S/O: Plus Sized Models and Your Children

[Hockey Mom]

In reading the thread regarding "plus sized" models and your Dh's opinion, I thought I'd throw this into the debate as well.

 

As mothers, how are you raising your daughters to view their bodies? How are you combating what society tells us is 'perfect'?

 

How are you raising your sons to view women realistically? How are you combating the imagery society puts in front of your young men?

Edited February 22, 2010 by Hockey Mom
Added link

[amy g.]

The main thing I have done is to minimize the amount of advertising my children are exposed to.

 

I find the amount of time some people spend on appearance to be such a waste of talent. What other great things could they be accomplishing for themselves with that time?

[KidsHappen]

This is an issue I deal with everyday. I am very thin and decidedly uncurvy. Most of my dds are much rounder. One is very thin like I am but even she is much more shapely than I: bigger booKs, smaller waist and a shapely rear. I tell them all that they are beautiful just the way they way and that I only make beautiful kids. It probably also helps that they know I envy their shapely curves. I don't think any of them want to grow up to look like mom. I also know that it helps them to see that all of their sisters are beautiful even though they are all different. Both my hubby and I point out beautiful women of all ages, shapes, sizes and colors. And while we might not have the healthiest diet we do express the joy of eating well. We would be very at home in Italy. We don't stress over calories, carbs, fats or dieting. We encourage moderation in all things.

[IsabelC]

For both my son and my daughters, we do the following:

 

• Avoid advertising as far as possible. We have no television, no newspapers or magazines (except my Breastfeeding Association one!), very little internet (supervized so we control content tightly).
  
• Avoid modeling unrealistic or negative body image or behavior (eg going on a diet).
  
• Avoid anti woman or fatophobic language. We use fat as a positive descriptor (eg "look how beautiful and fat [pregnant friend] looks!") and aim for our bodies to be strong and healthy, regardless of shape or size.
  
• We talk about how beauty is related to character and actions rather than looks.
  
• Encourage the children to listen to their bodies (eg think about how hungry they are and decide how much they want to eat) and take care of them (eg explaining why they need to drink plenty of water).
  
• The beauty myth is largely passive and concerned with looks, so we teach the kids about the wonderful things bodies can do, all the way from little people having "helpful hands" through to birthing and breastfeeding. (Hopefully by the time my son sees a topless model for the first time, he'll merely be wondering where her hungry baby is! Well, I'm allowed to hope, hey!)
  
• Both teaching and modelling respect between men and women. If they don't see their father treating me as an inferior, hopefully that will give them a sound basis from which to judge what they see later on, and they will not find the woman-as-sex-object paradigm acceptable.
  

That's pretty much it so far. Our children are young (the eldest will turn 7 this year) so we are not yet in the thick of it with teenage angst and developing sexuality. I guess there will be a lot more conversations around body image by then...

Edited February 23, 2010 by Hotdrink

[JoyfulMama]

I struggle with this. I know my dd9 already has views on what is "fat" and what is "not fat". She has already made comments about wearing or not wearing certain pieces of clothing because she thinks they make her look "fat". I feel like her view of others is skewed as my dh and I are both very thin, so pretty much everyone is overweight if compared to us! DD9 is very thin as well. I try very hard to be cognizant of my words. I try to focus less on outer beauty, and more on inner beauty, but have been finding that no matter what I do, there is a natural draw to define outer beauty. So much so that my dd9 has decided that she does not want her hair to start curling, as she has not seen many beatiful people (in her opinion) with curly hair.

I have found that she has been following my lead by example in wanting to look nice. In some ways I take it as a complement, that I have done a good job in showing her that I want to present myself as organized and confident, both internally and externally. Other times I :001_rolleyes: when she needs to plan an outfit to go somewhere (like the library).:lol:

So back to the original question... I think I mostly try to be aware of my words. I try hard to not be negatively judgemental about outward appearances, and I try to point out when I see someone being great to their body.

[Crimson Wife]

Honestly, I worry about this. My DD mortified me a few months ago when she saw a jazzercise class at our local rec center and asked in all earnestness why the ladies were fat if they exercise. :blushing: I tried telling her what really matters is being healthy at any size and that skinny doesn't necessarily mean healthy and heavy doesn't necessarily mean unhealthy. But the women she's closest to are both more active and thinner than the average American female. In both my and DH's families, we're lucky that our genes allow us to stay thin relatively easily with diet & exercise. She doesn't witness somebody doing everything right and still being heavy.

[Carol in Cal.]

No teen mags, no women's mags, nothing. DD does not get to wallow in those relentless images.

 

The other thing is that I encourage her to really look at people. I don't think I ever really did this during my teens and 20's. I don't take potshots at glamourous girls, but I do suggest that some of the clothes would make it difficult to move freely or hike or do much of anything except sit around. And I point out what women actually look like.

[Ginevra]

She doesn't witness somebody doing everything right and still being heavy.

 

That's because there is no such thing. Fat is the storage of excess fuel that is not burned off. It is that simple. When people eat less and move more, they are not heavy.

 

That is what I teach my children, too, both in word and in example.

[Elisheva]

That's because there is no such thing. Fat is the storage of excess fuel that is not burned off. It is that simple. When people eat less and move more, they are not heavy.

 

That is what I teach my children, too, both in word and in example.

