I am obese.
Well, I am probably not really obese, but if looking at the BMI index, I am well and truly over the threshold, and have left good health well behind. My BMI is over 33, with 30 being considered obese. But that calculation is an estimation based only on height and weight, but doesn't take into account muscle. It assumes that anything extra is fat. I have some fat, but I also have some muscle, and back in the day when my fat percentage was under 10, I was still obese going on my BMI.
Under 10.... Those were the days....
However a café in Thailand came up with a far better calculator, by building a fence with bars different distances apart. A person can get a discount if they can squeeze through, and the narrower the gap, the higher the discount.
Apparently, the internet is outraged.
Which is the point for the café.
Global publicity.
But while people are saying how appalling it is, and how it is fat-shaming, the thing is, no one has to try to get through the bars, unless they want to try for a discount. But it creates an interesting discussion that I have brought up before, where perhaps larger sizes should pay extra on their size, because they are using more. Food might not be the place to do it, but like I have brought up before, maybe smaller clothes should be cheaper than the larger of the same model.
For instance, a cotton extra small shirt that my wife wears costs the same as an extra extra large of the same shirt - even though it might have three times the material used in it. Cotton is a water intensive material, with something like 10,000 litres needed to produce 1 kilogram of it, so if a an extra small shirt weighs 200 grams, it has taken 2000 litres of water, and an extra extra large that weighs 600 grams has taken 6000 litres. That is quite a difference, isn't it - so why are they the same price? This is the same for the manufacturing of the shirt too, where more time is needed to stitch, more thread is needed, and potentially, there is more waste material in the patterns.
Is this body shaming?
Maybe, but we are also living in a world where the cost of living is increasing, as well as we have to pay for environmental considerations. If a person is smaller, that can mean that all things remaining equal, they cost the planet less, whether it be in the clothing they wear, the amount of food they eat, or the reduction in fuel in transport due to the lower weight. It takes more energy to move more weight - it is simple physics.
Why shouldn't they get financial benefit for using less resources?
But our culture over the years has looked to larger people, and mate selection has also impacted on our size overall. Women might have selected for men that were larger for protection, for status, or just for a larger penis. Whatever it is, tall men tend to get the attention. But, this same selection mechanism also has suitability along other factors too, like money and jobs.
We select our partners within our categories, but generally don't have options up from where we are. 5s don't have many options to marry 10s, but a 10 has many options across the spectrum. Yes, that is an oversimplification, but it is rare still to see a very unfit person, with a very fit partner - unless you are a Russian oligarch. People tend to be "similar" to their partners in fitness level, and as such, they are also going to have children who are similar to themselves.
Are consumer habits genetic?
No. But because we are products of our environments, they are conditioned. And if a child is conditioned to consume in a particular way, they are likely to continue to consume that way into adulthood, even if it is to their own detriment. I don't think there are many parents who want obese children, and unless there is a rare medical condition, it shouldn't be too hard to keep children at a relatively healthy weight, and with relatively healthy activities and habits - but unfortunately, it does seem incredibly difficult, evidenced by the increasing obesity in children around the world. And, this is coupled with increasing mental and emotional control problems too.
I suspect there is a link.
Now, while everyone is "outraged" by the gate at the café, as you can see from the pictures, the people aren't likely Thai, they are tourists. The cost of a meal at the restaurant is under 5 USD, which means the maximum discount is about one dollar. Again... tourists, who have spent many thousands to get here for a holiday in a tropical region, that has cheap food and drinks. It is a gimmick, yet people have made it into some kind of social statement about the world.
But since they have....
Maybe the same people should do some calculations on what they consume, why they consume what they do, how they feel about themselves, and whether there is anything they can change to make them feel better, rather than raging about some restaurant, in a country they will never probably visit anyway.
I wouldn't get a discount.
My wife would. Though since she is usually unable to finish a full meal anyway, I will get to eat her cheap leftovers.
Perhaps this is why I have got so much fatter....
As you might have noticed (or not), this is just for a bit of fun to get my mind out of all the other crap that is going on at the moment around the world, locally, and in my own life. People shouldn't take any of the media so seriously, and instead apply serious to the things that actually matter in life.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]