Am I the only one that noticed all the fat people?

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Misfit

Originally posted by CatHerder
Your fat ass is taking up the space on helicopters and buses that would normally fit TWO people, you make it extremely difficult for medical staff to help you (or carry you) --

So then, leave them all behind I guess.


From my own experience in fire and rescue there is no rule on who is saved first or last,it comes down to common sense save as many as possible,i know if put in the situation if rescuers had to make a choice on saving 1 obese person which could take four people to free opposed to those four saving 1 each in a dire situation they will choose the later.

Personally i`ve been in a rescuer situation with an obese person on one occasion,i was by myself in a small fire tender it was a house fire she had been smoking in bed and fell asleep the mattress caught fire when i found her she had crawled half way down the hall of the house and lost conscienceness through smoke inhalation,luckily for her she was the only person in the house otherwise she would have been taken out last as it took me a good time to drag her out the front door where an ambulance crew where waiting and were able revive her.

So i hope that may help for people to realize that if in a dire situation extremely heavy people are alot more of a burden on time and resources when other people are more easily rescued,imagine yourself in a life saving role and you have to make those horrible but necessary decision's.




posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by CatHerder

Originally posted by Valhall
I believe heartless dickhead would be what I would choose.


Yup. A heartless dickhead who took 1/2 of his RRSP savings (I think it's similar to your 401K), cashed it, and sent it to help those in the south. In essence, I not only donated $x dollars but I had to pay 10% tax up-front (and will again at the end of this tax year) to donate it to an out-of-country "charity", would you do the same? I highly doubt it.

Heartless dickhead who not only helps with his pocketbook, but also has the balls to post what is a real observation. Keep right on sitting on your ass in your comfy home, munching on comfort foods, and talk about others while you do sweet # all to help.

Oh the irony!

[edit on 3-9-2005 by CatHerder]


I can hardly believe you would do such a thing and if you did how do you know the money will be spent well??
With all the tsunami donations alot did not reach it destination.

Frankly i think that the US has to deal with it, because they are wasting vast amounts of money on militairy, black budget funding and what not.
This government must feel the consequences of a failing and senseless policy, both politically and financially, the only thing i regret is that these people have to suffer greatly for it.The government knew damn well that something like this was going to happen sooner or later and they ignored it because theyd rather spend it on their stupid selfmade wars.

This is the only way to knock some sense into these selfrightious politicians who are living in their golden bubbles and let them feel some stress for once.

Catherder, not only are you a thief of your own wallet, your also not doing the american people a favor by preventing that the rich US goverment has to provide(yes and i mean provide Well!) for their own citizens

And already know that they will not, because they simply do not care about americans and this will become very clear soon now this tragedy has happened.

I hope this will be an eye opener for all americans so that something positive changes in America for once.



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 10:56 PM
link   
The state of Lousiana has the highest obesity rate in the country. Its been mentioned that they have great food, and I absolutely agree. Cajun food rules. My fiance even wants me to bring some cajun recipies over to the UK for him cuz they dont get much there.

I dont see the overweight thing as a problem, really. If anything, since they are having a friggin bitch of a time getting relief there, it might help people weather the lack of food.

One might say they have eaten all their lives to prepare for this moment!

At this point, I dont really think obesity is the number health issue facing New Orleans, so save the dieting advice for when there is a city to live in.



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 11:32 PM
link   
Chris Rock noted several years ago in one of his routines that America has the fattest poor people in the world. If you look at pictures from the Depression era, you don't see very many fat people, at all. The poverty "guidelines" don't really tell the story of poverty in America. It certainly doesn't tell us much about intelligence and personal habits.

Someone already noted that many who stayed behind either didn't have transportation out of town or because of the timing of the storm near the end of the month had not received their checks yet. Two guesses what kind of checks they were waiting for.



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by glastonaut
We were wondering why so many people are lying about waiting for transport where they could up-sticks and get hiking up the road. Generally when we see refugees they are on the move and seeking refuge.


The fat woman rescued with a 4x8 sheet of plywood out of a huge hole in the side of her house by 8 rescue workers sums up the point. If she had not been so indulgent through her life 6 of those rescue workers could have been helping someone else.

Sri Oracle



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by motionknight
I can hardly believe you would do such a thing and if you did how do you know the money will be spent well??
With all the tsunami donations alot did not reach it destination.