 

Only if you define "doing everything right", circularly, as doing what's necessary to be thin, rather than as doing what's necessary to be healthy. There are healthy and unhealthy people at almost every body size. A certain amount of reserves on the body is healthy and protective against disease and there has been some research lately indicating that that amount may be larger than our culture thinks. Different people have different genetic predispositions to store different amounts of fat at the same level of diet/activity. They may also have underlying health conditions that make it more difficult, medications they have to be on which cause weight gain, etc. You can never know the whole story. Why judge people on such a personal matter anyway?

[IsabelC]

Different people have different genetic predispositions to store different amounts of fat at the same level of diet/activity.

I read some interesting research about non purposeful activity (ie, fidgeting). It makes a surprising amount of difference whether you are a person who can sit still or a person who is always tapping, fiddling, twiddling, jiggling etc. (and yes, this is largely hereditary). Also, being underweight is several times more risky to your health than being overweight. In fact, the amount of movement a person performs regularly is a better indicator of health and life expectancy than any measure of size or weight. The person's mental outlook is also a strong indicator. For many larger people, concentrating on a positive attitude and an active lifestyle would be far more beneficial than doing whatever it takes to lose weight.

 

 

That's because there is no such thing. Fat is the storage of excess fuel that is not burned off. It is that simple. When people eat less and move more, they are not heavy.

Are you perhaps a person who does not have any major difficulties with weight? Because your comment sounded similar in tone to certain people who claim that there is no such thing as [adhd/ad/hfa] and those children just need more discipline. Only people who have never parented or taught one of these children make that kind of comment. Do you seriously think that 50+% of people are fatter than they'd like to be simply because they don't bother to eat and exercise appropriately? Sure, some people are. (I am one of those. I am a bit overweight, because I love eating and I don't move enough. I need a lot of physical activity to remain slim, and right now I am prioritizing my kids and the exercise has suffered. [Not necessarily the right decision, but a decision I have made, nonetheless].)

Edited February 23, 2010 by Hotdrink

[Lolly]

That's because there is no such thing. Fat is the storage of excess fuel that is not burned off. It is that simple. When people eat less and move more, they are not heavy.

 

That is what I teach my children, too, both in word and in example.

 

Oh honey, you know not what you say. I am so glad for you that this is the world you live in, but it just is not truth. As hard as it is to believe, aging does horrible things to many women. Their bodies start holding fat. Exercise makes their bodies hold onto that fat even more. At this point in my life, if I do not exercise continuously (I just don't have the time) at an intense level and eat such a tiny amount that you would be astonished I will not lose weight. In fact, exercising and eating what you would consider unhealthily little causes me to gain weight. No, it is not muscle. Exercising and eating a healthy amount of healthy foods causes me to gain weight. Slight exercise and healthy eating keeps me at a hold. It is all hormonal unfortunately. I really wish that you were correct.

[Mrs Mungo]

That's because there is no such thing. Fat is the storage of excess fuel that is not burned off. It is that simple. When people eat less and move more, they are not heavy.

 

That is what I teach my children, too, both in word and in example.

 

I have a friend who *easily* eats twice as much as I do, doesn't work out at all and is a size two. I have another friend who is almost 200 lbs and runs triathlons. This isn't the least bit accurate.

[MommyRyan]

To the OP, I believe the most important thing I can do for my daughters' body image is to have a healthy body image myself. I take care of myself, try to eat healthy, and exercise daily. But most importantly, even when I want to lose weight, I don't discuss it with my dds. I might say "Oh, I haven't exercised in awhile, I'm starting to feel lethargic/off" or "I haven't been eating so well. I really need some nutrients," but I never discuss dieting or targeted weight loss. My daughters are all young and thing, but I never (unlike my mother) make comments for them to "enjoy it while it lasts", to "wait til they have kids", or remark that I "wish I had their thighs". I don't pinch my fat in front of them, don't complain about my size, nothing. I believe if *we* exhibit a healthy body image our kids will too. That simple.

[Parrothead]

This is something that we have to work on. Dd is a bit pudgy, but she is a big girl. At 10 she is already 5 ft. tall and the next time I buy her shoes she will have to have a size bigger than what I wear.

 

Dd exercises 5 hours a week on top of what she gets when she plays, but she could stand to loose 20 pounds. So we have talks about exercising and diet.

[Peri]

Fashion magazines are not allowed in this house. We are also getting ready to turn off the tube for good too.

 

I come from a family of curvy women and I have to say that women who are waif like honestly look like they are in pain. I am almost afraid to touch them out of fear of breaking them. I absoultely hate seeing any outline of bones (collar bones, back bones, ect.). What is a woman without curves. Protruding hip bones are not curves.

[Rosy]

In reading the thread regarding "plus sized" models and your Dh's opinion, I thought I'd throw this into the debate as well.

 

As mothers, how are you raising your daughters to view their bodies? How are you combating what society tells us is 'perfect'?

 

How are you raising your sons to view women realistically? How are you combating the imagery society puts in front of your young men?

 

We have Y memberships and they know that exercise is important. They see me making my cardio and strength training classes a priority, and they know that we expect them to be involved in at least one sport. We go to the lake all the time in the summer.

 

None of these directly relates to body image, but they know the importance of being fit. They also know that I'm not happy with my overweight body and see me trying to correct it (though they also see me making poor food choices). My kids are still young, (<10) so I think just doing our best to keep them and us active and eating well is all that is needed for now.

[Ginevra]

Are you perhaps a person who does not have any major difficulties with weight? Because your comment sounded similar in tone to certain people who claim that there is no such thing as [adhd/ad/hfa] and those children just need more discipline. Only people who have never parented or taught one of these children make that kind of comment. Do you seriously think that 50+% of people are fatter than they'd like to be simply because they don't bother to eat and exercise appropriately? Sure, some people are. (I am one of those. I am a bit overweight, because I love eating and I don't move enough. I need a lot of physical activity to remain slim, and right now I am prioritizing my kids and the exercise has suffered. [Not necessarily the right decision, but a decision I have made, nonetheless].)

 

There is no such thing as a healthy person who cannot become thinner by eating less and moving more. We need only to look to the extreme to see that this is true. Have you ever seen the horrible pictures of starved, stacked-up bodies in Nazi death camps? How many of those starved people were fat? Have you ever heard of an anorexic who was mysteriously fat? Who at nothing but lettuce, yet somehow continued to be fat?

 

I seriously do think that 50+% of people are fatter than they'd like to be because they want X more than they want Y. In your case, you say because you love eating and want to spend time on your kids rather than exercise. That is a perfectly valid explanation. You are choose eating and not exercising, even if it means you will be a bit overweight. My choice is different. I do not want to be overweight and unhealthy, no matter if I have to sacrifice some of the foods I'd enjoy and some of the time I could spend on other things.

 

It is certainly true that people have predispositions towards certain body types - I don't disagree. But fat is stored-up, unburned body fuel. In native populations, where there is no such thing as keeping food in refrigerators or picking it up at the grocery store, nobody is fat. They must expend energy to hunt, gather or raise the food they eat. Also, there is no such food as New York Cheesecake or Carmel Mochiatas. :tongue_smilie: They are eating the amount of calories it takes to do their work and secure more food, so it is in balance.

 

And just for disclosure - yes, I am a person who does not struggle with weight. I don't struggle with it because I know what makes it go up and I know what makes it go down. If it goes up - and it does if I make too many choices for cookies and ice cream - I make it go back down by making more choices for apples and carrots.

 

Oh, and not that it's germane to the discussion, but I do believe in ADHD/ADD, although I think there are many more kids so diagnosed who have no disorder.

[lionfamily1999]

For the most part the kids are only exposed to that at school or in the store. We don't have t.v. and I don't read fashion magazines. Dh does get a motorcycle magazine and, interestingly, the majority of the models in there are curvy/normal looking (some can be a bit haggard, but I imagine they really are bike chicks).

 

Dd is curvy and from what she's gathered, simply living that way, she is very happy with her shape. When an older guy (I think he was around 18-20) asked for her number I almost died, but she found out, once again, that being curvy is far from yucky.

[lionfamily1999]

That's because there is no such thing. Fat is the storage of excess fuel that is not burned off. It is that simple. When people eat less and move more, they are not heavy.

 

That is what I teach my children, too, both in word and in example.

Some people are genetically/through heredity inclined towards a larger frame. Some people are on medications that make it so that they cannot lose weight. Some people are facing life long diseases and issues that make it so that they cannot lose weight. Some people have glandular problems. Some people retain water. Thank you for teaching your children to pile all those people into one big fat heap and label them... what? lazy overeaters? That's great :)

[Hockey Mom]

There is no such thing as a healthy person who cannot become thinner by eating less and moving more. We need only to look to the extreme to see that this is true. Have you ever seen the horrible pictures of starved, stacked-up bodies in Nazi death camps? How many of those starved people were fat? Have you ever heard of an anorexic who was mysteriously fat? Who at nothing but lettuce, yet somehow continued to be fat?

 

I seriously do think that 50+% of people are fatter than they'd like to be because they want X more than they want Y. In your case, you say because you love eating and want to spend time on your kids rather than exercise. That is a perfectly valid explanation. You are choose eating and not exercising, even if it means you will be a bit overweight. My choice is different. I do not want to be overweight and unhealthy, no matter if I have to sacrifice some of the foods I'd enjoy and some of the time I could spend on other things.

 

It is certainly true that people have predispositions towards certain body types - I don't disagree. But fat is stored-up, unburned body fuel. In native populations, where there is no such thing as keeping food in refrigerators or picking it up at the grocery store, nobody is fat. They must expend energy to hunt, gather or raise the food they eat. Also, there is no such food as New York Cheesecake or Carmel Mochiatas. :tongue_smilie: They are eating the amount of calories it takes to do their work and secure more food, so it is in balance.

 

And just for disclosure - yes, I am a person who does not struggle with weight. I don't struggle with it because I know what makes it go up and I know what makes it go down. If it goes up - and it does if I make too many choices for cookies and ice cream - I make it go back down by making more choices for apples and carrots.

 

 

 

I'm more interested in how you are raising your children to view people realistically.

 

Are your sons taught that women are worth their body weight? Are your daughters taught that their worth lies in the size of their jeans? How do you combat the messages that the media, movies, magazines, tv, internet, etc. send to your children?

 

Around 35 years old, I finally learned to be comfortable in my own skin. Thin, fat, in-between....when I die, no one is going to remember how thin I was at 37, or how fat I was when I was 39. They'll remember how I treated them; how I taught them to treat everyone with kindness; how I loved them.

 

ETA: Michael Jackson was very thin. Do we remember him for how thin he was, or do we remember him for his talent?

[Laura Corin]

There is no such thing as a healthy person who cannot become thinner by eating less and moving more. We need only to look to the extreme to see that this is true. Have you ever seen the horrible pictures of starved, stacked-up bodies in Nazi death camps? How many of those starved people were fat? Have you ever heard of an anorexic who was mysteriously fat? Who at nothing but lettuce, yet somehow continued to be fat?

