Customers Called 'Fat' on Restaurant Bill

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

So you're saying that it's OK to shame someone for their behaviour, but it's not OK to shame them over something that they have no control over?

In which case, your logic is saying that it's OK to shame someone for being obese.

You have to make assumptions to think anyone's appearance is fully in their control.

 

[krioto]

He's saying that racists deserve derision, overweight people do not. This line of discussion wow.

Overweight racists - what to do?

 

[LightofRohan]

I hope the gaf health police are at least consistent. Hating on the smokers, getting upset over city-wide pollution, pissed that people don't do the more beneficial walk/run workout, bash alcohol drinkers for not considering their bodies first, raging on the underweight, speaking out against eating disorders.

Or is it just because fat people are icky?

 

[Ponn]

I think it's not their existence, but how they are occupying that existence.

Thats quite a slippery slope there. How are you "occupying" your existence huh? Is it acceptable to an arbitrary groups standards?

I hope the gaf health police are at least consistent. Hating on the smokers, getting upset over city-wide pollution, pissed that people don't do the more beneficial walk/run workout, bash alcohol drinkers for not considering their bodies first.

Not in the least. Some of the pro-mocking, bullying and hating gaffers even admit to being smokers.

 

[scar tissue]

Indeed, racists and homophobes tend to retreat into their views when challenged with vitriol. Those opinions don't go away, they're just suppressed. Education is the key, as it is for the challenge of curbing obesity as well.

.

Shaming is just a way for the shamers to feel better.
"Hurr we sure showed those racists" might be morally superior to "Hurr we sure showed those fatties", but the actual purpose (shamers feel better by asserting superiority over perceived inferior groups) and result (no change in behavior by the shamed) are the same.

 

[SPE]

He's saying that racists deserve derision, overweight people do not. This line of discussion wow.

Let's be clear, I don't believe that public shaming of the over weight is in any way acceptable.

But the logic in here is pretty whack. Why would you shame a racist? Is the goal for them to see the error of their ways and modify their behaviour? If that's the case, then surely the same rationale can apply to the ridicule of the obeset.

In both cases, neither will have the desired effect.

If you shame a racist to say to society that racist behaviour is not OK, why is is bad to do the same to the obese? Obesity is a serious issue (it could be argued that it's more more serious than racism, due to the death toll) that needs to be addressed.

The point that should be made is unsolicited rudeness and offensive to people is not acceptable behaviour.

 

[Devolution]

Let's be clear, I don't believe that public shaming of the over weight is in any way acceptable.

But the logic in here is pretty whack. Why would you shame a racist? Is the goal for them to see the error of their ways and modify their behaviour? If that's the case, then surely the same rational can apply to the ridicule of the over weight.

In both cases, neither will have the desired effect.

If you shame a racist to say to society that racist behaviour is not OK, why is is bad to do the same to the obese? Obesity is a serious issue (it could be argued that it's more more serious than racism, due to the death toll) that needs to be addressed.

The point that should be made is unsolicited rudeness and offensive to people is not acceptable behaviour.

The logic is only whack to you and others who are thinking in some vacuum where all types of behavior are equitable and that to shame one group while not shaming another is some form of hypocrisy. Guess what racists (and people who discriminate) are not equivalent to overweight people, neither are the behaviors either exhibit.

 

[LightofRohan]

Not in the least. Some of the pro-mocking, bullying and hating gaffers even admit to being smokers.

Which kills more every year in the US than obesity does. But you're always a dick if you call out smokers... but, it's ok to harass or publicly shame or embarrass overweight/obese people because being fat is gross!

 

[CHEEZMO™]

Bullying the bullies is hypocritical.

 

[ronito]

Devo/Liu why are you wasting your time?
You've given up on better posters for less.

 

[Devolution]

Devo/Liu why are you wasting your time?
You've given up on better posters for less.

I'm killing time laying down while waiting for my Words with Friends competition.

 

[grumble]

Which kills more every year in the US than obesity does. But you're always a dick if you call out smokers... but, it's ok to harass or publicly shame or embarrass overweight/obese people because being fat is gross!

What? People call out smokers all the time. When I smoked, I got shit about it constantly; some people would look at me like I just beat up a child when I had a cigarette.

And you know what? They were absolutely right. I thought about the health and financial implications and quit cold turkey, never looked back. If people treated it like it was totally okay, it would only have made it harder to stop.

Sure to some people being overweight is grosser than smoking, but vices aren't created equal in all respects.

 

[HiiiLife]

Uh..

 

[Grakl]

Oh, this thread blew up. Excellent.

 

[notworksafe]

Which kills more every year in the US than obesity does. But you're always a dick if you call out smokers... but, it's ok to harass or publicly shame or embarrass overweight/obese people because being fat is gross!

