I used to work at Abercrombie. Should I leave this out of my app?

[Status Sciaticus]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I didn't say that their primary demographic was the poor, or that poor people would have more xyz than rich...but they're certainly not trying to exclude them; they're trying to get as many people (poor or not) as possible to buy their products for as high a price as they can afford to charge.

No comment on my first (more relevant) statement?

The CEO said they didn't want their clothes on people it doesn't like because they aren't "cool" according to his definition which included fatties.

Looking at the media, how many fatty boombalaties are cool... Or even likable? Not many.

It's like those feminist uggos that always bring up the objectification of women by men...

 

[KnuxNole]

The CEO said they didn't want their clothes on people it doesn't like because they aren't "cool" according to his definition which included fatties.

Looking at the media, how many fatty boombalaties are cool... Or even likable? Not many.

It's like those feminist uggos that always bring up the objectification of women by men...

And after he said that...he was bashed and people starting suggesting that he probably doesn't shop at A+F due to his plumpness...it blew up like crazy when he made that bold statement.

In addition to the heavier girls making naked photo shoots with A+F gear 😱

I personally think that the way it came out was wrong...there was no need to imply to people they are "uncool" and ruin people's self esteem. There could have been a classier way to express his viewpoint if that's how he really felt.

 

[mehc012]

The CEO said they didn't want their clothes on people it doesn't like because they aren't "cool" according to his definition which included fatties.

Looking at the media, how many fatty boombalaties are cool... Or even likable? Not many.

It's like those feminist uggos that always bring up the objectification of women by men...

Cool, well, you just keep having your own one-sided convo-rant, and I'll sit here and occasionally comment if you say anything notable or ever bring it back to an actual discussion (unlikely). 👍

 

[cs5910]

Man, I bet you got a lot of interviews....

Hehe a lot actually.... Accepted at all! 👍 👍

 

[Status Sciaticus]

And after he said that...he was bashed and people starting suggesting that he probably doesn't shop at A+F due to his plumpness...it blew up like crazy when he made that bold statement.

In addition to the heavier girls making naked photo shoots with A+F gear 😱

I personally think that the way it came out was wrong...there was no need to imply to people they are "uncool" and ruin people's self esteem. There could have been a classier way to express his viewpoint if that's how he really felt.

Yea I agree. Maybe he shouldve just said he wanted aesthetic people to wear his brand.

Cool, well, you just keep having your own one-sided convo-rant, and I'll sit here and occasionally comment if you say anything notable or ever bring it back to an actual discussion (unlikely). 👍

actually, I wrote that comment in response to you saying I didnt address the first point. and actually it can be equated since a lot of people that should wear their size choose not to because they would rather squeeze into a smaller size to feel good about themselves.

A side question: youre not a chubster or a fatty are you?

 

[mehc012]

Yea I agree. Maybe he shouldve just said he wanted aesthetic people to wear his brand.



actually, I wrote that comment in response to you saying I didnt address the first point. and actually it can be equated since a lot of people that should wear their size choose not to because they would rather squeeze into a smaller size to feel good about themselves.

A side question: youre not a chubster or a fatty are you?

Yeah, only you didn't really say that, you just rambled for a while and it was really incoherent. Or maybe I'm tired.

As for the side question: really not relevant and definitely not your business, but I'll bite. I'm chubby for me at the moment, since I've spent the last year sidelined for a torn ACL, but that's more an "I-feel-out-of-shape" thing, as I still fit into the same jeans I did when I had a slight sixpack (more snugly, but whatevs). Now answer me this: why does it matter? All I've really argued thus far is that there's a difference between explicitly trying to exclude a population from your consumer group and selling something self-limiting, like a really expensive luxury item...I don't think my personal fitness is relevant to that discussion.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

Yeah, only you didn't really say that, you just rambled for a while and it was really incoherent. Or maybe I'm tired.