 

I seriously do think that 50+% of people are fatter than they'd like to be because they want X more than they want Y. In your case, you say because you love eating and want to spend time on your kids rather than exercise. That is a perfectly valid explanation. You are choose eating and not exercising, even if it means you will be a bit overweight. My choice is different. I do not want to be overweight and unhealthy, no matter if I have to sacrifice some of the foods I'd enjoy and some of the time I could spend on other things.

 

It is certainly true that people have predispositions towards certain body types - I don't disagree. But fat is stored-up, unburned body fuel. In native populations, where there is no such thing as keeping food in refrigerators or picking it up at the grocery store, nobody is fat. They must expend energy to hunt, gather or raise the food they eat. Also, there is no such food as New York Cheesecake or Carmel Mochiatas. :tongue_smilie: They are eating the amount of calories it takes to do their work and secure more food, so it is in balance.

 

And just for disclosure - yes, I am a person who does not struggle with weight. I don't struggle with it because I know what makes it go up and I know what makes it go down. If it goes up - and it does if I make too many choices for cookies and ice cream - I make it go back down by making more choices for apples and carrots.

 

I wish it were not so, but I've seen it. When I first lived in China, in 1985, there were no fat people. None. Not one. Many foods were rationed and most people couldn't afford much extra. When I returned to live in China in 2004, things had changed.

 

Now I do agree that it is easier for some people to lose weight than it is for others, and that this changes over a lifetime. But there is a relationship (if not a simple one) between intake/exercise and weight.

 

Laura

[mirth]

I agree 100% with Quill on everything Q said about excess weight.

[mommyrooch]

I have a friend who *easily* eats twice as much as I do, doesn't work out at all and is a size two. I have another friend who is almost 200 lbs and runs triathlons. This isn't the least bit accurate.

 

:iagree: My sister-in-law eats massive amounts of food and doesn't do a lick of exercise and she is 5'7" and a size 2. She eats tons of icecream, carbs, etc. and never gains a pound.:glare: She gave birth to twin boys and within ONE WEEK of having my nephews she was back in her size 2 jeans without so much as lifting a leg and complained because she had "a little pooch". It's sickening really. :tongue_smilie:

 

I on the other hand can look at food and I gain weight. :D I have struggled with my weight for years. I eat MUCH less than my sister-in-law and am twice as active and I am overweight.

 

The comment from the poster that stated that if you eat less and move more you won't be heavy just isn't true. This is a very common misconception and usually believed among people who haven't been cursed with horrid genetics that make weight gain a constant (sometimes losing) battle no matter how much one exercises or eats less.

 

It is mindsets like this that cause harmful steryotypes like obese people are just lazy and fat slobs because afterall, if they spent more time in the gym and less time stuffing their faces then they would be slim and trim too. This line of thinking is not only harmful but it is often times very untrue.

[Ginevra]

I'm more interested in how you are raising your children to view people realistically.

 

Are your sons taught that women are worth their body weight? Are your daughters taught that their worth lies in the size of their jeans? How do you combat the messages that the media, movies, magazines, tv, internet, etc. send to your children?

 

 

I don't see anything complex about this. My sons see a mother who does many worthwhile things: teaches them, keeps the home decent, makes good meals, draws, writes and sings - and exercises. My daughter sees this, too. I do instruct them on food choices and the need for exercise to be healthy. That healthy bodies also look good is something they may very well notice of their own accord. My ds10 is very interested in the book Eat This, Not That and finds it fascinating to see the drastic, wide variation in calorie content of restaurants and chain fast food.

[WishboneDawn]

I do not want to be overweight and unhealthy

 

Then you can be overweight and healthy. Or at a good weight and unhealthy. Or skinny and unhealthy. Or skinny and healthy.

 

There seems to be thinking these days that since many overweight people are also unhealthy then it must be the weight causing the health problems. Never mind that's simply a correlation, not causation. Never mind some underlying health issues can cause both problems. Never mind that many overweight people are perfectly healthy (me being one of them).

 

There's a lot of accepted common wisdom out there about health and weight that deserves questioning. Junkfood Science is an excellent blog that addresses much of it. Here's a quote from this blog post that will give anyone a good start on the issue:

 

This new study, led by Katherine Flegal, which the scientific community recognized as a vastly superior study and the most accurate to date, used recent and solid information that included actual measurements on real people representative of today’s population. It documented:

 

· “Overweight" and "obesity” is not associated with 400,000 deaths, as the special interests had (and continue to) claimed, but together perhaps 25,815 extra deaths — far fewer than the deaths attributed to motor vehicles or firearms. In fact, that links fat to 2% to 3% of all “preventable” deaths.

· Among nonsmoking people under age 60, being “overweight” (BMI 25-30) and “obese” (BMI 30-35) was actually associated with lower risks for premature death than those of "normal" weight.

 

 

The author's "Obesity Paradox" series in the sidebar is a great read.

[Ginevra]

There seems to be thinking these days that since many overweight people are also unhealthy then it must be the weight causing the health problems.

 

Sorry - I disagree with you. The human body was designed to use food as the fuel to think, move, speak, hunt, farm, walk, build and so on. Storing fat is the body's defense mechanism against famine. If our conditions were "natural", we would expend energy finding or raising food. Also, there would be times within a year when food was scarce and we would burn off any fat stores.

 

To have a high percentage of body fat and low muscle tone and strength is not naturally-ocurring. It is well, thouroughly documented that exercise combats myriad diseases and disorders, as does eating a variety of naturally-occurring foods. (Fruits, vegitables, meats, nuts and grains.) It is well, thouroughly documented that eating a lot of "invented" foods and taking advantage of the inertia that is possible in our world of conveniences brings on myriad diseases and disorders.

