Wokery

Status
Not open for further replies.
Soldato
Joined
7 Nov 2003
Posts
5,615
Location
Scotland
And it won't be long till gammon is added either if people keep using it as a personal attack.

No one here have used it as a personal attack have they? I thought in general the mods here were fine with using derogatory terms when making sweeping generalisations. Otherwise we wouldn't have had all the hundreds of threads about '******', 'chavs' and 'lefties'.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Jan 2010
Posts
22,488
No one here have used it as a personal attack have they? I thought in general the mods here were fine with using derogatory terms when making sweeping generalisations. Otherwise we wouldn't have had all the hundreds of threads about '******', 'chavs' and 'lefties'.
Oh the irony
 
Caporegime
Joined
12 Mar 2004
Posts
29,913
Location
England
What makes it worse is the lardy munters they have wearing the underwear.

Saying this as someone who was significantly overweight in the past, I really don't like the way obesity is becoming normalised by the likes of M&S and other clothing manufacturers, I realise that a lot of women are overweight so M&S are just trying to appeal to that market, but the message society is setting is that being overweight/obese is just fine when it's killing people.
 
Associate
Joined
13 Feb 2004
Posts
2,282
Location
Wales
Saying this as someone who was significantly overweight in the past, I really don't like the way obesity is becoming normalised by the likes of M&S and other clothing manufacturers, I realise that a lot of women are overweight so M&S are just trying to appeal to that market, but the message society is setting is that being overweight/obese is just fine when it's killing people.

Indeed, there are many health issues associated with being overweight.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
21,004
Location
Just to the left of my PC
They can't win. They only used super skinny models and they get criticised. They use oversize models which is far more representative of the population, they get criticised :rolleyes:

Well, they could use models within a normal healthy weight range. They'd be criticised for that too, but at least they wouldn't be promoting an unhealthy body image.
 
Don
Joined
7 Aug 2003
Posts
44,320
Location
Aberdeenshire
Well, they could use models within a normal healthy weight range. They'd be criticised for that too, but at least they wouldn't be promoting an unhealthy body image.
Yeah, I don’t get this. Adverts with athletic models have been removed in the past for promoting unhealthy body image :confused:. Personally I think overweight models should be treated the same.
 
Caporegime
Joined
23 Dec 2011
Posts
32,934
Location
Northern England
Yeah, I don’t get this. Adverts with athletic models have been removed in the past for promoting unhealthy body image :confused:. Personally I think overweight models should be treated the same.

No, you see becoming a ham planet results from a lack of self control. And its bad to hold people responsible for their own personal inactions and laziness.
However, if someone lives a disciplined lifestyle and shows dedication, hence ending up with a very athletic body they're bad because the lazy/weak/feckless apparently can't attain that.
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Oct 2007
Posts
12,105
Location
London, UK
Well, they could use models within a normal healthy weight range. They'd be criticised for that too, but at least they wouldn't be promoting an unhealthy body image.

They do use normal healthy weight range models. They use old models, young models. They use all shapes and sizes because they sell to all shapes and seizes. Some of you are worse at being offended than the people you claim are always offended :rolleyes:
 
Caporegime
Joined
12 Mar 2004
Posts
29,913
Location
England
They do use normal healthy weight range models. They use old models, young models. They use all shapes and sizes because they sell to all shapes and seizes. Some of you are worse at being offended than the people you claim are always offended :rolleyes:

You're being a bit dramatic, it was only suggested that normalising obesity is unhealthy, hardly outrage.
 
Commissario
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
33,039
Location
Panting like a fiend
Indeed, there are many health issues associated with being overweight.
IIRC there is some question about a lot of the older studies about health issues and being overweight, especially at the lower end of the scale.

Something to do with other studies realising that if a doctors first reaction when someone has a complaint is "have you tried losing weight" meaning they're missing early signs of a lot of things that aren't actually weight related but then putting them down as weight related because they then go on to cause serious issues skewed towards those who are overweight*. From what I understand this is especially true in america and with women

There is also the whole thing about "overweight" in some cases meaning normal for your body type/genetic background as some groups of people will almost always be overweight according to the BMI, others might look overweight but be within normal ranges (a lot of athletes can be "overweight" because muscle weighs more, whilst a pudgy person might be "normal" according to BMI)..

I think one of the best comments I saw about how "it's more common to be overweight now" than it used to be was pointing out that many of the "old beauties" would be considered overweight now (IIRC Marilyn Munro was one example from the 50's, as were many classic beauties) just for body shape, and that it's amazing how people tended to look thinner/be thinner back when virtually everyone was killing themselves with massive daily doses of something that had appetite suppressors as a side effect;)

Mind you I'm saying this as an overweight person who knows he's overweight and struggling to reduce it.

*Rather like the old image with the statistically most damaged areas of aircraft that made it back from missions in WW2 that was used to work out where they needed to add extra protection based on the damage of the aircraft that made it back...not wondering why they didn't get many/any aircraft back with say damage to the cockpit, engines or rudders compared to thousands with damage to the wings and fuselage where there was little that was actually vital to the aircrafts airworthiness in the very short term.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom