The Instigator
brian_eggleston
Pro (for)
Losing
14 Points
The Contender
Veridas
Con (against)
Winning
26 Points

We should use the term ‘fat' instead of ‘obese'

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 8 votes the winner is...
Veridas
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/29/2010 Category: Health
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,505 times Debate No: 12654
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (4)
Votes (8)

 

brian_eggleston

Pro

British Government Minister Anne Milton yesterday suggested that doctors should call overweight patients "fat" rather than "obese".

'She told the BBC the term fat was more likely to motivate them into losing weight. She said it was important people should take personal responsibility for their lifestyles.

Professor Steve Field, of the Royal College of GPs, said he agreed with Ms Milton and already tried to use the term fat as much as he could. "I think the term obese medicalises the state. It makes it a third person issue. I think we need to sometimes be more brutal and honest."'

http://www.bbc.co.uk...

The point here is that the fat rarely accept that it is their own fault they are overweight and, until they face the truth, they will never lose weight.

By coincidence, earlier this week it was reported that 50% of women of childbearing age are now overweight.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...

This means, for men who don't fancy fat women much (which is pretty much all men) over half the stock of available girls are going to be complete non-starters.

Of course, the remaining 50% of girls are in huge demand as a result and this causes tensions amongst the men in pubs and clubs who are unable to pick up a decent bit of skirt before chucking-out time.

Sadly, these tensions often escalate into violence, which places a huge strain on the police and ambulance services at night.

And all this because some people are too greedy and lazy to eat sensibly and get some exercise.

The Minister is right - we shouldn't allow these idle gluttons to hide behind the term "obese" any longer – they are just extremely fat people, that's all.

Seriously fat people deserve no sympathy from normal people, it's their own fault they are fat, and if they don't like being called "fat" they should just lose some weight.

This would not only be good for their health but would also relieve the chronically restricted supply of attractive women in pubs and clubs.

Thank you.
Veridas

Con

Thanks for the debate, yada yada yada.

Now then.

Consider for a moment the consequences of you actions Brian. Obesity becomes, well, fatness, hugeness, lardiness, whatever, but that doesn't solve the problem, does it?

See the nice thing about a word like "obesity" is that it's an easily-affixed suffix to words like "dangerously" "morbidly" and so on.

Additionally, obesity as a word is meant to be one up from fat, the same way that love is greater than like, and that hate is greater than dislike, and I quote:

:Wikipedia said:
:Obesity is a medical condition in which excess body fat has accumulated to the extent that it may have an adverse effect on health, leading to reduced life expectancy and/or increased health problems.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

In other words, a fat person is fat, but is at less risk than an obese person. I'm fat, I weigh about a hundred kilograms, but I'm six foot one and I go to the gym and do so to build muscle alongside some cardio training, as a result I've become much stronger physically over the past year but my weight hasn't changed. By the standards of the bullsh!t BMI, I'm obese, looking at me, I still appear to be fat because I can't lose the fat in my face and my stomach, though smaller, is still too round for my tastes, but I'm fat by most people's standards, I'm not obese.

By mixing the two you're putting unnecessary strain on people that are fat and you're making obese people more relaxed, not less, about their weight, because to be fat is different than to be obese.

Additionally...are you really going to focus on women's appeal as leverage for this debate? Has it never occurred to you that there are fat dudes too? Worse yet that these fat dudes may be totally cool with a curvy girlfriend.

Hell, send the fat 50% of the female population my way if they trouble you so much, either I'll get tons of exercise or they will.

Besides, if being insulted motivates you to lose weight then you're losing weight for the wrong reasons, and insults heal pretty damn quick compared to, say, being told you're gonna die.

Insults or death, insults or death, which would you choose? Insults of course.

Not only should obese people be referred to as such, but I think it should be expanded so that dangerously obese and morbidly obese become commonly used terms to refer to them to remind them of the dangers to their health.

Losing weight is pretty hard once you get past the half-stone or so of water that under-exercised bodies contain, and old habits die hard, but you can't seriously suggest risking people's lives and confusing a simple little system of identification simply because you aren't getting enough tail.
Debate Round No. 1
brian_eggleston

Pro

With many thanks to Veridas for his prompt reply, I should like to respond to the points he made as follows:

There is no need for the word obese, except for communications between health professionals. The word "fat" is malleable enough to replace it.

For example, if you say somebody is fat, you might think of a bloke with a beer belly or some bird with a big toilet on her. However, if you describe someone as: incredibly fat; morbidly fat; appallingly fat; hideously fat; disgustingly fat; etc. you form the impression that they have a serious weight problem.

Furthermore, these descriptions have the added advantage of reminding the fat that being grossly overweight is not acceptable and that they should do something about it.

Regarding my opponent's weight it would appear that he is technically overweight but his frame can carry the extra bulk. It also seems as though he gets plenty of exercise. I don't think he is the sort of person most people would describe as a "dirty fat bastard" – in other words, he is not one of the idle gluttons the Minister was referring to.

