How tall are you?

[Scouse]

you're the one who is apparently so stressed out by someone questioning this system that you resort to calling me a 'retard'.

I admit I get a little frustrated and exasperated when answering the same question three times. Especially when the second time I take the time to expand on my reasoning.

Do you understand the difference between objective and subjective now tho? I like to feel we're at least getting somewhere

 

[miri]

And yet you were incapable of answering a simple question I asked over and over. Like I said right at the beginning, you're the same every time you get on your high horse about something on this forum: you're not interested in a discussion, only shoving your own beliefs down other people's throats.

My entire point was based on the fact that I don't believe (debatable) objective, number-based conclusions about people's weight aren't always the most useful compared to how they feel subjectively about themselves. So don't give me that shit, at least I've tried to discuss this instead of just insulting you like a child.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Do I look obese to you?

Not at all, but ditch that beardy weirdo you're hanging out with.

 

[Scouse]

And yet you were incapable of answering a simple question I asked over and over.

I've answered it THREE TIMES now @miri !!

The post before last was entirely devoted to answering your question - and the reasons why I gave the answer I did!


You don't like the answer - so you're ignoring it. You're fat. Maybe obese. What more do you want? How can I answer the "do I look obese" question better than that?

There you go. FOUR times. I restate my previous assessment of your intellectual capacity as mentioned the third time I answered your question.


Edit:

you're not interested in a discussion, only shoving your own beliefs down other people's throats

What's belief got to do with anything? I'm just arguing that peer-reviewed objective scientific measures are objective measures of something. You're the one who "doesn't believe" them...

 

[miri]

Not at all, but ditch that beardy weirdo you're hanging out with.

I've answered it THREE TIMES now @miri !!

The post before last was entirely devoted to answering your question - and the reasons why I gave the answer I did!


You don't like the answer - so you're ignoring it.

But you didn't answer it, unless your answer is 'no' because you refused at any point to say 'yes you are obese' because that is what BMI says. It deals in absolutes, you are not. Therefore you can not absolutely say that BMI has any worth - which is the entire point. It's a useful guideline in some cases, but like anything it's a dangerous thing to take it as gospel. You said I'm 'fat' and 'probably obese', neither of these absolutely answer my question, which was clearly asked as 'yes or no'. Therefore you didn't answer my question. Moreover, your continuing insistence to point out that there are other factors involved and so on (in so many words, can't be bothered to go back through) surely simply agrees with what I've been saying all along?

Anyway, as you said, I'm quite happy with what/who I am especially given that my new diet means over time I will lose some of the extra weight I'm doubtless carrying. The only thing I dispute is that I am OBESE. I'm not, that's a crock of shit, which makes me therefore question BMI. Even further than that my gf (also in that picture) is borderline overweight according to BMI. As someone who is lucky enough to see her naked daily, I can tell you she's not overweight.

 

[Scouse]

But you didn't answer it, unless your answer is 'no' because you refused at any point to say 'yes you are obese' because that is what BMI says. It deals in absolutes, you are not. Therefore you can not absolutely say that BMI has any worth - which is the entire point. It's a useful guideline in some cases, but like anything it's a dangerous thing to take it as gospel. You said I'm 'fat' and 'probably obese', neither of these absolutely answer my question, which was clearly asked as 'yes or no'. Therefore you didn't answer my question. Moreover, your continuing insistence to point out that there are other factors involved and so on (in so many words, can't be bothered to go back through) surely simply agrees with what I've been saying all along?

Anyway, as you said, I'm quite happy with what/who I am especially given that my new diet means over time I will lose some of the extra weight I'm doubtless carrying. The only thing I dispute is that I am OBESE. I'm not, that's a crock of shit, which makes me therefore question BMI. Even further than that my gf (also in that picture) is borderline overweight according to BMI. As someone who is lucky enough to see her naked daily, I can tell you she's not overweight.

I did answer it - accurately. Your post there states clearly that I have to give a wrong and innacurate answer. You want an absolute black and white yes or no - which is frankly a stupid stance to take. My answer stands - you look fat, I can't tell you whether you're obese - because obese isn't something you "look" - it's an objective technical definition and you can't "look" obese - you either are or aren't according to an objective measurement.

You fail to understand that simple point - despite the fact I've gone to great pains to point that out.

