Lesbian obesity not just a stereotype

[Maes]

Says this here government-funded and government-approved research, sponsored by your taxpayer's dollars. And it says that 75% of lesbians are fat, period. Can't argue with that, Joe.

Then again I dont understand the "public health concern" aspects of it. I thought the USA has no public healthcare to speak of, let alone one which treats obesity. AFAIK you either can pay your own medical, or you die in the street.

[Doominator2]

How stupid is the government, Spending 3 Million dollars on finding out why lesbians are fat and how duck genitals work, I mean it must be a 1st world problem that lesbians are fat.

[BlueFeena]

I could have told you the vast majority of lesbians were overweight, like, what, a year ago? Welcome to last week.

Maes said:

AFAIK you either can pay your own medical, or you die in the street.

I cannot begin to describe how ignorant you are. If you go into an emergency room, you get treated. Then again, I guess this doesn't fit into your pre-conceived notion so it's unlikely you'll care one way or another.

But hey, with Obama Care now -- that thing the whole world told us was going to be soooo great and magical -- we can now have higher premiums, humongous lines like the British, not being permitted to keep your doctor, the demonization of absolutely everyone and everything that isn't for Obama Care, the complete and utter destruction of the private insurance agency, the socialization of 1/6 of the United States economy, and treatment based on whether or not you voted Democrat in the previous election. Thank you, prince Obama.

Anyways, off to work for me.

[Maes]

BlueFeena said:

If you go into an emergency room, you get treated. Then again, I guess this doesn't fit into your pre-conceived notion so it's unlikely you'll care one way or another.

I have already heard this, but not being denied treatment doesn't mean that everything is fine and dandy afterwards: you will be discharged (?) from hospital with a massive debt hanging over your head (possibly bad enough for death to have been preferable), or possibly even immediately arrested and put to some prison labor, if I understood how the USA works. Edit: my idea doesn't seem too far away from the truth. In an "emergency recovery", they'll kick you out as soon as you can walk on your feet, but they DO keep track of all costs, and WILL try to recoup everything.

Anyway, back to the OT: obesity is even worse for Islamic countries, especially for women. High rates of obesity and diabetes there, probably due to all those sugary drinks they use in place of alcohol.

[Zed]

I agree that there may be more important things to worry about, and it certainly sounds stupid if the media presents it as "the government spent millions to study fat lesbians", but I think that, if done correctly, this kind of research could actually be helpful, and not just for lesbians (or fat people).

[dew]

Maes said:

Anyway, back to the OT: obesity is even worse for Islamic countries, especially for women. High rates of obesity and diabetes there, probably due to all those sugary drinks they use in place of alcohol.

TIL alcohol is what keeps me and mine from going fat. Congratulations, wise western civilization! :D

[Inkie]

wait, aren't 75% of americans in general fat?

[doomgargoyle]

Inkie said:.
wait, aren't 75% of americans in general fat?

I was thinking more like 85%+. America is the land of the fat.

[gggmork]

Maes said:

75% of lesbians are fat, period.

They should sell T-shirts with that written on the front.

[Technician]

Maes said:

Anyway, back to the OT: obesity is even worse for Islamic countries, especially for women. High rates of obesity and diabetes there, probably due to all those sugary drinks they use in place of alcohol.

Middle easterners enjoy a high carb diet. Rice is the hero in most dishes. This can be said for most Asian nations, but oil countries have a higher standard of living that you still won't find in India or China.

[Jonathan]

BlueFeena said:

humongous lines like the British

I can call up and see my doctor the same day, any time I like, or I can see a duty nurse, go to an emergency ward, or a drop in centre, call an NHS helpline, etc. No lines. All for free. I have never faced any delay for treatment in thirty years, and I've never paid more than 8 GBP (13 USD) for any prescription medication, ever. Plus, I can still get private medical insurance and care if I want it.

But yeah, thank god you don't have any pre-conceived notions, eh?

[SuperflyJohnson]

Lesbians are fat because they're always eating out.

I'm here all week, don't forget to tip your moderator.

[dew]

I like how BlueFeena scolds Maes for stereotyping and then pulls utter bullshit out of his ass about the British medicare. The irony is delicous.

[durian]

Zed said:

I agree that there may be more important things to worry about, and it certainly sounds stupid if the media presents it as "the government spent millions to study fat lesbians", but I think that, if done correctly, this kind of research could actually be helpful, and not just for lesbians (or fat people).