I have a lot more faith in my fellow man than you I guess. I also know that the red cross is one of many very noble institutions, and I also know that other charitable groups in the USA and Canada have people just like me who truly want to do what is right. If it means that 20% of my money vanishes into the "administrative vapor" while the remaining 80% buys somebody some clothes and food, or perhaps flys a family to their relatives on the other side of the country, then that 20% is money well "spent" imho.



Frankly i think that the US has to deal with it, because they are wasting vast amounts of money on militairy, black budget funding and what not.


That same military is the reason that most of the survivors will be survivors. The Coast Guard has already rescued more people in this disaster than they did between Jan 2002 to Aug 2005 combined. What would money have done to prevent this disaster anyway? Should the US have simply erected a giant bubble over the south to keep the weather out?


This government must feel the consequences of a failing and senseless policy, both politically and financially, the only thing i regret is that these people have to suffer greatly for it. The government knew damn well that something like this was going to happen sooner or later and they ignored it because theyd rather spend it on their stupid selfmade wars.


I really do not understand this sentiment. You are saying that the government should have had a multi billion dollar rescue plan in place, including infrastructure, hardware, and personnel "just in case" of a disaster of this scale? I'd be willing to bet that you'd be one of the first people screaming bloody murder about some $10-15 billion yearly budget item than never got used in it's history before this date... It would be something along the lines of "FEMA has such a huge budget but where does the money go? Obviously they're some sort of black ops group. That agency needs to be checked!"
(FEMA's budget in 2000 was $3.6 billion, they requested $6.4 billion in 2003, of which $4.9 billion was spent on 65 major disasters and seven emergencies in 46 states and/or U.S. territories.)

But alas, the cuts to FEMA already happened for 2005. People (especially on this forum) have screamed that FEMA needed to be checked and it's budget cut back, well that happened when FEMA was rolled under the auspice of Homeland Security. And why was that? It was because the voting population wanted to be secure from terrorism or at least be told that things were being done to make them safer from it. And what was the result?)



Catherder, not only are you a thief of your own wallet, your also not doing the american people a favor by preventing that the rich US goverment has to provide(yes and i mean provide Well!) for their own citizens

And already know that they will not, because they simply do not care about americans and this will become very clear soon now this tragedy has happened.


"The rich US government" ??? The government of the USA has ran a deficit every year for over 20 years. The current national debt is



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 01:25 AM
link   


CatHerder

I really do not understand this sentiment. You are saying that the government should have had a multi billion dollar rescue plan in place, including infrastructure, hardware, and personnel "just in case" of a disaster of this scale?


Then you must not known about SELA.



New Orleans had long known it was highly vulnerable to flooding and a direct hit from a hurricane. In fact, the federal government has been working with state and local officials in the region since the late 1960s on major hurricane and flood relief efforts. When flooding from a massive rainstorm in May 1995 killed six people, Congress authorized the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project, or SELA.

Over the next 10 years, the Army Corps of Engineers, tasked with carrying out SELA, spent $430 million on shoring up levees and building pumping stations, with $50 million in local aid. But at least $250 million in crucial projects remained....

Yet after 2003, the flow of federal dollars toward SELA dropped to a trickle. The Corps never tried to hide the fact that the spending pressures of the war in Iraq, as well as homeland security -- coming at the same time as federal tax cuts -- was the reason for the strain.


www.editorandpublisher.com... isplay.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001051313

You see the government already had a multimillion dollar plan already set up. It went back on its promises to fund SELA which would have strenghtened the leeves, and made other preprations against a major hurricane. This could have been prevented. Before you say anything about how Bush needed to fund the war, think of all the pork barrel spending that was rolled into the highway bill that passed. Alaska recieved millions to create a 50 mile bridge to no where. Actually I heard it was a small town with a population of 20 people.

Bush could have vetoed the bill, make them take out all the pork, and redirected the pork barrel money to SELA where it was needed the most. Heck, with as much spending Bush has done over the past few years, it would have been a drop in the bucket to increase the budget to cover the rest of the funding for SELA. I'm sure most Americans who scream and rant about all the pork barrel spending Whashington does would understand funding to help prevent a natural disaster.

It would have cost the government less if they would have fully funded SELA, which was only in the millions. Now with the aftermath of Katrina, it will more than likely cost the government and us tax payers billions if not trillions to clean up and re-build New Orleans.



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 01:37 AM
link   


Catherder

That is almost 8 TRILLION dollars, and it will be over eight trillion before this thread gets it's last response I'll bet. Rich indeed...