As for the side question: really not relevant and definitely not your business, but I'll bite. I'm chubby for me at the moment, since I've spent the last year sidelined for a torn ACL, but that's more an "I-feel-out-of-shape" thing, as I still fit into the same jeans I did when I had a slight sixpack (more snugly, but whatevs). Now answer me this: why does it matter? All I've really argued thus far is that there's a difference between explicitly trying to exclude a population from your consumer group and selling something self-limiting, like a really expensive luxury item...I don't think my personal fitness is relevant to that discussion.

because I sensed that you were a chubby girl. and clearly I was right. Obviously it makes a difference. Chubby girls complaining about a company that doesnt want their brand associated with them? I doubt you will hear a fit skinny girl protesting them for the same reason.

using my old example, If I said a woman was protesting outside a hooters because it objectified women and then asked you to guess if the woman was as hot as the waitresses or an ugly person jealous of the hot waitresses, what would your guess be?

I debate a lot so I assumed that you might have gotten the connection instead of me having to use the same language as the question to connect the dots, but thats my mistake.

And please try not to use your injuries such as your torn ACL as an excuse for you not being fit. There are guys who work out who are in wheelchairs.. I personally have trained with a torn RC, tendonitis, and golfer's elbow...

 

[gettheleadout]

And please try not to use your injuries such as your torn ACL as an excuse for you not being fit. There are guys who work out who are in wheelchairs.. I personally have trained with a torn RC, tendonitis, and golfer's elbow...

That's actually a bit of an understatement.

 

[Ost3oclast]

That's actually a bit of an understatement.

Wow dude thats impressive!

 

[Status Sciaticus]

That's actually a bit of an understatement.

Wow dude thats impressive!

exactly! I get so sick and tired of people looking for excuses for their own laziness or ineptitude when there are people in much worse conditions in better shape.

 

[mehc012]

because I sensed that you were a chubby girl. and clearly I was right. Obviously it makes a difference. Chubby girls complaining about a company that doesnt want their brand associated with them? I doubt you will hear a fit skinny girl protesting them for the same reason.

using my old example, If I said a woman was protesting outside a hooters because it objectified women and then asked you to guess if the woman was as hot as the waitresses or an ugly person jealous of the hot waitresses, what would your guess be?

I debate a lot so I assumed that you might have gotten the connection instead of me having to use the same language as the question to connect the dots, but thats my mistake.

And please try not to use your injuries such as your torn ACL as an excuse for you not being fit. There are guys who work out who are in wheelchairs.. I personally have trained with a torn RC, tendonitis, and golfer's elbow...

Sorry, I got the connection, but I was hoping you were going to refrain from ad hominem attacks in your arguments. Clearly not. As stated before, I am out of shape, but not chubby...I still fit the same size as when I was in top condition (which I stated earlier). I'm not jealous of anyone's body, I have no problems with Hooters (despite my lack thereof), etc. I admit that I could be in better shape despite my injury, but as I said, I have the same body shape as before, just with lower fitness, so it's really not relevant. I admit that I framed it that way with the intention of showing that I was a fit, active person before and therefore give you a hint as to my body type without getting into a discussion of weight or clothing size. You seem to have missed that part, but then, you seem pretty intent on dismissing my entire argument on the basis of me being a chubster, which is kind of funny because
a) I'm not
b) My argument had absolutely nothing to do with obesity

If you read back through, all I said was that the intentional elimination of a consumer group is a very different issue than the other examples provided, which all focused on expensive products being underrepresented in poor populations. So I'm not seeing the connection to my personal weight, as I neither stated that A&F was wrong to do what they did (nor did I state they were right) nor even mentioned obesity. The closest I came was that people are more likely to wear clothing a few sizes too small if their size isn't sold than if an appropriate size is available, which is simple math, really: ANY possibility > NO possibility.

You have consistently failed to address my actual statements, you have set up this whole straw man where I'm protesting their stance on obesity, and then you 'won' that argument by attacking my motivations based on your allegations of my weight. Well done, I'm sure your debate coach would be proud. 🙄

I'm not even sure what you're trying to argue with me here, given that you have yet to disagree with what I actually said...the only argument I see is you trying to prove I'm fat, and I even if there were proof I could offer to counter that (there isn't; this is the internet) I wouldn't bother. I've had all sorts of hangups and insecurities in my life, but I've been fortunate enough that my body has never been one of them, whether because I got lucky and have a good one or because I just don't really give a flying F#$@ what people think about it.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