As for your bird being borderline overweight - it's the first thing I thought when I looked at her. "Pretty, but carrying a bit"...

...not as much as you are tho.

 

[Job]

This guy says BMI is a pile of wank

 

[Job]

As for your bird being borderline overweight - it's the first thing I thought when I looked at her. "Pretty, but carrying a bit"...

...not as much as you are tho.

Advise Scouse to delete his personal data

 

[miri]

I did answer it - accurately. Your post there states clearly that I have to give a wrong and innacurate answer. You want an absolute black and white yes or no - which is frankly a stupid stance to take. My answer stands - you look fat, I can't tell you whether you're obese - because obese isn't something you "look" - it's an objective technical definition and you can't "look" obese - you either are or aren't according to an objective measurement.

You fail to understand that simple point - despite the fact I've gone to great pains to point that out.

As for your bird being borderline overweight - it's the first thing I thought when I looked at her. "Pretty, but carrying a bit"...

...not as much as you are tho.

Hahaha. You are fucking insane.

 

[Scouse]

Hahaha. You are fucking insane.

"Technically accurate" is the phrase you're looking for m8

 

[miri]

Sums it up, but not in the way you're going for.

 

[leggy]

That's why Toht moans about tallness being a thing. It's a thing in the eyes of women. Therefore it's a thing.

Of course, it's easy for me to be OK with that at 6'3". But apparently a ten inch cock is also a thing.

It is a thing.... for SOME women. My ex was 6' and towered a good 3 inches over me. And the bitch wore heals to make it worse. But she honestly didn't care about my height. We had chats about it because she was worried that I would be insecure but I honestly didn't care as long as she kept me in BJs.

10"? At my height I could tuck that fucker into my socks.

 

[DaGaffer]

It's a feature of living in a relatively "fat country" m8. When I was my ideal weight (about 8 years ago) I got people saying "you look really gaunt" and "have you been ill?" - I actually had - I'd come back from India and been ill for a week, dropped a stone and weighed a bit under 12 stone. Had about 10% body fat. However, I was still in my healthy weight range.

Was reading an article in New Scientist a few months back about exactly this phenomenom. So many people are now slightly overweight that our physical "norm" has shifted - so when we see people who are the correct weight we now mistakenly identify them as underweight.

That's definitely a "having your cake and eating it" argument (mmm, cake...) Throughout human history "fat" phenotypes have been regarded as more attractive than thin ones. If anything its an extremely recent societal change that values thinness as a standard of attractiveness. So I don't buy the idea that we prefer fuller faces because we've all suddenly got fatter, it doesn't add up.

Interestingly one of the big problems with your "objective" measure of BMI, as that while it is "objective" within its own frame of reference, its not objective when it comes to the effects of the percentage of fat you carry. Long term studies have shown your life expectancy is longest if you sit in the "overweight" category rather than the "normal" category. Life expectancy figures (longest to shortest) go: Overweight>Normal>Underweight>Obese.

 

[Scouse]

That's definitely a "having your cake and eating it" argument (mmm, cake...) Throughout human history "fat" phenotypes have been regarded as more attractive than thin ones. If anything its an extremely recent societal change that values thinness as a standard of attractiveness. So I don't buy the idea that we prefer fuller faces because we've all suddenly got fatter, it doesn't add up.

I'm not saying it's a preference - just that fatter people are now seen as "normal" and traditionally normal people are looked upon as "too thin". I.E. people who you'd look at as recently as the 1980's and go "fattie" you now look at as perfectly normal.

Quick search results in news link (tho the new scientist thing was an actual-science thing)...

[England's chief medical officer] also claimed that people do not recognise that they have weight problems, with 52 per cent of overweight men and 30 per cent of overweight women believing they are a healthy size.

Pretty much people in denial because everywhere they look everybody is fat - so the natural human reaction is to go "oh, I'm fine then"...

 

[DaGaffer]

I'm not saying it's a preference - just that fatter people are now seen as "normal" and traditionally normal people are looked upon as "too thin". I.E. people who you'd look at as recently as the 1980's and go "fattie" you now look at as perfectly normal.

Quick search results in news link (tho the new scientist thing was an actual-science thing)...

Pretty much people in denial because everywhere they look everybody is fat - so the natural human reaction is to go "oh, I'm fine then"...

