hateful, if only somewhat pejorative. Of course everyone deserves respect, but this principle should never be limited to our own species. Anyone who criticizes another for denouncing someone's physical appearance, mostly controllable such as weight in most cases, while marching in lockstep to the speciesist drum that tells us to treat some animals as "food," clothing, laboratory subjects or entertainment, is simply the worst form of hypocrite. Pardon me, but my heart won't bleed for anyone who allows her/his weight to rage out of control while refusing to seize the opportunity to go vegan. If you eat animal products, you deserve bo sympathy for your own self-destruction. This isn't to say that fast-food companies should be allowed to literally get away with murder, genocide as far as their nonhuman victims are concerned, but their customers who partake in their mercenary suicide pact are equally complicit in the rape, pillage, plunder and ecocide of Mother Earth, who as far as I'm concerned has always been & will remain the ultimate arbiter of justice. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, and that woman is Mother Nature Herself.

[situationcritical]

Plants are just as alive and conscious as animals. Vegetarians are murderers too!

[LeftHandedMama]

There are many fat vegetarians and vegans. Also many of the same are quite athletic. Vegan does *not* equal thin.

[mbh78213]

True. I checked out a vegan website, and there was a list (titled "I can't believe it's vegan" of things available at the grocery store that are "safe" for vegans to eat. I looked at the over-processed crap listed there and thought, "That can't be healthy." So unless one sticks with the fresh vegetables, it is possible to be vegan and fat.

[southsideirish]

I think the most important point that is being missed here is that the discrimination overweight folks deal with daily is real. All you have to do is read this blog and these posts, and you find folks who are actually OFFENDED that someone might be overweight. And it doesn't stop at just being offended, they actually believe it is not only acceptable, but thoroughly justified, nay, a moral duty, to utterly humiliate and dehumanize a sect of our society. We're not talking about neo-nazis or radicals with a belief structure that defines them as having CHOSEN to be MONSTERS, we're talking about people who have weight issues. No matter what side of the argument you fall on, be it Ridley's "you're overweight because you eat crap and don't try" absolutism, or the side of folks like me who really think there is a more complicated issue at work here, no one can legitmately argue that it is alright to actually treat someone differently over their size. That's hate, folks. There's really not a clearer definition. I mean why did Ridley add the qualifier "mostly" to a denouncement of ridicule? And despite his shunning of "abasement", his eintire tone undercuts his shallow disclaimer. Then the peanut gallery joins in with statements that are beyond revolting. Sorry, but if this is your interpretation of "progressive" you need to check your liberal card at the logout.

[zull2]

You know what's even more efficient and effective than standing around yelling at overweight people?

Regulating the food industry and forcing them to stop loading up food, expecially the most affordable stuff that can be purchased with food stamps, with filler material. Using stuff like partially-­hydrogenat­ed oils, high fructose corn syrup, and other products produced by companies that have built their entire business on lobbying congressmen to let them hawk their poisons on people.

Natural and organic foods don't just need to be labeled, they have to become the standard. If you can get a block of Velveeta, which is basically oil that has been dyed orange, with food stamps but you cannot get organic high fiber cereal or other diet/healt­hy/natural foods, guess what? That's a pretty good reason why people are overweight, and THAT is why YOU have to pay for it. So that some businesses can keep hawking poison on everyone else.

[nevadagirl]

Have you seen poor people in other countries? They're downright skeletal! I was on food stamps many years ago and used them to buy produce and flour to make my own bread. All of these posts imply that poor people can get to fast food cheaper and easier than a grocery store and that they're all too stupid to know anything about nutrition.

[muslimarabdude]

"Sorry, but it's a little...n­o, actually it's a whole lot insulting to equate girth with race, gender, age or sexual orientation" --- well you are right up to that last category - and this is an issue that i am sure will inflame many but - there will have to be a point where people begin to recognize that *** in the VAST majority of cases *** homosexual tendencies are NOT something that is "part of nature" --- anyone who understands how evolution works will appreciate that any genetic basis for homosexual inclinations would have been weeded out of the gene pool as it would be lethal to the existence of the human species over the course of human evolution ---- there have been numerous studies that point to other factors explaining this behavior such as: societies where sexual promiscuity is the norm (have within them a higher prevalence of homosexuals - sex with the opposite gender loses its value), social and psychological factors in upbringing of children, histories of sexual abuse, or parent-child conflicts, etc --- all these are factors don't even touch on the mixed signals from the media/ hollywood that are bombarding already identity confused teens ---- this really has nothing to do with one's faith although i believe all the world's religions do not condone homosexuality as it is simply something that goes against the grain of the way nature works

[foolwriter]

Yeah, I wish that Hollywood would stop confusing those Bonobo monkeys into homosexual practices. And those male penguins that form nesting families and "adopt" orphaned chicks -- man, those birds must have been abused when they were young. Then there are the non-mammalian species that actually change gender in the wild -- you can definitely lay that at the feet of a society that doesn't value traditional family roles.