Sorry, I got the connection, but I was hoping you were going to refrain from ad hominem attacks in your arguments. Clearly not. As stated before, I am out of shape, but not chubby...I still fit the same size as when I was in top condition (which I stated earlier). I'm not jealous of anyone's body, I have no problems with Hooters (despite my lack thereof), etc. I admit that I could be in better shape despite my injury, but as I said, I have the same body shape as before, just with lower fitness, so it's really not relevant. I admit that I framed it that way with the intention of showing that I was a fit, active person before and therefore give you a hint as to my body type without getting into a discussion of weight or clothing size. You seem to have missed that part, but then, you seem pretty intent on dismissing my entire argument on the basis of me being a chubster, which is kind of funny because
a) I'm not
b) My argument had absolutely nothing to do with obesity

If you read back through, all I said was that the intentional elimination of a consumer group is a very different issue than the other examples provided, which all focused on expensive products being underrepresented in poor populations. So I'm not seeing the connection to my personal weight, as I neither stated that A&F was wrong to do what they did (nor did I state they were right) nor even mentioned obesity. The closest I came was that people are more likely to wear clothing a few sizes too small if their size isn't sold than if an appropriate size is available, which is simple math, really: ANY possibility > NO possibility.

You have consistently failed to address my actual statements, you have set up this whole straw man where I'm protesting their stance on obesity, and then you 'won' that argument by attacking my motivations based on your allegations of my weight. Well done, I'm sure your debate coach would be proud. 🙄

I'm not even sure what you're trying to argue with me here, given that you have yet to disagree with what I actually said...the only argument I see is you trying to prove I'm fat, and I even if there were proof I could offer to counter that (there isn't; this is the internet) I wouldn't bother. I've had all sorts of hangups and insecurities in my life, but I've been fortunate enough that my body has never been one of them, whether because I got lucky and have a good one or because I just don't really give a flying F#$@ what people think about it.

Actually,

1) Your definition of a chubster might be different than mine or of most people, including A&F's CEO.

2) You fitting the same size clothes doesnt disprove that you are chubby. I know plenty of girls that fit a small when they should really be wearing a medium.

3) If you think that the pricing of high end brands is not intentional exclusion, then you are foolish or naive. The production cost of their goods is comparable to other less expensive items.

4) I understand and agree that a larger size would be better for chubbier people for a better fit... but A&F obviously doesn't want larger people wearing their brand which embodies aestheticism and athleticism that overweight people cannot inherently display.

5) Me pointing out you being overweight, and being correct about it based on your words simply proves that bias exists in your statements. Otherwise, I wouldnt have mentioned your weight.

 

[mehc012]

Actually,

1) Your definition of a chubster might be different than mine or of most people, including A&F's CEO.

2) You fitting the same size clothes doesnt disprove that you are chubby. I know plenty of girls that fit a small when they should really be wearing a medium.

3) If you think that the pricing of high end brands is not intentional exclusion, then you are foolish or naive. The production cost of their goods is comparable to other less expensive items.

4) I understand and agree that a larger size would be better for chubbier people for a better fit... but A&F obviously doesn't want larger people wearing their brand which embodies aestheticism and athleticism that overweight people cannot inherently display.

5) Me pointing out you being overweight, and being correct about it based on your words simply proves that bias exists in your statements. Otherwise, I wouldnt have mentioned your weight.

It's not intentional exclusion; it's a company charging the highest price that they can get a large number of people to buy. Many poor people save up for Nikes, and Nike doesn't discourage that; their ads actually cater to a lot of those groups. A company charging a high price is called trying to make money. A company cutting out a group of customers willing to throw money at them for overpriced items is called exclusion, and it's weird.

Again, my point has nothing to do with obesity, and so my weight doesn't indicate bias one way or another. For the record, I am not overweight, but I have no way to prove it over the internet and quite frankly I find it creepy how much you have focused on it. You brought it up, you decided I was overweight, you keep acting as if my admission of being in worse shape than my best makes me obese, and you keep acting as if me being fat would make you 'win' in some way. So, fine...continue believing that I am fat. Believe what you want to, if it makes you feel better. If it makes you feel as if you auto-win the argument, then take that victory and proclaim it to the world. But I find the fact that you care so much about the weight of an internet stranger, and that you derive so much superiority from invalidating someone else's arguments on the basis of their supposed weight to be rather pathetic and creepy. Hell, I find it pathetic that I care enough to continue denying your assertions; as much as I agree that obesity is a problem and can be avoided, I still believe that it's someone's right to make their own choices, good or bad, and I certainly believe that there are far worse things to be than fat. An asshoIe, for example.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

It's not intentional exclusion; it's a company charging the highest price that they can get a large number of people to buy. Many poor people save up for Nikes, and Nike doesn't discourage that; their ads actually cater to a lot of those groups. A company charging a high price is called trying to make money. A company cutting out a group of customers willing to throw money at them for overpriced items is called exclusion, and it's weird.