Not from what I've noticed.

 

[SquiddyCracker]

Made me chuckle lol

 

[SPE]

The logic is only whack to you and others who are thinking in some vacuum where all types of behavior are equitable and that to shame one group while not shaming another is some form of hypocrisy.

OK, so you think it's fine to demonize and shame __________ because their behaviour is damaging to society, damaging to individuals and needs to be eradicated.

The only issue here is what groups can be put into the blank. Some think the obese can, you don't.

 

[pigeon]

Obesity is a serious issue (it could be argued that it's more more serious than racism, due to the death toll) that needs to be addressed.

Really?

Really.

Obesity may be a more serious issue than racism.

Not IS. That could be an overstatement! You wouldn't want to look like an idiot. But it MAY be. It could be argued! Not that you're arguing it. Just that, you know. You could, if you had to.

Because nobody dies from racism, but people die all the time from obesity, so obesity is worse. I mean nobody writes "racism" on the death certificates under cause of death, right? Obviously obesity is a more serious issue.

Maybe.

It could be argued.


Keep it up.

 

[captmorgan]

Which kills more every year in the US than obesity does. But you're always a dick if you call out smokers... but, it's ok to harass or publicly shame or embarrass overweight/obese people because being fat is gross!

wait what?, every where I go people call out smokers constantly.

 

[SquiddyCracker]

Not from what I've noticed.

Yeah, and it's really not the same thing.
Smokers are awful because they are breathing out toxic fumes in your vicinity.
A fat person isn't necessarily "a disgusting, stinky pig" as some people in this thread makes it out as.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

OK, so you think it's fine to demonize and shame __________ because their behaviour is damaging to society, damaging to individuals and needs to be eradicated.

The only issue here is what groups can be put into the blank. Some think the obese can, you don't.

I think the more apt way of putting it is that some groups deserve their just deserts.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

OK, so you think it's fine to demonize and shame __________ because their behaviour is damaging to society, damaging to individuals and needs to be eradicated.

The only issue here is what groups can be put into the blank. Some think the obese can, you don't.

Active oppressors vs people just existing. It's not hard.

 

[nib95]

Obesity is worse than racism? Lol.

 

[Devolution]

Obesity is worse than racism? Lol.

Through the looking glass on this one it seems.

OK, so you think it's fine to demonize and shame __________ because their behaviour is damaging to society, damaging to individuals and needs to be eradicated.

The only issue here is what groups can be put into the blank. Some think the obese can, you don't.

So yelling fatty at someone is the same as telling someone yelling nigger to shut the fuck up. Okay. Good to know what some people's reality looks like.

 

[SPE]

Really?

Really.

Obesity may be a more serious issue than racism.

Not IS. That could be an overstatement! You wouldn't want to look like an idiot. But it MAY be. It could be argued! Not that you're arguing it. Just that, you know. You could, if you had to.

Because nobody dies from racism, but people die all the time from obesity, so obesity is worse. I mean nobody writes "racism" on the death certificates under cause of death, right? Obviously obesity is a more serious issue.

Maybe.

It could be argued.


Keep it up.

Come one, son. That's piss poor arguing.

How do you determine how much of an impact something has on a group. Let's use the entire US population as that group. You need to have metrics. Is is something that causes physical harm or morbidity?

If you're looking at something from a public health perceptive, obesity is at the top of the pile. It doesn't mean that racism, or discrimination, or another other of societies woes are no longer an issue.

 

[Skilotonn]

Not cool at all considering they just contributed to your paycheck, Jeff.

 

[Opiate]

You're still shaming though.

Yes, absolutely. The relevant question should then be: is it ever okay to shame someone? Is there any behavior which deserves to be shamed? It is a discussion in its own right, but I already provided my conclusion to this early in an attempt to head your exact position off at the pass:

I'd just add this, which I stated earlier in the thread: the only weaknesses I find inexcusable are cruelty and a lack of compassion. All of the other myriad things we've detailed here (education, professional advancement, financial responsibility, smoking, drinking, etc) are things I can usually understand because no one is perfect, we all have weaknesses, and it doesn't seem helpful for all of us to be pointing and mocking each other over them.

In other words, the only behavior to be ashamed of is cruelty and a lack of compassion -- which is what fat shaming typically is. I then went on and said:

But cruelty and lack of compassion are the two character flaws which civilized societies should not be sympathetic towards. It's almost an oxymoron; just as being "tolerant" does not mean tolerating other people's bigotry and intolerance.

Similarly, we are suggesting that you tolerate other people's weaknesses, but that does not mean we should be tolerant of your intolerance of smokers, or the obese, or the uneducated, or the poor.

 

[Log4Girlz]

If I condemn violence am I a hypocrite for defending myself when attacked?

