Oversensitvity? I don't think so.
So people should be bullied by a national publication by a cowardly bitch like him who couldn't be man enough to say it to their faces or help them in the slightest? Like anything, obesity is a complex phenomena that depends on even more complex psychological and economic phenomena. Some people have eating disorders developed from incessant bullying from looking too different or having a different body type that isn't the society's ideal, some have genetic tendencies from ancestry like any disease while others do it for the hell of it through competition and or mental issues.
Actually, that's exactly what I'm talking about. It's oversensitive to respond so vituperatively to something so impersonal and commonplace, treating it like a concerted, deliberate attack and not a specimen of potentially offensive but ultimately innocuous levity. Going as far as to refer to is as "bullying" is just making my case for me. Bullying is the continued use of intimidation, violence or the threat of violence to elicit fear or establish subordination in the victim. There was none of that present here. This was plain old fashioned ridicule, and even if you're inclined to argue that it shouldn't occur, it does, every day, and these kinds of knee-jerk defensive reactions only ensure that it goes on.
Is it unfortunate that certain individuals feel like they have to make targets of others for their own amusement or elevation? Sure. But it's a reality that we all face, one that's probably inherent to our competitive, animalistic nature, and by protesting it so vehemently you're really just empowering the ridiculer and giving them what they want.
Then cue the fact that fresh and healthy foods are costlier and that many live in the city sans the farms many many years ago due to the industrialized economy , the set up and monotomy of modern society where people rarely have to walk to get to places ... just recall that it wasn't until fairly recent that man lived on the land aimlessly if not in caves while being predated by the beasts of the night so such a sudden progression into an urban lifestyle not seen since the days of the Roman Empire or more popularly Athens/Egypt.
Now you're just making excuses for people being overweight, which is a separate issue and one that doesn't belong in this discussion, although it is revealing as to why you think this guy was acting out of line.
Because the guy couldn't be a real man and talk to them face to face?
Talk to them about what? Obviously this dude's intention wasn't to express concern for and help people improve their physical condition, or he would be authoring books, organizing health seminars, providing personal training instruction, etc. He just got a kick out of seeing fat people in costumes way too small for them and thought others might see the humor in it as well.
That'a bout as tasteless.
Probably. But if all observation was expected to be tasteful then nothing important would ever be said.
It is that bad. I don't stand by this bullshit to incessantly defame and slander people who dress how they want behind their backs like a pussy and being inconsiderate of them in general. And what does them being overweight have to do with anything? They could have been something else like x person is too ugly, shouldn't dress like x character because they are not that race . And I still would have stood up against it. It does not help in the slightest that it is a fitness magazine whatsoever because sorry to break it to you, many of those people probably pick those magazines up .
So it's not okay to impugn someone by using them as a valid example of the overweight masses but it's perfectly acceptable to refer to people that you disagree with as "bitch" and "pussy"? How very consistent of you.
Freedom of the Press does not protect such slander and unprofessional bashing of people, especially since they did not authorize it. Not only now can Men's Fitness be sued because of defamation , but of using them without compensation of any kind because unlike what many people think, people own any images that are taken of them unless they agreed consciously to allow "Men's Fitness" to use them. Considering how paparazzi violate peoples' rights every day, their needs to be a check for this "freedom" written into the law to protect people from defamation unless they sign it over themselves. This however did not happen.
Actually, it does, because this case does not constitute slander. True defamation involves statements or implications that could be seen as misrepresentative or damaging of the character of an individual or a group. Who is being defamed here... fat people? And what counter-claim are they able to present that would make what the author included in his article baseless? Are they not actually fat? How can they include themselves in the number of those defamed without implying that the ideas behind the defamation are true? Not to mention the fact that they probably signed away any rights or expectations of privacy by being part of Comic Con, or, you know, making a public spectacle of themselves in the first place. Besides, the taker of a photograph only needs a formal release allowing them to use the likeness of another individual if the photograph is being used for commercial or advertising purposes. Anything else is fair game, including these geeks' muffin tops and love handles.
Wouldn't you be too in a sense? They are getting exactly what they deserve and if they lose subscribers and customers because of this, it's their fault. I don't want to foster a society that is judgmental or bigoted but at the same time do not want to encourage behaviors such as over eating, anorexia. You know, hate the sin , not the sinner?
What you should be concerned about encouraging is obesity, which is just as much a health problem and arguably moreso in the long term than minor eating disorders. Why is it that we as a nation have such a problem about condemning people who make valid assertions? Being overweight is not a desirable thing, and this asshole and all of his macho friends do have the prerogative to say so even if the manner in which they express themselves is inflammatory or confrontational. The issue here isn't bigotry or bullying or inferiority complexes or any other overinflated term you wanted to use to dramaticize what has happened here. The fact is we're not fostering tolerance by revolting against this guy's article but insinuating that it's perfectly alright to be overindulgent, and that we owe nothing in the way of curbing the destructive behavior of those who would just as soon eat themselves into the same grave occupied by smokers, drug addicts, drunk drivers and the intentionally malnourished.
This same attitude that people should have to the right to be able to pick and persecute others is the same for race , religion, sexuality and simple facial qualities. Doesn't the Holocaust , the Trail of Tears , the African Slave Trade , the Inquisition , the Nanking Massacre or the AIDS Epidemic ring any bells to you?
... you just compared cracking jokes about fat people to the Holocaust and slavery.
Please take a breath and a step back from your computer and think before you make presumptuous and absurd remarks like that in the future.
Forgive me for a being a little alarmed at this article because such things are almost always the first step towards such detestable acts of mankind and we should be trying to get away from this primitive thinking. Not regressing back into it.
You're right, this can only end with the total genocide of fat people.
Nope. They were exactly what was needed. Nonprofessional behavior and defamation of individuals should be reprimanded and punished , not celebrated of cherished. If we were to do that, what would we be as a republic who supposedly protects others from having their freedoms infringed? That means I can take the most unflattering images of you ,and you look like x stereotype or not the ideal looks that society shoves down our throats , and defame/slander you without any repercussions. And that isn't right and shouldn't ever be.
Look, Mr. Smith, nobody is defending what this author had to say about the subjects of his article. It was malicious and ill-intentioned and didn't really serve anyone in the way of understanding or self-improvement. But if you want to start making outlandish claims about the inevitable outcomes of certain types of behavior, then you should know that if we allow people like you to dictate the ethics and consequences of what's put in a medium of free expression then we're all going to end up subjects in a totalitarian society in which self-perceived moral superiorists are going to take it upon themselves to impose judgement (ironic, right?) and punishment on those they deem a threat to the happiness of others.
In summary, **** happens in the world that we would rather not see, and sometimes, if you value a structure of freedom and person accountability, there's just not much you can do about it. Grow a pair and move on.