Identity is drawn from so many places in so many different ways that to try and distinguish between what's your "fault" and what's your parents' "fault" and what's society's "fault" becomes so much gibberish.

[muslimarabdude]

@ rnb and foolwriter

you do not have to agree with what i have said - what you both CANNOT deny is that - up until the modern advents of science and medicine - there was NO possible way for the human species to continue to exist over the course of evolution without a sperm coming from a male joining with an egg coming from a female thru an act of copulation -- natural history revisionists, finding exceptions in nature, or (somehow) making comparisons with species that "change gender" to US is simply trying to find justification for behavior that is not in tune with the hundreds of thousands of yrs of evolution that has brought us here -- i am well aware of how genetics works and if your source is "google" for your knowledge base then i suggest enrolling in your local univ and take a few biology and biochemistry classes and i would contend that statements such as yours are perfect examples of spreading ignorance ----- i'm not interested in "blame" but what i am interested in is calling things as they are and if you disagree you have a perfect right to do so but don't expect approval/ acceptance for what the vast majority of the human species finds unnatural -- whether you choose to accept that or not -- identity is more than who we sleep with ----- if you've inclinations that go against this, i sincerely believe that it is something that can be

[rnb]

You're not only wrong about genetics, but you're wrong about nature. There are plenty examples of animals and insects which engage in homosexual behavior. A simple google search for "homosexual animals" comes up with tons of hits from credible sources. Stop spreading ignorance, and try learning the facts before making assumptions.

[jhamm1]

If that were the case, than the evolutionary process would have also weeded out the gene that causes sterility, as well.

[muslimarabdude]

the unspoken truth is that there is that a very high percentage of sterility that results from past std related medical complications (knowingly or not) -- and yes any "sterility gene" if there is one WOULD be weeded out by the laws of genetics -- no one can dispute this with any credibility

[situationcritical]

Heterosexuals are just as promiscuous as homosexuals. In fact the number of promiscuous heterosexuals is 90% larger homosexuals according to breeder math.

[muslimarabdude]

well if that is the case its because there is more than 90% of the population that is heterosexual (the whole 10% figure used by the gay community has been discredited from within the community itself in their own publications in the past) -- and i'm not making the argument that homos are *more* promiscuous than heteros; i'm arguing that the DEGREE to which there is more or less homosexuality in any given society has SOME correlation with the degree to which there is a general acceptance of sex as "free" and therefore "alternatives" are sought or people pursue satisfaction thru other venues IE the more a society values and holds sex as sacred and as being saved for a post marriage/ committed union monogamous relationship (between a male and female) then the less the percentage of homosexual practices you will find --- i do not condone any form of discrimination towards anyone but there are simply realities of genetics and nature that cannot be ignored -- if one chooses to not have children or if one is unable to for whatever reason this does not mean they are of any less value to their community -- everyone and every creature of God (animate and inanimate) has tremendous value -- your "breeder" remark is noted for its condescending tone

[sangsue]

Hmmmm...wh­ere to begin, Mr. Perfect Ridley.

I am obese and it's all my fault.

It's also my fault that I got Rheumatoid Arthritis, chose to take Prednisone (which made me gain thirty pounds) so I could work instead of choosing to be on disability and not taking the anti-inflammatory drug that enabled me to walk.

And, sorry, it's also my fault that I'm hypothyroid whose metabolism runs so slow that I don't get hungry or have an appetite and the only way I remember I need to eat is when I feel sick to my stomach because it's 9PM and I've only eaten an apple all day.

I will fully take responsibility for the fact that when I get stressed, I crave sweets. That IS my fault that I give into it.

But the my other circumstances that I mention are proof that not everything is cut and dried.

Your health insurance is probably rising every day I'm alive because of the expensive biologic drugs I need to take to stop the Rheumatoid Arthritis - an auto-immune disease - from progressing.

Instead of being selfish and using expensive drugs to improve my productivity to society, I'll think of perfect people like you, just accept the life I'd have otherwise and let my body get crippled instead of using YOUR money.

Then, when I'm on disability, you can complain about how lazy I am.