 

[SPE]

So yelling fatty at someone is the same as telling someone yelling nigger to shut the fuck up. Okay. Good to know what some people's reality looks like.

No, of course not.

One is unsolicited abuse (which I've very clear stated is not acceptable), the other is addressing someone's public statements and opinions. Another example is that as an atheist, I hold all religious views in low regard. I would never hurl abuse at someone religious, but would take them to task if they start preaching their dogma to me.

 

[PhoenixDark]

I wish I could say I'm shocked or surprised by the level of disrespect and bile in this thread, but I'm not. Being fat is unhealthy - most people know that. But that doesn't give you the right to disrespect or demean them. That's basic shit anyone with elementary social manners knows; no one deserves to be demeaned, it isn't helpful or constructive. But given some of the social undeveloped people posting in this thread, why be surprised that some don't know how to act irl.

I'll take solace knowing many of you wouldn't say shit to these women irl, or even go to a restaurant for that matter.

 

[SquiddyCracker]

I wish I could say I'm shocked or surprised by the level of disrespect and bile in this thread, but I'm not. Being fat is unhealthy - most people know that. But that doesn't give you the right to disrespect or demean them. That's basic shit anyone with elementary social manners knows; no one deserves to be demeaned, it isn't helpful or constructive. But given some of the social undeveloped people posting in this thread, why be surprised that some don't know how to act irl.

I'll take solace knowing many of you wouldn't say shit to these women irl, or even go to a restaurant for that matter.

Word, bruv.

 

[Opiate]

Come one, son. That's piss poor arguing.

How do you determine how much of an impact something has on a group. Let's use the entire US population as that group. You need to have metrics. Is is something that causes physical harm or morbidity?

If you're looking at something from a public health perceptive, obesity is at the top of the pile. It doesn't mean that racism, or discrimination, or another other of societies woes are no longer an issue.

No, this is poor argumentation.

Sometimes, metrics don't exist because the topic is so abstract or so complex that we don't yet have a system by which to measure them. How evil was Hitler? Well, we don't have an evil-o-meter, so I suppose we should conclude that he wasn't so bad. In reality, reasonable people can reasonably agree that he was one of the worst people of the 20th century.

Keep in mind that the fact that we don't have a metric yet does not mean none will ever exist; neuroscience is still a nascent field and our ability to measure behavior is in its infancy. But that doesn't mean measurements cannot exist, and it doesn't mean we can't try our best to reach reasonable conclusions even without metrics.

There was a time when Newton's G constant had not yet been calculated precisely or, for that matter, even been thought of at all. We had no way to measure gravity or gravitational acceleration. But that didn't mean gravity did not exist, and certainly any reasonable person would have been able to know an apple would fall to the ground when you let go of it -- you didn't need precise metrics to understand that.

In short: I agree that metrics are very useful, but it is extreme and absurd to suggest that we can reach no conclusions or have any reasonable idea what's going on without a flow chart to guide us.

 

[Devolution]

No, of course not.

One is unsolicited abuse (which I've very clear stated is not acceptable), the other is addressing someone's public statements and opinions.

Most of the discussion here has been about unsolicited opinions and you'd have me and others believe that shaming people who are discriminatory and vile is the same as fat shaming individuals. I have to honestly wonder the point you're trying to make. I do not see the two as equivalent just because they're under the umbrella of "behaviors that people consider to be negative or a detriment to society." The people who honestly believe that are just looking for a justification for shitty behavior and concern trolling. They can hide it as much as they want in sentences upon sentences of rhetoric and or tons of statistics but individual overweight people are not going out of their way to harm others like people who discriminate are, this is a ridiculous and frankly disturbing comparison.

 

[Opiate]

If I condemn violence am I a hypocrite for defending myself when attacked?

If you preach tolerance are you a hypocrite for trying to keep racists and bigots out of the discussion? If you preach kindness towards others are you a hypocrite if you are unkind to someone berating your daughter? To put yours and my examples in together: generally speaking, the one thing we are not tolerant of is cruelty and a lack of compassion.

You can be black, you can be white, you can be jewish, you can be french, you can love skateboarding, you can hate skateboarding, you can love video games, you can hate them, you can think physics is really cool, and you can think physics is really boring. You can be a woman, you can be a man, you can be anything in between. You can be depressed or fat or a smoker or any number of weaknesses that all of us suffer from in some degree throughout our lives. We've all got problems.

The only thing you can't be is a jerk.

 

[SPE]

Sometimes, metrics don't exist because the topic is so abstract or so complex that we don't yet have a system by which to measure them. How evil was Hitler? Well, we don't have an evil-o-meter, so I suppose we should conclude that he wasn't so bad. In reality, reasonable people can reasonably agree that he was one of the worst people of the 20th century.

