so you're fat? it's all your fault.

[Rostov]

I think this has been an interesting and enjoyable discussion so far, and I think by and large people agree more than they disagree - it's just a matter of what people choose to emphasise the most.

 

It's a difficult discussion to have in many ways, because what underpins people's views on this topic in particular are a broader and deeper set of values and beliefs about individuals and society in general - political, psychological, sociological.  And cultural.  As this is an international forum, we'll have people posting from very different national cultures and traditions  No country's experience is generalisable across the world, even between countries that are - at first glance - similar in terms of development, language, and history.

 

I guess my view is that it's never a good idea to oversimplify, and I worry about oversimplifications which reduce things to a simple, single "choice" about whether to be healthy or not.  Health isn't the result of a single choice, it's an emergent property or consequence of lots and lots of other choices.  For example.... if I choose to have a McBurgerFriedChicken for dinner and not to do any exercise today, neither of those decisions will make me unhealthy in isolation.  Some people who are fit and are a healthy weight will also make this choices, with no significant adverse effects.  The problem comes when the wrong choices are made over and over and over again and start to significantly outnumber the right choices over an extended period of time.  The consequence of all these choices is foreseeable and predictable, but some people won't admit this to themselves, some doubt their ability to change, some don't know how, and some will accept the consequences as the price they pay for the life they want.  Or a mixture of all of those.

 

So.... someone who is overweight and unhealthy can decide to do something about it.  They can resolve to change, but it's not as simple as just 'choosing' to be healthy.  It's much more complicated than that, because it's an emergent property, a change that will only happen as the result of enough right decisions (compared to wrong decisions) over an extended period of time - probably the rest of their life.  We can't just decide "I'd like to be healthy", take the green pill, and suddenly, like that, it's done.  We can resolve as a high level aim that that is what we'll do, but that high level aim will only be achieved through lots and lots and lots of lower level decisions.  That higher level aim should influence those decisions, but it can't control them or bind them.  Hence the importance of explanations - of understanding why we've made more wrong choices than right in the past - and of knowledge and understanding of the science (what works), and how to implement that in a form that works for each individual - what fits our lifestyle and preferences.

 

So, yes, the decision to get fit and healthy starts with a choice to do that.  But that's only the very beginning....

[Raikas]

I never claimed to hate them; also, don't place me on the slippery slope of not being able to discern marathoners from an elementary school mile.

You failed to address the point that I was making- constantly being nice to children, and valuing their self esteem above all else (e.g. giving everyone a trophy for running a mile, or "social promotion") is not a healthy way to raise responsible children.

Kids like that grow up thinking "they can do anything if they put their mind to it" when the cold hard truth is that some people aren't meant to be president/test pilot/doctors.

If they are very lucky, when they're 16, or 18, or maybe 25, they'll realize that in the real world, you don't get a medal for trying.

But that entire diatribe is a segue in to my real point (Which you also failed to address)

 

 

The "kid gloves" thing has already been discussed to death, so I was more interested in discussing the side issue that you brought up (and fair enough if you don't hate the awards - but it certainly sounded like you blamed them for a multitude of societal issues).   For the record, I don't disagree with the responsibility talk, but I do think it's generally better to be tactful when talking about it.

 

 

In any case, I didn't claim that you were unable to tell the difference between a marathoner and a kid, I was making the point that participation medals don't go away in adulthood - marathon finishers get them, corporate training sessions often have certificates of completion, as do continuing education programmes.  And they're not about "self-esteem", they're about validating the experience.  So if someone asks you "Did you run Boston?" or "Did you take the SAP training session?" you can say "Yes!" and show them your medal/certificate. 

 

Similarly, I was also disputing the notion that participation awards (in and of themselves) mislead people to believe that anyone can be equally brilliant at anything.  As I said, the kid who gets only a participation award is not growing up with the belief that he's the equal to the kid who also gets an award for most goals (or whatever).  They know where they fall in the talent hierarchy, as least in my experience.