Again, my point has nothing to do with obesity, and so my weight doesn't indicate bias one way or another. For the record, I am not overweight, but I have no way to prove it over the internet and quite frankly I find it creepy how much you have focused on it. You brought it up, you decided I was overweight, you keep acting as if my admission of being in worse shape than my best makes me obese, and you keep acting as if me being fat would make you 'win' in some way. So, fine...continue believing that I am fat. Believe what you want to, if it makes you feel better. If it makes you feel as if you auto-win the argument, then take that victory and proclaim it to the world. But I find the fact that you care so much about the weight of an internet stranger, and that you derive so much superiority from invalidating someone else's arguments on the basis of their supposed weight to be rather pathetic and creepy. Hell, I find it pathetic that I care enough to continue denying your assertions; as much as I agree that obesity is a problem and can be avoided, I still believe that it's someone's right to make their own choices, good or bad, and I certainly believe that there are far worse things to be than fat. An asshoIe, for example.

1) there are two important aspects a company making money looks at. You are right about the first one : charging the highest possible price. However you forget the second important aspect: a loyal customer base that has returning business. If fat people wear A&F, then it is logical that the brand wont be associated with fitness, athleticism, and aestheticism anymore and could possibly lose business... Therefore excluding a certain population might be seen as a loss, but it is a minor one compared to the losses of a loyal fan base.

2) I am not focused on your weight. I merely pointed out that you sounded like an overweight person by the inherent bias I picked up in your statements. I did not decide that you were overweight, you admitted that you were overweight yourself. Secondly, I did not call you obese so stop bringing up obesity as it is not related to being overweight. There are different BMI classifications for them, and it is not obesity that we are discussing here.

3) Since you did bring up obesity, it might be their right to be overweight, but it is not within their right to demand extra large shirts that fit their overweight bodies by a company that does not make them. The burden of these overweight people also adds to the national tax burden as many of them end up diabetic and are on welfare/medicaid/medicare or any other governmental assistance program.

Frankly, I dont care if youre fit, fat, chubby, fatty, flabby or whatever else. I am never going to meet you or care enough even if I did. The reason I brought it up is because your bias was overt and can easily prevent an impartial approach to the problem.

 

[mehc012]

1) there are two important aspects a company making money looks at. You are right about the first one : charging the highest possible price. However you forget the second important aspect: a loyal customer base that has returning business. If fat people wear A&F, then it is logical that the brand wont be associated with fitness, athleticism, and aestheticism anymore and could possibly lose business... Therefore excluding a certain population might be seen as a loss, but it is a minor one compared to the losses of a loyal fan base.

2) I am not focused on your weight. I merely pointed out that you sounded like an overweight person by the inherent bias I picked up in your statements. I did not decide that you were overweight, you admitted that you were overweight yourself. Secondly, I did not call you obese so stop bringing up obesity as it is not related to being overweight. There are different BMI classifications for them, and it is not obesity that we are discussing here.

3) Since you did bring up obesity, it might be their right to be overweight, but it is not within their right to demand extra large shirts that fit their overweight bodies by a company that does not make them. The burden of these overweight people also adds to the national tax burden as many of them end up diabetic and are on welfare/medicaid/medicare or any other governmental assistance program.

Frankly, I dont care if youre fit, fat, chubby, fatty, flabby or whatever else. I am never going to meet you or care enough even if I did. The reason I brought it up is because your bias was overt and can easily prevent an impartial approach to the problem.

My bias was not overt, as I hadn't stated a position on A&F's attitude yet.
I did not ever say I was overweight; I said I was out of shape. If you get to call those two equal, than my flip-flopping between overweight and obese is fine.