I'll agree with you there. There is a major difference between the deficit and debt. The deficit is what the US Government would have to borrow to keep this country running each year. The debt is the total amount owed to the federal reserve and central banks. What most people don't know is that the federal reserve has nothing to do with the US government. Due to interest rate on our national debt, all of the dollars that were ever created would not be enough to pay off our national debt. What once was a rich nation is now enslaved to debt possibly forever.



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by gps777
Personally i`ve been in a rescuer situation with an obese person on one occasion... she had been smoking in bed and fell asleep...

extremely heavy people are alot more of a burden on time and resources when other people are more easily rescued...


Sounds like the smoking is at least as much of an issue as the weight to me.

My point in this whole thing is that people, we, all of us, put a drain on the system in one way or another. Whether we're fat, have lots of kids, are ill, smoke, have AIDS, don't wear our seatbelt or have been on welfare, we are a drain to the 'system'. And that's because that's what it's there for.

Once we start separating out a group of people and looking down on them for their particular use of the public support, it can so easily become discrimination. It divides us.

I'm fairly healthy, I work out regularly, eat pretty well and I quit smoking years ago but I just can't single out a group of people (even if they do put an extra burden in this particular area of the public system) because there have been times in my life when I needed a little extra support from the 'village'. There was a time when I lived on the streets, I've received supplemental support. I have needed that extra bit of effort from the system and I've used it. Thankfully that's been behind me for many years.

I can't help but think that maybe one of these fat ladies on the rescue coverage opens her home every day for free daycare of the kids in the neighborhood and takes care of the babies so the young mothers can go to their measly jobs and bring home a pittance to feed their kids.

I can't help but think that, somehow, it all works out in the end. And to pick out one segment of the population at one moment in time and take negative notice of their burden on the system in the middle of a life and death rescue effort is nothing more than kicking them while they're down!

Maybe you who are supporting the opposing mindset have never had an occasion to take advantage of the public support systems in this country and that's great. But it is there for a reason. Not everyone can go through life without needing a little extra help, though.

I just look at the whole picture. There's no way I can say that any particular person at any particular time is more of a drain than they should be. Who knows what these people have been through? What contributions do they make to society that we don't know about, in spite of their fat? If the fat lady runs a free daycare and works her big butt off taking care of the babies out of the goodness of her heart, does she deserve to be rescued? If she has saved numerous babies' lives herself, is she worth the extra effort to save?

Being fat is one of the last acceptable prejudices. And I refuse to buy into it for any reason. You cannot logically reason with me into thinking that because someone is fat or black or ill or poor or smokes or drinks or is homeless, that it's ok to judge them as not quite as deserving as the rest of us. I refuse to think that way and I refuse to accept the prejudice as tolerable. It's NOT ok with me. And it breaks my heart to see that so many -so readily- take up this uncompassionate attitude.



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 09:10 AM
link   
FAT: eats junk in place of meals that are good for you, gheto snacks, breads, etc. If one had the money, one would prepare oneself a balanced meal. Gheto snacks are cheap! Poor people eat these. 5/1.00 stuff- you pack on the pounds. Yes, poor people get fat on this stuff.

They are poor and dont feed themselves properly. So?

Should we discriminate if someone has a lazy eye?

We should all look like Angelina Jollie, i suppose...but just think, everyone would be after us and our lives would be a nightmare.


[edit on 4-9-2005 by dgtempe]



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 09:31 AM
link   
What exactly is the purpose of this thread?

Yes there are fat people in New Orleans and yes some of them were evacuated.

I asked before is this world so shallow that you can look beyond human suffering to notice who is fat and who is not? I'm personally disgusted and offended that this is actually part of the Katrina aftermath discussion.


From reading various posts in this thread, I feel this is more of general social issue than a specific Katrina related thread, discussions of diets, and obesity in American society is not an issue only because of the hurricane.

I'm very much tempted to just close this thread, but I will let it continue with one condition, that is that everyone addresses the specific post that started this "thread" and keep the ignorant comments, political sniping and bickering out of it.

Thread is being moved to Social Issues in PTS. I also suggest that the author try to think of a more appropriate title.. one that doesnt' seem so shallow, bigoted and ignorant. I'll be more than happy to edit the title for you.



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 09:55 AM
link   
Catherder's original question was this:

"Am I the only one that noticed all the fat people?"

Here's my answer.

I don't know. I can't speak for everyone else; only me and my small group of friends here in the depths of North Dakota. None of us (admittedly, we're a small group) really noted the weight, gender, ethnicity or age of the victims we've been shown on the media. What we did notice was suffering. An awful lot of suffering, and this had nothing to do with weight problems.

