You were never a fat person to begin with
Posted Oct 26, 2019, 8:22 PM UTC
13227
I’ve lost weight and plan to keep it off forever. So, if I’m successful, I was “never a fat person to begin with”?!? LOL that’s ridiculous!
Also, “weight isn’t truly lost”?!? What?!? Where IS IT?!?
37
In the couch cushions
16
So any data point that contradicts our theory is rejected as anomaly by our HAES researchers. You either can't lose weight and keep it off or if you can't you shouldn't count because that would contradict our theory.
Also this entitlement of I deserve the affection. Like fuck off you repey little shit. No it's not your God given right for people to offer you sex and relationship. You don't deserve anything from any one just for a fact that you are a woman. Everyone has a choice and if someone choose not to be with you it's perfect valid reason and it doesn't mean you somehow got hurt or mistreated.
34
Yeah, this is like the "no true scotsman" fallacy turned into the "no true fatsman" fallacy or something. If you manage to keep the weight off, you were never truly fat to begin with!
Maybe all those pictures of me over the years were taken using cameras with the special lenses they put on airplanes to make the flat earth look round!
32
I gotta say, no true fatsman is a God damn work of art
8
It's a hallmark of superstition and pseudoscience. There is no falsification possible. Everything that doesn't fit can be explained away.
16
If this is blues research field, then she needs to be fired.
31
At HAES university, she’s a distinguish professor and decorated researcher. They’ve likely named a building in her honor.
24
She's a professor of "Excuse Science"
14
For some reason I have a hard time believing the blue person - she's never dated, yet she's old enough to be a researcher who researches something related to weight?
26
For some reason I have a hard time believing the blue person - she's never dated, yet she's old enough to be a researcher who researches something related to weight?
Because she's from unnamed country where fat women can't date.
That was another problem I had about her posts. She spent a lot of time talking about society, but refused to name her society and instead just said it wasn't the USA. That's not a discussion, that's her giving herself free reign to make stuff up.
29
I've kept off ~40lbs since ~2007. What does that make me?
25
A sTaTiStiCaL aNoMaLy, obvs!
22
Anorexic, duh.
9
If the person had 80 pounds to lose, there’s no way they weren’t legitimately fat.
8
Ahhh! So my keys are truly never lost when I don’t pay attention to where I put them, they’re just suppressed. Got it!
7
"strawman out of a handful of shallow encounters ... "
Hm. Hm. Um ... hm ...
5
[deleted]
1
Surely you are considered a statistical anomaly if you keep the weight off precisely BECAUSE so many people try fad diets that don't work.
They can't seem to see the link and actually think about why things happen.
This person's job is not research.
4
Wow, ok. This is all over the place. Fat people, in the US or any place else I can think of, aren't treated like sub humans. Saying that there is a problem that severely impacts a group of people and then only using your own country makes it the statistical anomaly to be discounted.
I take "field of research" to mean higher education and if her country is so hostile and cruel to fat people, women especially - well, where is she learning this? Her field of research seems like it's at odd with how her society generally sees fatness. For example, I wouldn't expect 1920's American academia to be charitable or even accurate about non-white history.
As someone else said, because her country is unnamed it makes it harder to argue against. But her manner of speech and attitude suggests her country is enveloped in the Western zeitgeist, which further makes me doubt her claims.
4
[deleted]
1
I never understood this line of thought. It takes an astounding amount of willful denial of reality to think that people somehow make optimal choices for their long term well-being all the time.
"If drugs were harmful, no one would be an addict".
"If education was helpful, no one would drop out".
"If seat belts were protective, no one would fail to use them".
"If sugar was bad for your teeth, no one would eat sugar".
"If social media were a largely unproductive use of your time, everyone would quit them forever".
These are all examples of basically the same line of reasoning. "If something helpful could be accomplished, everyone would do it".
What reality do these people live in, where everyone is some kind of an utility maximizing productivity robot? People who actually consistently make choices that are aligned with their long term goals are, in every area of their life are I'd argue, actually very rare. Most everyone else fucks up something or many somethings.
I feel personally attacked. Look, I just have a naturally high Instagram setpoint....
Did you know that self-improvement industry is a ten billion dollar industry?? They want to suppress your shitposting habits, but that's impossible - 95% of people who try to reduce their time spent on social media fail!
For a mere $199, I can coach you in my 10-step Intuitive Redditing™ program that is sure to help you make peace with your social media set point.
Same. But you know, I did the hard work necessary to overcome my internalized productivityphobia and now I have embraced laziness acceptance. Yes, my house looks like shit, there are no clean plates to have dinner from, and I don't have any clean laundry, but I am happy!
[deleted]
Lol
You forgot "if it were possible to get sober, there would be no alcoholics" and "if it were possible to quit smoking there would be no smokers".
When you replace food addiction with some other flavor of addiction, it sounds so ludicrous.
Nono, they mean that if there was a magic pill that I could take to be thin while continuing to est whatever and whenever I want, you think I would choose to be fat?
Permenant weight loss for them is effort and restriction free, indulgence inclusive weight loss.
And the reason why they believe it is effort and restriction free is because they think everyone who is thin is that way genetically
They honestly believe thin people maintain their weight with no restriction. That restriction may be instinctive for some and not self-imposed consciously, but the restriction is still there.
There’s a name for this fallacy, but I don’t remember what it is.