 

To have a high BMI is unhealthy. It's not something I made up. To exercise and eat naturally-occurring foods is healthy.

[Ginevra]

My sister-in-law eats massive amounts of food and doesn't do a lick of exercise and she is 5'7" and a size 2. She eats tons of icecream, carbs, etc. and never gains a pound.:glare: She gave birth to twin boys and within ONE WEEK of having my nephews she was back in her size 2 jeans without so much as lifting a leg and complained because she had "a little pooch". It's sickening really. :tongue_smilie:

 

I would venture to say that this will not be true for you SIL for her whole life, if, indeed, it is even true now. Also, don't forget that we never truly know what people do privately. I have a tiny, thin friend and her fit, buffed husband, who go out to dinner constantly and drink alcoholic beverages every day. It seems like those two facts would surely mean they should both be fat; restaurant meals are usually fattening and most alcoholic drinks are, too. They stay thin. But I don't know what their other habits are, and I do know they both go to the gym every day. Maybe they never eat breaksfast. Maybe lunch is an apple and yogurt. They may consume most of their calories for the day at dinner. I don't know. But even with different metabolisms and different body types, it's still a fact that food is fuel and more food in means more fuel to either be used or stored as fat.

 

I on the other hand can look at food and I gain weight. :D I have struggled with my weight for years. I eat MUCH less than my sister-in-law and am twice as active and I am overweight.

 

The comment from the poster that stated that if you eat less and move more you won't be heavy just isn't true. This is a very common misconception and usually believed among people who haven't been cursed with horrid genetics that make weight gain a constant (sometimes losing) battle no matter how much one exercises or eats less.

 

I do not believe this is a misconception, horrible genetics notwithstanding. See my earlier point about starvation (not that I'm recommending starvation as a weight-loss plan). All people who eat too little food get thinner and thinner until they starve. Whether they have miraculous metabolism or snailish metabolism, whether they are ectomorphic or endomorphic, either way. Less food, more movement = lower body mass.

 

I don't pretend it is easy. I think it is very hard. We are surrounded by every variety of marvelous, delicious food and many diversions that make exercise unappealing. But hard or easy, I believe this is a true fact of all healthy people: Eating less and moving more = less body mass.

 

It is mindsets like this that cause harmful steryotypes like obese people are just lazy and fat slobs because afterall, if they spent more time in the gym and less time stuffing their faces then they would be slim and trim too. This line of thinking is not only harmful but it is often times very untrue.

 

Speaking only for myself, I think nothing of the sort. I don't reject what a person is because they are overweight. I don't assume they are lazy or slobs. I believe they are making a choice that is not leading to thinness, just as an earlier poster said she loves to eat and chooses to devote her time to her kids and not to exercise. If that is the choice a person wants to make, that is perfectly fine. The only reason to choose to be thinner is because that is what you want for yourself. But, I'd rather see people own that choice than to make an excuse that they cannot lose weight, it's not possible for their genetic type or something similar. It's putting oneself into an artificial prison.

[Snickerdoodle]

 

All people who eat too little food get thinner and thinner until they starve.

But are they able to keep up a normal amount of energy expenditure? Or do people who are starving eventually become pretty much immobile?

[Ginevra]

But are they able to keep up a normal amount of energy expenditure? Or do people who are starving eventually become pretty much immobile?

 

Good grief! That's why I said I wasn't recommending starvation as a weight-loss program! I was simply illustrating that less food always equals less body mass.

[Snickerdoodle]

Good grief! That's why I said I wasn't recommending starvation as a weight-loss program! I was simply illustrating that less food always equals less body mass.

 

I'm just pointing out that eating less and moving more doesn't make sense from that standpoint. If you eat less, naturally you will be moving less. However eating more doesn't make you want to move more.

[Mrs Mungo]

There is no such thing as a healthy person who cannot become thinner by eating less and moving more. We need only to look to the extreme to see that this is true. Have you ever seen the horrible pictures of starved, stacked-up bodies in Nazi death camps? How many of those starved people were fat? Have you ever heard of an anorexic who was mysteriously fat? Who at nothing but lettuce, yet somehow continued to be fat?

 

Are you suggesting overweight people should eat nothing but lettuce? I eat *much* healthier now than I ever did in high school or college. Sure, people could starve themselves but that's not exactly healthy. *I* am much more healthy now than I was when I was underweight. I don't get sick as often, etc.

 

To have a high BMI is unhealthy. It's not something I made up.

 

But that isn't the whole story. As I pointed out in the other thread, *many* if not *most* female celebrities are not within the normal BMI range, they are underweight. There is a lot of discussion out there about whether being slightly underweight or slightly overweight is "worse."

 

Examples:

http://www.diet-blog.com/archives/2008/10/07/underweight_or_slightly_overweight_which_is_worse.php

 

http://www.diet-blog.com/archives/2006/08/23/slightly_overweight_increased_health_risk.php

 

Being underweight is not without risks. Those super-thin actresses are often choosing behaviors that are at least equally unhealthy and sometimes much more unhealthy than having an ice cream. For example, some of the biggest health problems that shows up in the underweight population are related to smoking.

 

Some studies actually suggest that slightly overweight is actually better from a health standpoint.

“I believe the data,” said Dr. Elizabeth Barrett-Connor, a professor of family and preventive medicine at the University of California, San Diego. A body mass index of 25 to 30, the so-called overweight range, “may be optimal,” she said.