The cries that we heard here were of "Oh my god...those poor people..." and "Go get the truck so we can take some food or something over to the Church"; along with similar variations on those two common themes.

Yes, it did bother me that someone saw past the initial suffering and focused on the physical attributes of those victims. But why did it bother me?

Was it my own defensiveness?

I am one of "those fat people". I'm sure my defensiveness was in part because of this. Do you think I like being laughed at in public? Do you think I enjoy being pointed at and called names by kids (and their parents, tragically)? Do you think I get a kick out of being unable to get a certain thyroid condition under control which would enable me to actually lose weight? Do you think I'm fat because I have nothing better to do?. No. I didn't think so, either.

So, was it our well-masked tendency to hide our true feelings?

We all have our prejudices - let's not try and deny it. And we're taught that it's not acceptable to speak outwardly about these prejudices. Was the honesty of the post bothering me? Yes, I'm sure that was part of it, too. I'm fine with admitting that.

Was it because I perceived the initial post as being unfeeling?

Perhaps, yes. Even though I know - intellectually at least - that this sentiment is obviously not indicative of Catherder's compassionate nature.

I've gone through these questions over and over, and there's just one thing that keeps coming back to the fore.

It's the generalisation. It's the implication that those "fat people" were automatically guilty of creating their own circumstance, and thus contributing to the suffering of everyone else.

We just don't know that. We don't know if the "fat people" were all actually severely hypothyroid and/or suffering from one of many endocrine disorders and thus had very little control over their weight gain/loss situation.

We don't know if the "fat people" had had weight reduction surgery and were now actually half of the weight they would have been last year. We don't know if the "fat people" were halfway through a potentially successful weightloss plan.

We just don't know - and yet the assumption was made, so it seems, and guilt was applied. I think that's actually what bothered me the most.

And it made me wonder, would the same be said of lung cancer patients whose need for oxygen held up rescue operations in some of the hospitals? After all, they chose to smoke, didn't they?

It's just high time that we stopped laying guilt on people who are already victimized in this disaster regardless of what their individual stories may or may not be. We don't have the right to judge like that.

They need our help - not criticism.

Peace out.



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 10:02 AM
link   


there is no rule on who is saved first or last,it comes down to common sense save as many as possible,i know if put in the situation if rescuers had to make a choice on saving 1 obese person which could take four people to free opposed to those four saving 1 each in a dire situation they will choose the later.


While in some situations, the logic of the above quote would seem the way to go......I was always under the impression that the most desperatly in need came first. Isn't that what 'triage' means ( those that require imediate help, those that can wait, those beyond help, etc.) Surely the fat lady would not be left for last if her injury was more life threatening!

This seems like an issue that could sooo easily become a slippery slope, whether you well-meaningly intend for it to go that way or not.........next the old would be a 'waste' of rescue effort ( this could also be logically supported)
and whichever group that is a 'drain' on resources could be next.....poor, unemployed, cripple.....a 'case' could be made that any of these, 'unproductive' groups use up valuable time and materials that could better help some one else.

Perhaps the original poster would not condone any of that I just mentioned, but someone would and may in the future. The 'real' world certainly can be a cruel place.....it's just sad.




If you look at pictures from the Depression era, you don't see very many fat people, at all.


While this may be true in some instances, my Grandmother for one.....remained relatively plump through out that era. They had cows, chickens, pigs, etc....eggs, whole milk, real butter, fat back, cornbread.....all high calorie foods. She sewed, quilted, cooked, sold eggs, milk and butter, she also home schooled her children and some others who had to work on nearby farms during the day instead of going to school. Again, a full time, but low calorie burning occupation.

The skinny people in depression era photos had starved for months or years.....would you want to do that to these folks in NO before going to their aid??

[edit on 4-9-2005 by frayed1]



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
Was it my own defensiveness?

I am one of "those fat people". I'm sure my defensiveness was in part because of this ................ [snip]


While I initially started to U2U this to you, I decided to make a post directed to you, but perhaps for insight to others. I hope anyone reading can see into what I am trying to convey, as I SUCK at trying to put thoughts to typed words with no inflection.

I can't justify your being defensive over this based soley on the fact that you deal with the issue of weight. I justify it by the notion that this bias [in any scenario] against larger people is simply 4th grade. I justify your defensiveness on the human level, the same defensiveness I felt while reading thru some of these posts. I am not fat, no where near it, I am average size with no baggage - and I am disgusted by this 4th grade mentality that shoots off with comments like "fat-asss" and such.