[Flex Luthor]

I hate participation awards and here's why.

If everyone gets a trophy all the same they never feel that sting of failure. Absolutely everyone should know what it's like to fail. That's what makes the eventual victory that much sweeter.

There are no participation trophies in life.

[Raikas]

I hate participation awards and here's why.

If everyone gets a trophy all the same they never feel that sting of failure. Absolutely everyone should know what it's like to fail. That's what makes the eventual victory that much sweeter.

There are no participation trophies in life.

 

As I just said this in response to jehan but, yes there are participation trophies in adult life.  Continuing education, corporate training, service awards, marathons, half-marathons, triathlons, etc.

 

I also think it's total BS that participation awards mean the kid doesn't notice that they've failed.  The person who drops out of the team doesn't get that trophy.  The person who scores the most goals gets a different trophy.  So those kids can fail and can get extra awards if they win.

 

 

Here's an example:  My co-worker's kid is in a gymnastics program and at the end of every 8-month session

•  Everyone gets a participation ribbon for finishing out the year.
•  Kids who pass their exam and can move up to the next level in the next session get another ribbon
• Kids who hit the high scores on an apparatus at their level get yet another ribbon
• Kids who hit the high score overall across the levels get another.

The kids who only get a single ribbon know that they're not as good as the kids who get four.  It's absurd to think that even the 6-year-olds don't know the difference - those single ribbon kids sometimes cry (or have families scolding them), so they're pretty clearly learning about failure.

[Flex Luthor]

Kids want the stuff. In answer to your question no I do not believe a 6 year old has the ability to make the connection between hard work and more ribbons. I do however believe 6 year olds grasp the concept that 4 is better than 1. It's not the participation awards themselves though that bother me but rather the lack of meaning that is associated with them, especially by kids.

 

The purpose of running a marathon is not a medal. The purpose is to test your willpower, push your bodies limits, achieving something you never thought you could, or many other potential reasons and I should feel good about myself because I worked damn hard and I accomplished the monumental task of completing a marathon.

 

This is exactly what we should be teaching our kids because someone won't always pat them on the back for every achievement. They can, however, always have that good feeling of knowing they put in their best effort, even though of course it sucks to lose/fail.  When you've learned the values of discipline, hard work, and sacrifice to succeed that's the true reward.

 

The everyone getting a trophy thing was aimed at those groups who give all the kids the same award regardless of aptitude.

[Rostov]

I suspect the two of you may agree more than you disagree - just approaching things from a different perspective.

 

Clearly a system that was completely non-competitive which rewarded everyone equally regardless of effort or achievement wouldn't be good.  It's good for children to learn about competition, and to learn to win and to lose with grace and dignity.  To develop resilience.  In particular I'm fond of team sports and team competition to promote these virtues.  This isn't to say that people shouldn't chose non-competitive forms of exercise if they prefer them and if they're more likely to lead to long term healthy habits.

 

Equally, a system in which only the victor is rewarded, and in which second place is the first loser is going to be just as bad, but in a different way.  People are not equal - through the lottery of nature and nurture some of us are more talented than others.  The fact is that no amount of hard work and effort will allow the slowest runner in class to outpace the quickest - and similarly with academic work.  So people need to be motivated to do the best that they can do, rather than necessarily compare themselves with other people.  If only the winners are rewarded and you have no hope of challenging them, the danger is that you get so demotivated you stop trying your best if you don't believe it will make a difference, or if you don't believe you'll get any credit for it. 

 

So.... we need systems that rewards effort/commitment and that rewards achievement.  My sports club, for example, has a 'Most Valuable Player' award for each team, and a 'Most Improved Player' award - both voted for by the rest of the team.  We all know that the MVP is going to be one of a small number of people, but MIP will always be much more open.