[muslimarabdude]

i think the writer has indicated that he is not including cases such as yours or anyone else with any kind of medical condition -- clearly if you have RA and are taking meds for it you should not see the article as addressed to people such as yourself -- but there is no doubt that obesity is a problem that is serious as it leads to many other medical issues that would simply not be there (diabetes, heart disease, sleep apnea, etc) --- the majority of over-weight/obesity cases are not originating from a medical condition (maybe psychologi­cal.. yes, and that still needs to be addressed) but people do have to realize that in the end (for those without medical conditions) it is an energy in-energy out formula and those needing help should get help and be encouragement to do so while the rest of society should remember to not judge people by their size and learn to be more tolerant and show kindness regardless

[situationcritical]

Remember also to be tolerant and show kindness regardless to homosexuals too, muslimarabdude.

[ShyFrost]

Okay, maybe I misunderstood you, but are you truly suggesting that you only have diabetes, heart disease, sleep apnea and other diseases if you are overweight?

[sickofitall]

thanks for the article.
for MOST of us, it's a fairly simple equation..­.

LESS EATING- MORE MOVING ! calories in = calories out/burned.

and that crap about eating healthy costing more than eating junk- WRONG.

OMG ! it takes effort and will power to make the correct choices.

you are what you eat.

[mouselion]

Article about weight/obesity, posted April 6, 11:38 pm. Responses as of April 7, 5:22 pm: 318.
Article about the demise of net neutrality, posted April 5, 10:37 pm. Responses as of April 7, 5:22 pm: 7.

[AnitaWagner]

What is it about fat people that brings the bully out in others? I think it's a matter of good character, or in this case, the lack thereof. Yeah, go ahead, pick on the persons you've made a point of shaming. Kick 'em around - their ability to defend themselves is pretty limited. They have few advocates, no one is going to stand up for them, so go right ahead. It's fun, right????

There seems to me to be a sense of entitlement here to dispense with civility and indulge in hate language. This is even worse in that such behavior is being modeled by a person who is in a position to influence the opinions of many, many others.

The irony here is that this hate speech is entirely unnecessary and clearly amounts to nothing more than a bully's lack of self-control and a penchant for, shall I say it? ..self-ind­ulgence. The valid points about obese people's responsibility to care for their health and accept responsibility for the state of it could have been made just as easily and with much greater credibility had they been made with more sensitivity.

Every person has inherent worth and dignity and deserves to be treated with respect, be they black, white, gay, straight, fat, thin, etc. That doesn't mean you can't express your opinion, but your harsh, hateful words say a lot more about who YOU are, Mr. Ridley, than they do about anyone else.

[nevadagirl]

Someone who cuts in front of the kids and old people to get to the buffet has a sense of entitlement. Someone who can't fit in a theater seat and cries"disc­rimination­" has a sense of entitlement. I have exercised most days for the past 30 years, yet overweight people consistantly "discriminate" against me by saying how "lucky' I am to be thin.

[situationcritical]

You sound like you're hungry.

[SevenLevels]

Not only is your argument stillborn, but your final point makes no sense whatsoever. Congratulations on achieving absolute irrelevance.
Peace,
Kelly

[cominginsecond]

You're smearing overweight people with your disgusting, bigoted stereotypes. Grow up.

[CalicoJackRackham]

Just to clarify, I meant to say: some people say the same thing about sexual orientation, that it is a choice.

After re-reading my comment, I realized it could be misinterpreted.

[JohnJames]

Some people are willful idiots or just plain idiots.

[CalicoJackRackham]

Yes, they are. That was my point.

[jcwtts1]

I guess according to John the fact that obesity and poverty are linked is just... what, proof that poor people are lazy? It couldn't have anything to do with the fact that healthy food costs almost double what unhealthy food costs. Single parent homes below the poverty line, what are they buying in the supermarket? Can they even get to a supermarket regularly since supermarkets in the inner city are rare and I'd like john to try riding the bus with groceries for a family of four. But back to the point, a mother working multiple jobs to make ends meet, what does she buy for snacks, fresh fruit? Is that going to be filling when the kids arrive at school at 7 am and she doesn't see them again until 7 at night? What frozen meals is she going to buy, healthy choice when stouffers regular meals cost half the price and have 4 to 5 times the fat grams? What about frozen pizza? Lean cuisine pizzas (great by the way) costs almost 4 bucks for a very small pizza. For 10 bucks I can get 5 Celeste pizzas 10 when they go on sale.

[jcwtts1]

So.... 2 and half lean cuisine at 4 -5 fat grams each, or 5-10 depending on sales mama Celeste at 17 grams of fat per. Tell John to do some number crunching. Potato chips a dollar a bag baked Doritos 3.49. One has 20 grams of fat per serving one has 3.5. Snackwells, 4 dollars for 8-10, 3 dollars for fifty Oreos. If you have a family and little money what the hell are you supposed to do? As long as the more money you have the better you BMI then screw John it isn't victimology it's life and discrimination against people who grew up poor, formed poor eating habits because their mother worked two jobs and who are attempting to change a life time of bad habits should be punished. If the gov really gave a crap they would add two gym classes every day to the elementary, middle and high school schedule. Make kids work out, hard every day for a serious part of the day.