There are pretty clear metrics as to why Hitler is the most evil person. The death toll and quantifiable suffering caused by his policies and government. He certainly wasn't the first person to hold evils view about Jews, Gypsies etc, but his actions in committing outright genocide against them are unique in all of history.

 

[Opiate]

There are pretty clear metrics as to why Hitler is the most evil person. The death toll and quantifiable suffering caused by his policies and government. He certainly wasn't the first person to hold evils view about Jews, Gypsies etc, but his actions in committing outright genocide against them are unique in all of history.

That isn't an evil-o-meter, that's a death-o-meter. Let's say I hate jewish people. Suddenly, the death toll is not a bad thing, and may in fact prove Hitler to be the most virtuous person in the world. How do you "prove" me wrong?

If we're going to rely on indirect metrics like this, there are plenty of metrics showing that racism makes it more challenging for black people to get a job. I thought we were only relying on direct metrics? Because if anything tangentially related can be included, there are plenty of metrics which show how terrible racism has been. Yes, I agree, there is no bad-o-meter showing precisely how bad racism is.

 

[davepoobond]

won't someone think of the poor racists and fat shamers? how will they ever get by when their intolerant attitudes are criticized

There are pretty clear metrics as to why Hitler is the most evil person. The death toll and quantifiable suffering caused by his policies and government. He certainly wasn't the first person to hold evils view about Jews, Gypsies etc, but his actions in committing outright genocide against them are unique in all of history.

"Being Evil" implies there's some sort of magic involved in this person being the way they are. I don't believe that you can stick a needle in them and measure the evil in their blood. It is not quantifiable.

 

[SPE]

Most of the discussion here has been about unsolicited opinions and you'd have me and others believe that shaming people who are discriminatory and vile is the same as fat shaming individuals.

Please correct me if I've incorrectly judged your position. It just seems to me you think there are some groups that is is OK to give unsolicited abuse to.

My position is there are not.

 

[kittens]

What do you mean? Are you saying society should tease and mock people for being fat? You can be against obesity and promote fitness without being a fucking shitstain about it.

Where's the line between being against obesity and being against fat people? I see your point, but it makes me wonder.

Bullying the bullies is hypocritical.

It's the very definition of being a hypocrite.

You condemn bullying, but you're going to partake in it?

Being mean towards someone is not inherently wrong. Basically: the anger of marginalized people is legit, but the anger of bigots isn't. Perceiving anger as some universal, static expression is the problem with your argument. We're talking about condemning oppressive, sizist, body-shaming behavior. Anger and meanness, while not necessary, are absolutely appropriate expressions in those situations.

 

[Piecake]

I wonder if they tipped after seeing the bill

 

[CHEEZMO™]

Please correct me if I've incorrectly judged your position. It just seems to me you think there are some groups that is is OK to give unsolicited abuse to.

My position is there are not.

Don't make me repost my image, young man.

 

[Devolution]

Please correct me if I've incorrectly judged your position. It just seems to me you think there are some groups that is is OK to give unsolicited abuse to.

My position is there are not.

Who said anything about unsolicited abuse? We've hit a juncture where you, Blasty and scartissue are actually trying to argue some sort of equivalence between fat shaming and bigot shaming.

 

[Blasty]

Who said anything about unsolicited abuse? We've hit a juncture where you, Blasty and scartissue are actually trying to argue some sort of equivalence between fat shaming and bigot shaming.

No I'm not. Those were two separate discussions, which is why I said I'm getting off topic.

 

[Log4Girlz]

I wonder if they tipped after seeing the bill

Tipped over?

 

[SPE]

Who said anything about unsolicited abuse?

Eh? I have and you have...

Let's be clear, I don't believe that public shaming of the over weight is in any way acceptable.

The point that should be made is unsolicited rudeness and offensive to people is not acceptable behaviour.

Most of the discussion here has been about unsolicited opinions

There's not point continuing this, as I think you think that I think something that I don't think. You know?

 

[Devolution]

Eh? I have and you have...





There's not point continuing this, as I think you think that I think something that I don't think. You know?

There is no point in moving forward if you think shaming racists is some form of abuse because that is not at all what I was getting at.

 

[pigeon]

Come one, son. That's piss poor arguing.

It was not arguing. It was shaming. Your position does not command enough respect to merit a considered response (although Opiate has helpfully provided one anyway). It is, however, offensive and probably bad for society to some degree, so I'm doing my part to help out.

Pro tip: when your position is a worse version of a LostVoyager post, you should rethink your life.

 

[SPE]

...

Hmm, seeing as you're the poster who claimed that obese people aren't obese because of what they eat, I am very happy to completely disregard your opinion.

 

[Trojita]

Kapura: Not a fat person.

 

[Alligatorjandro]

A decent person wouldnt make fun of some based on their looks.