[Raikas]

Heh, jpryan, I'd argue with the ability of 6-year-olds to understand winning and that the running for "personal challenge" is only true for people running a first marathon with a goal of just finishing, but I think Rostov is right that we're not really that far from each other on most of this.  Honestly I think the core of our difference of opinion is with this:

 

The everyone getting a trophy thing was aimed at those groups who give all the kids the same award regardless of aptitude.

 

I've never seen a group aimed at kids older than kindergarten-age that doesn't have distinct awards in addition to the participation one.  And 4-year-olds doing activities are just in it for the skill-building, so at that level, the point really isn't competition, so there's nothing dishonest about it.  I don't even see how it would work with older kids - you can't fool 10-year-olds into thinking that the team who scored 4 goals didn't beat the team who couldn't score at all, y'know?

 

If it actually happens, then yeah, I get objecting to that.   But I think that objection  isn't really about participation trophies as much as it's about some kind of freakish obsession with hiding the fact that a competition is a competition.  I'm totally on board with calling that crazy.

[Elastigirl]

Heh, jpryan, I'd argue with the ability of 6-year-olds to understand winning and that the running for "personal challenge" is only true for people running a first marathon with a goal of just finishing, but I think Rostov is right that we're not really that far from each other on most of this.  Honestly I think the core of our difference of opinion is with this:

 

 

 

I've never seen a group aimed at kids older than kindergarten-age that doesn't have distinct awards in addition to the participation one.  And 4-year-olds doing activities are just in it for the skill-building, so at that level, the point really isn't competition, so there's nothing dishonest about it.  I don't even see how it would work with older kids - you can't fool 10-year-olds into thinking that the team who scored 4 goals didn't beat the team who couldn't score at all, y'know?

 

If it actually happens, then yeah, I get objecting to that.   But I think that objection  isn't really about participation trophies as much as it's about some kind of freakish obsession with hiding the fact that a competition is a competition.  I'm totally on board with calling that crazy.

 Not all sports clubs were like that but we did run into it with my son. One year when he was 7 or so he was on a basketball team that didn't count baskets becuawe "everyone is a winner,we don't keep score" But of course the kids all kept score and knew who won.

[Flex Luthor]

I get that we're basically in agreement about the participation awards so I'd rather focus on the second idea I talked about. We all agree kids can distinguish that winning is good and losing is bad. In my experience what most kids cannot distinguish is the connection that hard work and winning have. I didnt figure it out until i was an adult. This is the problem with our society. Few people are willing to work hard to achieve.

[Raikas]

In my experience what most kids cannot distinguish is the connection that hard work and winning have. I didnt figure it out until i was an adult. This is the problem with our society. Few people are willing to work hard to achieve.

 

Well, people are lazy.

 

Actually, I wonder if some of it isn't because of a focus on "winning" as the only valid form of achievement.  If someone realizes that they're never going to win, maybe that makes them less likely to try at all.  Barring people with a degenerative condition, most people can get better at whatever task over time/with practice, but without that perfect combination of natural talent and the time/money to develop it they're just not going to be #1, so if that's someone's focus then they're just setting themselves up for disappointment.

 

I think that's probably the argument for giving kids (and adults for that matter) some kind of validation for just trying.  Pushing the idea that there's value in improving your personal best even if you're still at the back of the pack.  Alternatively, maybe everyone just needs a stereotypical immigrant parent who's going to punish you if you don't work hard! 

[Starstuff]

I think the problem with making excuses and/or "explanations" about why you're not succeeding is that they can become a crutch to avoid working on your problems. You don't have to fix things, because there's a *reason* why it's impossible/too difficult/someone needs to do it for you.

 

I think you are misunderstanding the value of explanations. They are not the same as excuses, and it's very frustrating for those of us who find explanations absolutely necessary to our self-improvement processes to have people conflate them, particularly in response to someone explaining they're different.

 

Because I am an engineer at heart and approach my fitness as an engineering problem, I'm going to use a software development analogy to show how explanations (not excuses) are extremely useful.