Indeed. I can only comment on this from a British/European perspective (though I suspect things work similarly in the US), but this seems to follow the trend of crude and somewhat disingenuous presentations of the situation vis-a-vis government funding for academic studies. Roughly, the way this works is that public funds for academic research are allocated by quasi autonomous funding bodies, who - for each subject area within their remit - assemble a panel, composed of leading academics within the relevant field/s, and this will be responsible for making decisions on proposals for funded research. The applications are typically assigned scores on range of relevant factors, and the overall score will determine whether or not the application succeeds. A key factor here - even in my own field, which is pretty far removed from empirical research - is so-called 'impact', i.e. the relevance of the research to the benefit of society, or the public at large, and any proposal will have to argue its case on these grounds. These processes are highly competitive, and the majority of funding applications are unsuccessful, and - talking from experience - they can be a real PITA, but of course that's how it should be. My point is that the decisions on the allocation of public funds for academic research are not taken lightly, and are typically made by experts in the field, who consider very carefully whether, on a range of relevant factors, the research merits funding. I'm not saying that they always make the right calls, just that things in this case are likely to be more complex than a public body thinking to itself, 'Hey, let's find out why there are so many fat lesbians, that'll be a lark!'.

[geekmarine]

You can always get treatment in the emergency room in the US IF you're currently suffering for a life-threatening condition. To be clear, both of my parents have had careers working in the ER - if you're not suffering something that will be immediately fatal without treatment, you're lucky if you're given a tylenol and sent on your way.

And by immediately fatal, I mean you have to run the risk of collapsing and dying right there in the ER to be treated without insurance. If, say, you have cancer that will kill you in several months without treatment, and you don't have insurance, you're SOL.

Hopefully, Obamacare will ensure that many more have access to health insurance, that's the whole damn point of the thing, but I find it highly questionable to call other countries' healthcare systems broken when the current system requires that millions have no access to healthcare whatsoever. I mean, what kind of madness is it to say, "But if poor people have access to healthcare, it might inconvenience me!" Not that I even buy that argument to begin with, but even if it were true, I don't see how it could possibly be moral to say that your convenience is more important than other people's lives. If the healthcare system depends on people being barred treatment in order to function, that to me suggests there's something wrong with the dang system.

[Gez]

geekmarine said:

I mean, what kind of madness is it to say, "But if poor people have access to healthcare, it might inconvenience me!"

It's a much greater sin that inconveniencing.

Have you heard about the One True God, our Lord Jesus Christ? Well, he hates the poor and he loves the rich. As you know, he is God. God is omniscient and omnipotent and omnipresent and eternal. Everything that happens, happens because God wills it to happen, and everything that happens is part of His plan. This is called Predestination. Predestination goes even further than what happens in the world: it also covers what happens beyond the world, to our immortal soul. As you know, good people go to Heaven, and bad people go to Hell. This, too, is predestined: people who go to Heaven were predestined to be good people all their life, so they are called the Elect. Likewise for the Reprobates, who are damned to Hell since the dawn of time, even before their birth these lost souls were meant to be damned. This is a just system because. Anyway, you have two kinds of people, the Elects who have God's favor, and the Reprobates who do not. Since God is omnipotent, those who have God's favor are blessed and good things happen to them. The Reprobates are cursed and bad things happen to them.

Therefore, logical conclusion time!

Rich people are favored by God and therefore Good people who do not deserve to have their God-given money taken by filthy atheist commies to the benefit of the God-damned poor, because poor people are Evil people who deserve everything they got. If they weren't, they wouldn't be poor, because God is just.

Now that you understand American Christianity, you understand why social welfare is so horrible: it is positively blasphemous.

They will not be swayed by any argument about how it is better for society as a whole, or how on the long term it is to their benefit as well. Anything that is indiscriminately helpful, instead of being selectively helpful only to the wealthiest, is a sin against God.

And if you think that this isn't really the Christ's original message, keep in mind that it doesn't matter. Look at a US dollar banknote. Notice what is written on it. American Christianity isn't based on the teachings of some Palestinian Jew two millennia ago, it's really the Cult of Mammon.

Note how people who are against a functioning welfare state always resort to blaming the poor, saying that they are poor because they are lazy, or worse that they are parasites. The poor are bad people, and you know they are bad people because they are poor. If they were good people, they wouldn't be poor. This is how the world works when you have faith in Our Lord Mammon. And this is also why American Christianity is so firmly in the sola fide camp, because "good works" is codeword for "helping the poor", and to help the poor is to disobey God's will.

We now return to your regularly scheduled fat lesbians.

[geo]

All the fat lesbians I know would protest this. Not kidding. I know some very fat lesbians.

Are there any studies on obese gays? Kind of sexist having just women isn't it?

According to a youtube video, 1 out of 22,000 men have a 6 pack.

[geekmarine]

My bad. Incidentally, your views intrigue me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. How exactly do I please this almighty Mammon, that I may gain his favor? I mean yes, granted, technically I am an atheist, but I'm not above paying lipservice to various deities every now and again just to be on the safe side.

[Maes]

geo said:

Are there any studies on obese gays? Kind of sexist having just women isn't it?

The same study concludes that gay and bisexual men are fitter than average, on the converse. Fat gays ("bears", "chubs" etc.) are really a fringe within the gay community.