To exercise and eat naturally-occurring foods is healthy.

Absolutely, I agree. Are you suggesting one cannot do those two things and still be overweight, according to BMI charts? Because you can and you can still be healthy.

[mirth]

My young son always points out the oddity of women who are wearing "stick shoes" and have big red fingers. (high heels and painted nails) I guess he finds these things wholly unnatural and uncomfortable, and as a result, rather interesting as objects of oddity than attractiveness. He has definitely extolled the beauty of a sunset, or a flower, and even a smooth piece of heartwood. I think kids are born with an innate sense of beauty. It is whacked out billboards displaying designer heroin-chic that messes with one's minds.

[Guest Katia]

My young son always points out the oddity of women who are wearing "stick shoes" and have big red fingers. (high heels and painted nails) I guess he finds these things wholly unnatural and uncomfortable, and as a result, rather interesting as objects of oddity than attractiveness. He has definitely extolled the beauty of a sunset, or a flower, and even a smooth piece of heartwood. I think kids are born with an innate sense of beauty. It is whacked out billboards displaying designer heroin-chic that messes with one's minds.

 

It's funny you would post this. My ds, when he was young, made the same observations. He would ask why that lady wanted her fingernails and lips to look bloody. He would wonder aloud why those ladies wanted to look like someone had punched them in the eyes. He would look at me, made up in minimal make-up for church and ask why I wanted ucky goop on my face that I would need to wash-off....what was wrong with a clean face?

 

Because of my young son's observations, I began to become more natural in my appearance and discovered a few things:

 

1) My dh prefers a natural look; he hates sticky hair goop/he wants it clean and natural; he can't stand long or painted fingernails and any make-up must be applied to enhance natural beauty IOW: it can't look like I have any make-up on.

 

2) Looking natural takes less time and I feel cleaner and healthier

 

3) Looking natural is waaaayyyyy less expensive

 

4) I find I like myself more

 

I'm not entering the weight discussion, but I do agree that the media is to blame for young men's expectations of women's body shape and size, and I find it sad that men of any age would not be able to see past a body size or shape to the wonderful person standing in front of them. Very, very sad.

[Daisy]

I'm not sure but to some degree I think I was too successful. Now trying to convince my daughter of the necessity of washing her hair every day (now that she is in puberty), dress in clothes that match, etc. are a real pain in the rear because she tosses back, "Hey, I don't care what people think about me." AGHGHG. Can we care a little? Just a little.

 

Biggies around here are probably that hubby and I don't really care. We limit exposure to advertising. We are huge readers and kinda nerdy which really seems to have impacted the way our children view the world. I was always slightly disinterested as a kid. Could have cared less about pop culture and it appears my children are following in my footsteps. I would prefer them to not always look so....homeschoolish though. :lol:

 

Here's a picture I entered in a contest.

 

http://daisyhomeschoolblog.blogspot.com/2010/02/i-am-participating-in-smrt-lernins-you.html

 

Kinda says it all.

[WishboneDawn]

To have a high BMI is unhealthy. It's not something I made up. To exercise and eat naturally-occurring foods is healthy.

 

I didn't make up the assertion that being overweight doesn't automatically mean unhealthy either. The blog I linked to is a really interesting read regarding the science around weight and health. It points to science that contradicts the idea that a high BMI is necessarily unhealthy. Seriously, spend some time with that blog. It's a great resource on the matter.

 

But you've confused a couple of points. I'm not asserting that exercising and eating well isn't healthy. In fact I think it's key. But that doesn't always mean the healthy person who is exercising and eating well isn't also going to be overweight according to government guidelines.

[Ginevra]

Are you suggesting overweight people should eat nothing but lettuce? I eat *much* healthier now than I ever did in high school or college. Sure, people could starve themselves but that's not exactly healthy. *I* am much more healthy now than I was when I was underweight. I don't get sick as often, etc.

 

 

*sigh* I knew someone would say that. That is why I said I don't advocate starvation. Of course I'm not saying that! It would be absurd. My point was that if an overweight person ate a piece of lettuce three times a day, they would absolutely, positively, no matter what their genetic predisposition, get thinner and thinner and thinner. I'm not recommending it, nor am I insisting all overweight people must become thin. I am much healthier now than when I was underweight in high school and my early 20's.

 

*many* if not *most* female celebrities are not within the normal BMI range,

 

I'm not defending underweight celebrities. I couldn't care less about what celebrities do. The point I'm disputing is that people can eat healthfully and exercise regularly and still mysteriously have a high BMI. I do not believe that is possible, but I guess it partially depends on what one considers "eating healthfully". The foods and portions I consider healthy (and which most doctors and expert-types also consider healthy) would make it inevitable that one shrinks BMI. You can't be fat on carrots and apples, unless you eat great hoards and gobs of them, but then that doesn't agree with healthy portion size.

 

I'm just pointing out that eating less and moving more doesn't make sense from that standpoint. If you eat less, naturally you will be moving less. However eating more doesn't make you want to move more.

 

Snickerdoodle, that is a silly argument. Eating less doesn't make you go comatose. :confused: If you've been eating 2400 calories a day, and it's making your weight go up, but you rein in your calories and eat 1700 a day, you're not going to suddenly be unable to go up the stairs. Thousands of people lose weight using this precise method; decrease consumed calories and increase burning off stored calories (fat). I have done it and I am not rare.

[Ginevra]

But that doesn't always mean the healthy person who is exercising and eating well isn't also going to be overweight according to government guidelines.