Politician looking for tax money makes statement. Ooh, news. The mannequins bit is a great example of this bullshit; women in the UK are 5 inches taller than they were in the 50s, this is a function of better diet, not a worse one. Yes there are clearly a lot more properly obese people than there were, but it doesn't mean the definition of overweight or obese is correct, and you have to take anything to do with health in the political arena as tainted data.

 

[Scouse]

Politician looking for tax money makes statement.

Oh come on Gaff. Apart from the fact that I clearly stated the quickly searched for article I posted wasn't science and that the article I was reading in new scientist was (I'd love to link it but I can't) - saying "politician" about this person is slightly disingenuous.


But if if makes you feel better forensically picking that apart, rather than taking my post as it was intended then knock yerself out m8

 

[DaGaffer]

Oh come on Gaff. Apart from the fact that I clearly stated the quickly searched for article I posted wasn't science and that the article I was reading in new scientist was (I'd love to link it but I can't) - saying "politician" about this person is slightly disingenuous.


But if if makes you feel better forensically picking that apart, rather than taking my post as it was intended then knock yerself out m8

Of course she's a politician. She wants money for the NHS. Every single statement anyone "official" says about health has to be looked at through that lens.

 

[Scouse]

Of course she's a politician. She wants money for the NHS. Every single statement anyone "official" says about health has to be looked at through that lens.

Anyone who wants money for something, ever, is automatically wrong or simply lying to obtain it then Gaff?

Seems that we're all fucked considering our society is based around obtaining it...

 

[DaGaffer]

Anyone who wants money for something, ever, is automatically wrong or simply lying to obtain it then Gaff?

Seems that we're all fucked considering our society is based around obtaining it...

Didn't say they were wrong, or even lying (although in that news article, "twisting the facts" was definitely going on) but there's always an agenda.

 

[Scouse]

there's always an agenda.

Spoiler

Gaff, yesterday

But seriously - Yeah, there is. Her agenda is to tell people "look out, you don't realise it, but you're fat"...

 

[old.Tohtori]

So mind me asking what the "end note", so to speak, is here? If not BMI then unhealthy? If not BMI then unattractive?

In short; why is this BMI so important? (if you feel it is)

 

[Billargh]

I envy all you fat fuckers on here, especially the morbidly obese @miri , I really struggle to put weight on.

 

[Scouse]

I really struggle to put weight on.

Why would you want to? If you want mass - build muscle.

 

[soze]

So mind me asking what the "end note", so to speak, is here? If not BMI then unhealthy? If not BMI then unattractive?

In short; why is this BMI so important? (if you feel it is)

If BMI is just used to asses the population and say at 6' tall and 15st statistically you are overweight then it is fine.

The only problem comes when companies like insurance use BMI to judge you as a higher risk and
Increase premiums. Also you could get lazy doctors who decide your BMI is enough to tell you to lose weight. As a measure of health it is a bag of sick. But I conceded as a national way of saying statistically some that height weighing that much is overweight it works as well as anything else.

 

[miri]

I envy all you fat fuckers on here, especially the morbidly obese @miri , I really struggle to put weight on.

fite me

 

[Billargh]

Why would you want to? If you want mass - build muscle.

That's exactly what I do mean, I struggle to eat as much as is required though.

 

[Trem]

In short

*giggles*

 

[Yoni]

It's weird I used to religiously read these forums many times a day but it is threads that start off interesting with some fun jibes here and there and end up in a pointless debate which mean that I can't be arsed to visit as frequently. I'm not saying that I am supremely interesting but I have seen some wonderful characters leave because they can't be bothered bashing their heads against a brick wall and unlike the dull members who make zillion good buy threads they just vanish from our existence. TdC delete this if you like but it need saying....

 

[soze]

It really didn't. The "good" people don't leave because of people arguing because you can simply ignore it. That is just a shit excuse.

What you are saying is that you don't give a fuck what the people who have posted think and that they have ruined the forum for you by posting. Use the ignore button.

 

[old.Tohtori]

It hasn't really changed that much though, not that i don't see where you're coming from @Yoni , but i honestly think it's more to do with people reaching a limit then the forums being that much different. I'd say it's to do with a lot of forum members growing up as well.

Disclaimer; in no way is the above a statement about me not being part of derailments and stupid arguments myself.