If you are hairy/fat/old/balding, you're pretty much "finished" and considered utterly unattractive, from the gay men's point of view, unless you have a partner who's into daddy bears or something.

[Wagi]

BlueFeena said:

I cannot begin to describe how ignorant you are. Let me proceed to complain about "Prince Obama" and tell you that Obamacare will create waiting lines that still have not shown up.

[TwinBeast]

Women get fatter easier than men. Maybe lesbians get fatter because they lack a male presence in their lives. If they were with a guy, then they would be constantly worried about being too fat.

And gay men do the opposite. And straight people balance it out in the middle. And if people are crouching, they can do the duck walk. And if they take off their pants, you can see their genitals.

Sure there are always exceptions, like muscular lesbians, fat gays and people with duck size genitals...

Now where's my 3 million dollars?

[Phml]

I don't care about Lord Mammouth or the British, but I just got a 2 months wait for my next dentist appointment and that's pretty much a best case scenario.

I much prefer for health care to be available for everyone, it's the ethical thing. But it also seems obvious to me if you give more people access to health care then you have longer lines, because, well, there's more patients to take care of. Perhaps some countries have solved the problem and perhaps other inefficiencies are also to blame, but in France that's how it is.

Ironically, here it's the upper middle class that is worse off when it comes to wait times. People working low wage jobs get out at 4 or 5 o'clock and can get an appointment at those hours. If you're working until 7, better hope your doctor can squeeze you in before he's off. You're competing for a spot in a much narrower range.

[Blastfrog]

I think the ideal solution is to allow private insurance to exist while also having a public option. Those that cannot afford insurance are at least guaranteed some form of healthcare rather than none, and those that want their snappier service times with private insurance would be able to keep it. It doesn't have to be one or the other FFS.

Besides which, the public option would set a baseline standard for service that's guaranteed for everyone, and it would thus force private insurers to compete to improve the quality of their own service in comparison. Everybody wins; poor people get treated (even if not as quickly) and more affluent people get even better insurance than they have now.

Of course, corporations hate competition, but fuck 'em, competition is healthier for the market and society at large. If monopoly or oligopoly has emerged from your capitalist economy, it has failed. The economy is supposed to be in place for the benefit of everybody, not just a select few.

[Gez]

Phml said:

Perhaps some countries have solved the problem and perhaps other inefficiencies are also to blame, but in France that's how it is.

Situation in France is that inefficiencies have been hunted relentlessly. The system is now a lot more efficient than it was 30 years ago.

Example of inefficiency: having a hospital where some of the bedrooms are not being used right now, at the moment the inspector takes his survey. These rooms will be ordered closed. How about a maternity clinic where less than 100 births per year happen? Inefficient. Let's close it! Hunting down inefficiency means always reducing the available amount of facilities, even as the population increases. Small town facilities are closed down because they're not 100% full all the time and therefore redundant. Now people need to go to the big city hospital, where there was a 50% reduction in bedrooms. Suddenly waiting for an intervention becomes a lot longer, but look at how much more efficient this now is: 100% full all the time, no longer money is being wasted!

Oh yeah, this also means that if you don't want to wait, you go to the emergency services. So before, emergency was for "every minute count, this will not wait days", and now emergency is for "every day counts, this will not wait months". It's efficient!

And if people don't like that, they can go to private hospitals. They cost as much to the state as public hospitals thanks to subsidies, but they are more expensive to the patient, sorry, customer. So rich people get to be healed, and poor people get to die in a waiting room. EFFICIENCY!

[Phml]

So rich people get to be healed, and poor people get to die in a waiting room.

I'm not anywhere near poor, but I can't afford clinics. Granted, you can say in a life or death situation some people at least have the option of taking a one time hit... Except who's going to tell people I'm a money pinata if I'm unconscious or bleeding out? Are the EMTs going to swipe my credit card in between CPR? Perhaps the blessed Lord Mammouth, deep inside the secret Illuminati hideout, keeps a secret book of All The Rich People and telepathically transmits relevant names to emergency teams so rich people are wheeled off to wealthy clinics.

[printz]

Lesbians being fat was a stereotype? I thought the stereotype was short hair and boring clothes.

[Aliotroph?]

It's funny. I've met some fat lesbians, but most of the ones I've known well were not at all overweight. Short hair and boring clothes were more common.

[Mr. Freeze]

How about instead of "treating" obesity in hospitals, we educate people on healthy food alternatives instead of becoming fat, useless pieces of shit?

inb4 "MUH GENETICS, MUH THYROID, MUH SLOW METABOLISM" etc etc you aren't fooling anyone you fuck

[ducon]

Doominator2 said:

How stupid is the government, Spending 3 Million dollars on finding out why lesbians are fat and how duck genitals work, I mean it must be a 1st world problem that lesbians are fat.

How many dollars/francs/marks were spent for nothing in the XIXth Century when they gave money for researches on logic?

[geo]

Does anyone see obesity as a weakness?