 

I'm not confused on this point. I do not believe that is possible. If you eat according to recommended guidelines, and you exercise, you eventually will get thinner and thinner. Recommended guidelines for maintaining weight if you are a healthy adult non-pregnant woman: 2000 calories per day. If you wish to lose weight, that should be less. If you wish to gain weight, that should be more. If you are a mountain-climber or swim eight hours a day, then it will necessarily be much more.

 

I didn't make up the assertion that being overweight doesn't automatically mean unhealthy either. The blog I linked to is a really interesting read regarding the science around weight and health. It points to science that contradicts the idea that a high BMI is necessarily unhealthy. Seriously, spend some time with that blog. It's a great resource on the matter.

 

You may find the blog interesting; who knows, maybe I would, too, but I doubt it. I do believe that being overweight is unhealthy. I don't think it is good for anyone at all. Carrying around excess fat is not a naturally-occurring situation, as I discussed already. It is an outgrowth of our ridiculously good fortune of having an endless supply of food available to us at all times and virtually no necessity of exercising strenuously to secure it. Therefore, I conclude that obesity is not healthy for any person.

 

Stacks upon stacks of medical and anthropological studies back my belief, btw. When populations which once had no obesity change, so do the incidence of heart disease, stroke, cancer and diabetes. When McDonalds move into areas of the world that had no such thing before, the population becomes fat where fat did not exist before. Childhood obesity is on the rise in America and right along with it, so does early-onset diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

[Snickerdoodle]

Quill, would you be interested in listening to this talk?

http://webcast.berkeley.edu/event_details.php?webcastid=21216

[Ginevra]

I would, except that it doesn't seem to load right or else my non-tech idiocy is making it fail. :tongue_smilie: I did Google the guy, though, so I was reading some of his stuff.

[Caribbean Queen]

I agree with Quill.

 

(and I am overweight:tongue_smilie:)

[Snickerdoodle]

Here is a slightly different lecture he gave:

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4362041487661765149#

[Lolly]

I'm not confused on this point. I do not believe that is possible. If you eat according to recommended guidelines, and you exercise, you eventually will get thinner and thinner. Recommended guidelines for maintaining weight if you are a healthy adult non-pregnant woman: 2000 calories per day. If you wish to lose weight, that should be less. If you wish to gain weight, that should be more. If you are a mountain-climber or swim eight hours a day, then it will necessarily be much more.

 

 

 

 

You may not believe it, but it is so. You CAN eat and exercise according to recommended guidelines and GAIN weight. You have listened and learned what you have been told and taught. I believed it once too. Now, I live the other side and know it is a load of hogwash. I have no medical problems. Zero, zilch, nada. I am as healthy as is humanly possible. I am fat. I don't overeat. I exercise moderately because doing any more makes me gain. Are you telling me that what I am LIVING is not happening? It is just a figment of my imagination? Oh good! I am still in that 105 pound solid muscle body that had every man turning his head to watch walk down the street!!! (Quite amazingly, I ate everything in sight at the time. My diet was truly horrid.)

[WishboneDawn]

I'm not confused on this point. I do not believe that is possible. If you eat according to recommended guidelines, and you exercise, you eventually will get thinner and thinner. Recommended guidelines for maintaining weight if you are a healthy adult non-pregnant woman: 2000 calories per day. If you wish to lose weight, that should be less. If you wish to gain weight, that should be more. If you are a mountain-climber or swim eight hours a day, then it will necessarily be much more.

 

I do that. I don't exercise like I did at one point but I had a period where I ate less then 2000 calories a day, exercised a minimum of an hour a day and lost 15 pounds. Then I stopped losing weight. I was fit, had lots of energy and strength, felt great. But didn't lose more weight. I suspect I really would have had to step up my exercise to lose more but I was looking for a reasonable level of fitness, not wanting to run marathons or anything. Bodies are capable of carrying fat and being fit. Fat isn't bad after all. It's an insulator and an energy source. It's seem a little irrational to suppose that simply because it's present means it's causing harm.

 

You may find the blog interesting; who knows, maybe I would, too, but I doubt it. I do believe that being overweight is unhealthy. I don't think it is good for anyone at all. Carrying around excess fat is not a naturally-occurring situation, as I discussed already. It is an outgrowth of our ridiculously good fortune of having an endless supply of food available to us at all times and virtually no necessity of exercising strenuously to secure it. Therefore, I conclude that obesity is not healthy for any person.

 

Stacks upon stacks of medical and anthropological studies back my belief, btw. When populations which once had no obesity change, so do the incidence of heart disease, stroke, cancer and diabetes. When McDonalds move into areas of the world that had no such thing before, the population becomes fat where fat did not exist before. Childhood obesity is on the rise in America and right along with it, so does early-onset diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

 

I reccommend the blog because it takes on the stacks of evidence with good science. The author cites her sources and is careful about using science to address the claims about weight. The science is not as one-sided as you think.

 

In your second paragraph you're talking correlation, not causation. Yes, rates of certain diseases are rising and yes, obesity rates are rising but it's a mistake to think that because of that it's the obesity that's causing the health problems. It could be that a diet of fast and processed food causes both the health problems AND obesity. In fact, we KNOW a poor diet affects health. But the obesity could be a side effect, not that harmful in and of itself.

 

The reasoning often used in discussions around weight is often poor. It's rather like observing a person being stung by a bee. Imagine the person going developing hives and then going into anaphylatic shock. We don't assume it's the hives that cause the shock. We KNOW it's the sting and that the hives, by themselves, are a rather harmless side effect. If we applied the reasoning used with matters of weight we'd conclude hives cause the shock and all people with hives are in life-threatening danger. We'd assume that if we just got rid of the hives, there would be no danger anymore.