[badtimes]

All three examples you give are processed food. As many dieting sites point out, shop the perimeter of the store- that's where the produce & other non-processed foods are.

[jcwtts1]

Change school lunches from high carb high fat nastiness to tons of fresh fruit and fresh veggies...­. and feed kids three meals a day, breakfast, lunch, dinner. Does that solve the whole problem, no but it would dramatically reduce it and subsidies healthy food. There are taxes on things that are unhealthy or a luxury, how about a reduction on things that are good for you. Make people buying healthy food actually save significant money on that food. Don't tax already cheap food, and make it expensive, LOWER the price, dramatically, of healthy food. Give companies huge grants and subsidies for designing healthy food. Instead of giving EXXON billions of dollars give it to General Mills and Kellogg, so that the price of their healthy food is cut in half. Give it to McDonalds so that the grilled chicken sandwich with no mayo is 38 cents a day. Carrot sticks are free, and salads with low fat dressing are a buck on the dollar menu. Until then John stop being an ahole.

J

[mc2714]

Bravo! Thanks for an excellent article! Every time I see an obese person with a handicap placard, I want to scream-- they have no one to blame but themselves. Need an electric scooter just to get around? Good grief-- you CAN control this!

For the record, I'm carrying around every ounce of 30-35 extra pounds of hard-earned blubber. My doing, my problem. Dropping pounds is damned hard, but totally in my control.

[JohnJames]

There's a difference in being somewhat overweight - having a paunch - and being obese and it's not just a matter of degree. Obese people suffer from a physiology that has gone haywire and causes their bodies to accumulate fat no matter what. They can eat like a bird and still not lose weight. It's a malady. Fake food and perhaps other aspectts of modern American life like stress, along with genetic predisposition, are to blame for its explosion but once it happens to a person's body, like diabetes, it's nearly impossible to correct.

[badtimes]

If that's true, why the success rate of bariatric surgery?

[rma2108]

"causes their bodies to accumulate fat no matter what."

Really? No matter what? What if they don't eat anything?

[sfpolarbear]

As an overweight man with a placard, please don't be so quick to judge. I am also a former runner (6 days a week, 6-7 miles each day) and weight trainer.
I now walk with a cane and have no joints in my knees, have had 2 back surgeries and have spinal stenosis.
I have gained weight largely because of my inability to excercise like I once did. Not the other way round. Could I find some other exercise to help with the weight? Probably. Would I love it as much and be as dedicated as I was to running? Never. I still dream that I'm running.
You don't know why people need a handicapped placard. And it's none of your business.

[Star123]

You want to scream when you see someone with a handicapped sticker? What's it to ya? First, they might be large because of a handicapping condition and the medication that they needed for it. Even if it is their weight that got them the sticker because they could not walk--well, lucky you, you can walk! Revel in that! As for your hard-earned blubber, which I gather you think festoons you because of some "sin" on your part such as eating things that taste good, if it's so easy to shed, it shed it. And for that you will need to walk from the far end of the parking lot or take the stairs, as others have thoughtfully suggested, so you don't need the handcapped spot anyway! No scream needed. See how nice it is when someone outlines your life for you...so helpful.

[Star123]

This thread in the NYT was way more interesting. Check it out:

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/31/fat-bias-worse-for-women/#comment-43222

You're in there, with your "eat less, exercise more" rote truism, but so are the haters, the scared, the panicky, and the just plain mean. Read up on this more, would be my advice.

[Sepiastar]

cont'd from previous post

We are all well-informed that obesity is a problem in this country but your article fails at its justification of what is considered discrimination. Discrimination comes in all forms and there's no classification system that states only race, gender, and age discrimination are intolerable and any category that you constitute as self-inflicted is incomparable. You have depicted a stereotypical view that all overweight people are lazy, twinking eating "fatties" that are waiting for a tragic health incident to occur to stick their medical conditions on the honest taxpayers of America. We also project this similar mentality when we discuss drug addiction, victims of HIV/AIDs, sexual orientation, and smokers. The consensus is your personal choices placed you into this predicament and it's not our problem. The issue is your health (physical, sexual) is your personal choice and we cannot diminish accountability and responsibility, but that does not excuse anyone to discriminate against you.

We need to practice empathy in this country, maybe that will reduce the "isms"!