My opponent underestimates the acute shortage of decent tottie around these days. Perhaps the situation is less dire down in Sevenoaks than it is here in London but I've resorted to shopping on foreign high streets for my fluff these days (get yourselves down to the C�te d'Azur, lads, there's more top quality gash there than you can poke a stick at).

But my opponent raised a good point when he reminded us that there are also fat men. This is true, but what is not true is that they prefer fat women – they are still men which means they are likely to prefer nice, slim attractive girls. And slim girls aren't always grossed out by fat blokes, particularly if he is built like a rugby player or if he happens to be rich.

In conclusion, the whole point of the Minister's assertion was not that we should insult grossly overweight people by calling them fat, as my opponent suggested, rather that we should help them to understand that being seriously overweight is unhealthy and it is not a disease, it is something they can actually do something about themselves.

Thank you.
Veridas

Con

Brian falls for a simple hypocrisy trap, he claims the word "fat" is not to be used in an insult under these circumstances (and yet the minister's assertion is that use of one word is somehow more effective than the use of another in motivating people, which raises questions all of it's own) and yet then goes on to answer the suffix point with words like "disgustingly" and "appallingly" and yet use of these words as prefixes implies personal judgement and thus arbitrary labelling which is just another form of insult, calling anyone "disgustingly" anything is generally an insult unless you're being ironic or you happen to be from some 50's films about airmen that are all "disgustingly charming" or something.

Additionally, Brian states, and I quote, "these descriptions have the added advantage of reminding the fat that being grossly overweight is not acceptable and that they should do something about it."

Unacceptable to whom? To Brian? Why should arbitrary judgement affect the actions of another? Is it not basic human right to eat what we like? Additionally, how would Brian then suggest that someone who is fat for reasons other than high food consumption do? Kill themselves? Have surgery? Both are extreme options and I doubt very many would be willing to do the first or able to do the second.

Brian's counterpoint in general makes it look like he has a simple vanity problem, he continues to talk about the so-called "shortage" of women that presumably aren't overweight and has generalised on the topic of how many women with curves are considered attractive by men of any kind, he's also misquoted, I didn't say all fat guys love fat girls, I asked if he'd considered the possibility that they'd be ok with it, because physical appearance only counts for so much in a relationship, if you want proof of that then check out the marital history of Britney Spears.

And yes, Brian, I am overweight, that was my point, idle gluttony is one thing but if you're going to accuse every single overweight person of that then you're going to become rather unpopular with anyone that weighs more than, say, eighty pounds.

I personally quite like a woman with curves, and especially a woman with pride in herself, if all you want is a lay then by all means go purely on appearances but just because she has the tools doesn't necessarily mean she knows how to get the job done (a phrase which also applies to men, and since this entire debate, in my opinion, makes Brian reek of sexual uncertainty I find myself unable to avoid putting two and two together.)

Also, Brian, I'm single and at the moment I'm not really looking, my circumstances are such that I wouldn't make a very good boyfriend, but I digress.

Ultimately you didn't show how changing the wording would change, well, anything, a rose by any other name but when people think of roses they seldom think of thorns.
Debate Round No. 2
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Ninja_Tru 7 years ago
Ninja_Tru
This is too hilarious, and too difficult for me to vote on since I can't stop laughing long enough to weigh arguments. I liked the language quips back and forth.

I felt like the Con was hitting on something interesting and clever in the first round when he said "By mixing the two you're putting unnecessary strain on people that are fat and you're making obese people more relaxed, not less, about their weight, because to be fat is different than to be obese."

That's a direct turn on what the Pro was arguing. It seems that calling everybody fat would cause *less* people to want to lose weight, which is the opposite effect the Minister was trying to have. If I had seen that again in Round 2, that would have been an easy vote for Con. Alas, it wasn't there.
Posted by Veridas 7 years ago
Veridas
For the record Brian, I did wonder if there was some sarcasm going on, but if I'm honest, I've met a few people who talk like that with straight faces.

Anyway, it's out of our hands now really.
Posted by DarthMaster 7 years ago
DarthMaster
After two rounds, I'll consider the con leading this debate...
Posted by brian_eggleston 7 years ago
brian_eggleston
Ah, I failed on this one. Shame.

I was trying to portray the Tory Government Minister's statement as ridiculous by exaggerating it using overtly sexist and offensive language.

Still, never mind, and I hope nobody (especially Veridas) was too offended!
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by Richardt 7 years ago
Richardt
brian_egglestonVeridasTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:33 
Vote Placed by Derek.Gunn 7 years ago
Derek.Gunn
brian_egglestonVeridasTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by BobMarleyIsDead 7 years ago
BobMarleyIsDead
brian_egglestonVeridasTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:16 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
brian_egglestonVeridasTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Yvette 7 years ago
Yvette
brian_egglestonVeridasTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by wmpeebles 7 years ago
wmpeebles
brian_egglestonVeridasTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by sadolite 7 years ago
sadolite
brian_egglestonVeridasTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Grape 7 years ago
Grape
brian_egglestonVeridasTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30