 

This kind of reasoning isn't simply troublesome in the way it shapes public thinking and policy, it puts people's live in danger. Obese and overweight people go to doctors with health complaints. Doctors assume (often without good evidence) it's weight related and tell them to lose weight. At best it can mean the true underlying causes (sleep disorder, heart problems, etc.) aren't addressed. At worst the measures a person might take to loose weight, even normally healthy ones, might worsen the underlying condition and put the person at risk.

 

We don't know as much about this as you assume. The science is not as good as you assume.

[Ginevra]

Wishbone, let me speak first to the blog you linked. The study that is cited is snipped. I googled Katherine Flegal and got more of the study. Very interesting what that blog is leaving out. This, for example:

 

Nov. 6, 2007 -- New research from the CDC confirms that people who carry a few extra pounds have a lower risk of death than those who are normal weight, extremely underweight, or obese.

 

The study updates and expands a headline-making study from 2005, which first suggested a survival advantage for people considered overweight, but not obese, according to government standards.

 

Using additional mortality data with longer follow-up, the newer analysis examines death risk by specific cause.

 

Compared with people who fell into the normal-weight category, being obese was associated with an increased risk of death from cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and cancers that have been linked to obesity, such as colon, breast, esophageal, uterine, and ovarian cancers.

 

Obesity was not associated with an increased risk of death from other cancers.

 

Being underweight was linked to an increased risk of death from non-cancer and non-cardiovascular causes.

 

And being slightly overweight, but not obese, was associated with a significant decrease in the risk of death from non-cancer and non-cardiovascular causes.

 

The study is reported in this week's Journal of the American Medical Association.

 

Body Weight and Death

CDC senior research scientist Katherine Flegal, PhD, who led the study team, tells WebMD that the analysis presents a more nuanced picture of the relationship between body weight and mortality.

 

"I don't think this paper or the previous one can be generalized to make sweeping statements," she says. "There is nothing here that should change public health messages about overweight and obesity."

 

But she adds that in both studies, being modestly overweight was associated with an overall decrease in excess mortality.

 

In the newly reported study, CDC researchers used data from the National Health and Nutrition Survey (NHANES) to link deaths from specific causes to body weight, as measured by body mass index (BMI), which defines fatness and thinness based on height and weight.

 

A 5-foot-7-inch person is considered underweight with a BMI of 18.5, meaning that they weigh 118 pounds or less. Using the BMI measurement, the same person would be considered normal weight at a weight of 119 to 159 pounds, overweight at between 160 and 191 pounds, and obese at 192 pounds or more.

 

In the 2005 study, Flegal and colleagues speculated that carrying extra weight may not be as deadly as it once was because of better management and treatments for obesity-related diseases like diabetes and heart disease.

 

BMI, Age, and Mortality

But JoAnn Manson, MD, who is chief of preventive medicine at Boston's Brigham and Women's Hospital, says that doesn't mean carrying a few extra pounds has no negative impact on health.

 

"We should not become more complacent about overweight and obesity because of these findings," she tells WebMD.

 

"The big picture of health extends far beyond mortality. We know that having a BMI in the overweight range is associated with many adverse health effects, including an increased risk for diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease as well as decreased physical function."

 

The bolds are my own. Her study does not discredit the health disadvantages of being overweight or obese.

 

Yes, rates of certain diseases are rising and yes, obesity rates are rising but it's a mistake to think that because of that it's the obesity that's causing the health problems. It could be that a diet of fast and processed food causes both the health problems AND obesity. In fact, we KNOW a poor diet affects health. But the obesity could be a side effect, not that harmful in and of itself.

 

I see that as immaterial. If a person has a poor diet and doesn't exercise, who cares whether obesity is the cause of adverse health effects or just another inconvenient side-effect? Having a poor diet and not exercising does not make one better off.

 

I do that. I don't exercise like I did at one point but I had a period where I ate less then 2000 calories a day, exercised a minimum of an hour a day and lost 15 pounds. Then I stopped losing weight. I was fit, had lots of energy and strength, felt great. But didn't lose more weight. I suspect I really would have had to step up my exercise to lose more but I was looking for a reasonable level of fitness, not wanting to run marathons or anything. Bodies are capable of carrying fat and being fit. Fat isn't bad after all. It's an insulator and an energy source. It's seem a little irrational to suppose that simply because it's present means it's causing harm

 

Did you want to lose more weight? Because I don't understand whether you're saying it simply was not possible to lose any more weight or that 15 pounds was satisfactory to you and so you didn't wish to go any further with it. If it's the former, I conclude differently. If it's the later, that's perfectly fine. If you don't wish to lose more weight, don't.

 

I don't think fat is bad simply because it's there. But I think it's an outward sign that one is either currently eating more and moving less than ideal or that one did that previously and hasn't burned it off.

 

Anyway, I have more to say, but duty calls.

[nevergiveup]

It seems that from reading all these posts that there is too much empahsis on weight. Even skinny or normal weight women can have too high a percentage of body fat. My BMI is on the higher side for my height but I pack on more muscle than most women and have the biceps to prove it.

 

For my sons, we talk about women and discuss whether or not they think they look healthy. Most of my cohorts and I do not wear makeup so my kids get to see what real women look like. We have also viewed the photoshop demos on Youtube to see how pictures can be altered.