 

Imagine you're a software developer, and you've just checked in some code that you ran the necessary tests on. A couple days later, someone from your QA team files a bug against what you checked. In that bug, they leave a detailed explanation of exactly what they were doing when they encountered the problem, what hardware they were using, what software build they were using, and any other relevant details. They also leave a detailed explanation of exactly what kind of error they encountered. Using this information, you are able to figure out where the error in your code is and fix it.

 

This is very similar to how I approach my fitness. If something isn't working, I test and try to identify exactly what isn't working (i.e. find explanations for the failure) so that I am able to craft effective solutions.

 

Now, imagine again that you're that same software developer. Except, in this scenario, the only thing in the bug from QA is a note that reads "something failed, and it's your fault." And when you try to do your own testing to determine what the error might be so that you have some prayer of fixing it, your co-workers tell you to stop trying to find excuses and just fix the problem already, because don't you know that you're choosing to write broken code? But you can't actually fix the code until you figure out what caused the failure.

 

This is what it sounds like those of you who insist explanations and excuses are the same thing, and that telling people their lack of fitness is their fault is a good thing are advocating. Maybe in your fitness methodology, those things are true, but for those of us who approach fitness and an engineering effort, explanations are mandatory, and laying blame is at best pointless.

[Flex Luthor]

I don't think anyone said explanations and excuses are the same thing. Excuses are reasons not to act. Anytime someone tries to "explain" why they cannot act will never succeed. Explanations are only useful to those people who took steps towards success and failed. Figuring out why is a very good thing so they don't do it again.

[Flex Luthor]

I have nothing wrong with people modifying their approach for certain reasons. In your squat example, if somebody wanted strong legs but was missing an arm, there are other ways to achieve that end goal, just not necessarily by squatting. But as you said, if somebody wants it bad enough they will find a way.

[Moxie Hart]

It is hurtful. I have, in fact, been hurt by that statement. It hurt when I was in elementary school and other kids said it. It hurt a couple months ago when I was feeling so damned proud of having lost so much fat and made so much progress in my running and lifting, and some random woman who'd I'd never seen before walked up to me to tell me that, "you know, you wouldn't be so fat if you didn't eat so much." Where I'm from, it's roundly considered rude and patronizing, if not downright invasive, to offer unsolicited advice on another person's medical condition. It's hard to swallow that it somehow becomes respectful if that medical condition happens to be fat.

 

Why do you think this is something you need to say to people? Do you somehow think that fat people haven't been told (over and over, often in really demeaning ways) that they're fat and it's their fault? Do you think somehow their doctors have just neglected to mention it every time they've gone in for a check-up (or a sprain, or strep throat, or a flu shot...)? Because I can tell you, the percentage of fat people who have never heard this is really effin' small. Hell, I'd be willing to bet the majority of fat people have heard it this week.

 

Further, there are a number of scientific studies suggesting that hearing these sorts of comments constantly are detrimental to fat people (a sampling of studies: 1 2 3), and I haven't been able to find a single study showing that they're helpful. Whether or not you think telling fat people they're fat and at fault should be helpful, it doesn't seem to be, and whether or not you think it should be hurtful, it definitely can be. Given those things, it seems a much better choice to leave a person's fatness between them and their medical professional unless our opinions are invited. Kind of like we do with every other medical condition ever.

 

All.of.this.

 

I had to ignore someone on facebook this week because of her "fat people are lazy. There aren't any excuses for it." tirade. Having lost 60 lbs I am far from lazy, but I still have another 50 to go. The point is, I know exactly what I am and I am probably the first one to blame myself. I don't really need someone else pointing it out.

 

It's not helpful, its simply a means for someone to feel superior. 

[Kunai]

How I've always seen it is it's not my fault that I am fat, but it is my fault that I Continue to be fat.