I honenstly do think, Tinkleflower, that if you look at this issue without your personal scenario intertwined with it, that you will see your defensivness of this in relation to your personal issue is the first to be apparent with you as you live with this every day; but, under that is a stronger notion of defensivness in that this mentality of belittlement is just plain wrong, no matter your personal disposition.

I do so hope my fingers do my thoughts justice, that what I 'want' to say is what is read. If there is any question as to what I am am trying to say, my other posts in this thread may add to its clarification of my standpoint.

As for a direct answer to the original question of "Am I the only one that noticed all the fat people? ........... no, I was too damn busy looking at all the kids, wishing I could hold every one of them


Misfit



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Misfit
I do so hope my fingers do my thoughts justice, that what I 'want' to say is what is read.
Misfit


Bravo! Your fingers absolutely do your thoughts justice. I tried to say what you did and failed. Thank you. In my opinion, this is not a matter of being offended or having hurt feelings because one is overweight, it's a matter of human compassion or lack thereof.

I agree with worldwatcher that this is more of a general social issue and one that I find particularly hurtful. I've said all I wanted to say on it, but Misfit really made a good point and I just had to come back and acknowledge that.



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Misfit
I honenstly do think, Tinkleflower, that if you look at this issue without your personal scenario intertwined with it, that you will see your defensivness of this in relation to your personal issue is the first to be apparent with you as you live with this every day; but, under that is a stronger notion of defensivness in that this mentality of belittlement is just plain wrong, no matter your personal disposition.



Which is why I said this was only part of my whole realm of mixed up emotions relating to the Katrina situation.
My defensiveness is mostly as a result of what appeared to be a blatant generalisation and belittlement that simply didn't seem fair or "right".

But I still have to be honest - I'm forced to look at why I felt defensive, and as a result I felt the need to include those reasons too, you know? Just to get a better picture of where I was coming from.

Taking away the "me" issue, yes - I'd still be defensive.

Because when all's said and done, nobody is any more or less deserving of aid than anyone else in this situation. We're all in this together, and the minute we start categorising people as somehow being more or less deserving, is the minute when we start losing our humanity.



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 11:26 AM
link   
Tinkleflower,

Yes, I do understand what you mean, about the partial. I can relate to it in the way of when I see people talk about "those idiot addicts". I can get quite defensive about the attitude involved - I am clean 8yrs, and I know that what those "idiot addicts" are doing are NOT what the PERSON that the addict is does. Seems when people talk down about addicts, they take the whole issue of "addict" out of a person, and just see a person that is an idiot.

I just wanted to identify with you in the senses of being human, that it's not just your personal side that hurts when this kind of crap happens


Misfit



posted on Sep, 6 2005 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk

Originally posted by CatHerder
Amuk this sort of racist bull# doesn't belong on this forum. If you can't discuss something without having to revert to typical american racial slurs and stupidity (you people in the US are the champions at it) then don't post at all.


Is it all Americans are stupid or just the fat ones and me? I am not the one starting threads called "look at the fat people" am I?




Know what? The rest of the world doesn't think differently about a black guy or a white guy. Your skin color doesn't mean # to anyone, its your actions in life as a member of society that matter.


You mean like being stupid enough to be born in America and too crippled and poor to drive out of the Hurricane area? I guess in your country its OK to hate fat black americans as long as you dont post the black part?



But then, I'm not from the USA so I don't know what it's like to be raised to hate other people.


except the fat black american ones, right?

[edit on 3-9-2005 by Amuk]


During a time like this, the skin color of ANY American shouldn't even F***ing matter. I'm a white American, but I treat black people the way that is right, not the way of a racist!



posted on Sep, 6 2005 @ 10:00 PM
link   
Ok, so you dont think a fat person can be hungry, thirsty and should be able to survive on their stored fat and water retention sort of like a camel?

Stop feeding an elephant for one day and see what happens...

This is a very narrow minded and shallow subject matter. In fact, fat people go HUNGRIER than the ones who eat correctly. The more bread, rice, sugars you take in, the hungrier you get. You could accuse them of eating the wrong stuff, i guess, but dont say "how can they claim they're starving to death?" They do starve.

I like my weight, but i tell you, the minute i eat a bowl of rice (which is cheap and poor people eat it as a filler), I start getting very hungry...it subsides after awhile then i go back to my healthy non-sugars food and i am not hungry at all.





top topics
 
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join