[Flex Luthor]

It is hurtful. I have, in fact, been hurt by that statement. It hurt when I was in elementary school and other kids said it. It hurt a couple months ago when I was feeling so damned proud of having lost so much fat and made so much progress in my running and lifting, and some random woman who'd I'd never seen before walked up to me to tell me that, "you know, you wouldn't be so fat if you didn't eat so much." Where I'm from, it's roundly considered rude and patronizing, if not downright invasive, to offer unsolicited advice on another person's medical condition. It's hard to swallow that it somehow becomes respectful if that medical condition happens to be fat.

 

Why do you think this is something you need to say to people? Do you somehow think that fat people haven't been told (over and over, often in really demeaning ways) that they're fat and it's their fault? Do you think somehow their doctors have just neglected to mention it every time they've gone in for a check-up (or a sprain, or strep throat, or a flu shot...)? Because I can tell you, the percentage of fat people who have never heard this is really effin' small. Hell, I'd be willing to bet the majority of fat people have heard it this week.

 

Further, there are a number of scientific studies suggesting that hearing these sorts of comments constantly are detrimental to fat people (a sampling of studies: 1 2 3), and I haven't been able to find a single study showing that they're helpful. Whether or not you think telling fat people they're fat and at fault should be helpful, it doesn't seem to be, and whether or not you think it should be hurtful, it definitely can be. Given those things, it seems a much better choice to leave a person's fatness between them and their medical professional unless our opinions are invited. Kind of like we do with every other medical condition ever.

 

Didn't see this post when I initially commented on this thread but I like it. Most of it.

 

I agree 100% that telling a stranger they're fat doesn't make you a respectful person for "helping" them. It makes you a jackass. Like you said starstuff, people realize they're fat, they don't need someone to tell them. And second of all, telling someone they're fat without offering them any kind of solution is completely useless.

 

However, there is one instance I will offer unsolicited advice. If someone I know well has let their weight get to the point of it being detrimental to their health, as in +100 lbs overweight, I will say something. It does need to be handled with care. I won't just say, hey you've gotten really fat, you should stop eating so much. Instead I will make sure they know that I care about them, and that I'm concerned. Plus of course offer a couple of suggestions. Again only someone I know well. I look at it this way. If someone you cared about started using heroine, would you stand idly by and do nothing?

[Defrock]

I think this

is relevant, especially at the 14:30 mark.

 

He is a fantastic, educated speaker. He has a 1:30:00 video that is awesome, and definitely worth watching, as are all his videos.

[Flex Luthor]

I think this

is relevant, especially at the 14:30 mark.

 

He is a fantastic, educated speaker. He has a 1:30:00 video that is awesome, and definitely worth watching, as are all his videos.

 

I also abhor food companies that excessively use sugar because of how addictive it is. He is completely right that sugar needs to be minimized and regulated just like tobacco and alcohol because of this. I think another thing people need to realize that, like tobacco and alcohol companies, the food industry as a whole does not care about you at all. They want you to buy the product. That's it.

[Harleytrypp]

How I've always seen it is it's not my fault that I am fat, but it is my fault that I Continue to be fat.

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ THIS ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

is the best way I've seen to address this whole issue.  Good call Kunai.

[makatski]

hmm... one of the listed thing in the article said is to 'create a timeline.' 

 

how do i create a time line? do you guys have any suggestions? 

 

right now my 'timeline' is to get fit enough and hopefully to run a mile without stopping/walking for March 8/9th basketball tournament. 

 

~Maks

[Evicious]

hmm... one of the listed thing in the article said is to 'create a timeline.' 

 

how do i create a time line? do you guys have any suggestions? 

 

right now my 'timeline' is to get fit enough and hopefully to run a mile without stopping/walking for March 8/9th basketball tournament. 

 

~Maks

 

The timeline he's encouraging is probably exactly what you've already laid out for yourself as you work towards running your mile: it's just a written series of goals-by-date to help you push yourself to progress in a steady manner. The C25K program is an excellent example for your situation (and an excellent program, if you haven't heard of it yet).