I never said they ought to be able to demand large shirts. I'm on record on some earlier thread arguing that they ought to pay for extra-size seats if they take up extra space, etc. All I said was that A&F's stance on this seems odd for a company; most try to maximize their customer base without lowering prices. They are doing something different.
Maybe if you'd stop assigning me stances I never took, you wouldn't have to argue so much.

As for the bolded...finally you are actually addressing the only real point I ever made! I think that a lot more companies do this than we generally like to admit, but I also think that's intentional. We don't, in general, like to think of ourselves as exclusionary, despite the fact that that's ~75% of our social system. So yes, perhaps it's not bizarre for them to limit their sizing options, but it certainly is bizarre for them to be so overt about their efforts to optimize their image. Honestly, I think the backlash of public statements like that could outweigh the benefits of maintaining their 'select' group. Most people who buy clothes aren't going to stop shopping somewhere just because they have a plus line...the...how did you put it...aesthetic people are going to stand out anyway because they will wear it well, etc.

I think, now that we've become at least marginally civil, I'm done here. I don't like debating with you...you don't stay on topic, you're rude, and you seem rather egotistic. A good discussion can be fun, win or lose, but this is just...not.

 

[Loveless]

Mehc, why are you arguing with someone whose alias is named GandalfTheWhite? I mean, really, this is like Howard arguing with Penny over who can get laid first.

 

[mehc012]

Mehc, why are you arguing with someone whose alias is named GandalfTheWhite? I mean, really, this is like Howard arguing with Penny over who can get laid first.

Cuz I find troll-seeking even more annoying than even this argument...ruins the entire forum experience if I'm always checking for trollishness, lest I seem dumb.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

My bias was not overt, as I hadn't stated a position on A&F's attitude yet.
I did not ever say I was overweight; I said I was out of shape. If you get to call those two equal, than my flip-flopping between overweight and obese is fine.

I never said they ought to be able to demand large shirts. I'm on record on some earlier thread arguing that they ought to pay for extra-size seats if they take up extra space, etc. All I said was that A&F's stance on this seems odd for a company; most try to maximize their customer base without lowering prices. They are doing something different.
Maybe if you'd stop assigning me stances I never took, you wouldn't have to argue so much.

As for the bolded...finally you are actually addressing the only real point I ever made! I think that a lot more companies do this than we generally like to admit, but I also think that's intentional. We don't, in general, like to think of ourselves as exclusionary, despite the fact that that's ~75% of our social system. So yes, perhaps it's not bizarre for them to limit their sizing options, but it certainly is bizarre for them to be so overt about their efforts to optimize their image. Honestly, I think the backlash of public statements like that could outweigh the benefits of maintaining their 'select' group. Most people who buy clothes aren't going to stop shopping somewhere just because they have a plus line...the...how did you put it...aesthetic people are going to stand out anyway because they will wear it well, etc.

I think, now that we've become at least marginally civil, I'm done here. I don't like debating with you...you don't stay on topic, you're rude, and you seem rather egotistic. A good discussion can be fun, win or lose, but this is just...not.

Again, being out of shape is synonymous with not being at your target weight, thus being OVERweight. The difference between overweight and obesity is significantly larger than between out of shape and overweight as you put it.

If I did not pick up on your bias, I never wouldve asked you if you were chubby. How else would I arrive at that conclusion?

As for people shopping elsewhere, you cant make that claim. A&F's CEO made the opposite claim, I'm sure, after talking with his PR and marketing board. Otherwise the plus sizes wouldve existed before he even became CEO.

Im sure after this whole controversy subsides, you will see that A&F will exist as it always has and the chubsters who complain about this will not have had their way. They arent the first to bring this issue up and wont be the last. Its the same issue about fat girls complaining about not fitting into VS underwear and lingerie... blaming other people for your own problems.

And as for me being rude, I disagree. I am blunt yes, but I am not making fun of you or lying about you. As for me not staying on topic, I can concede that I discuss multiple things at once so it can seem that I dont stay on one issue.

And if I have hurt your feelings regarding your weight problems, then I'll go ahead and apologize.

Mehc, why are you arguing with someone whose alias is named GandalfTheWhite? I mean, really, this is like Howard arguing with Penny over who can get laid first.

Does my name suggest trollishness?

 

[TheWeeIceMan]

I'm not reading all of this back and forth argument mess, but imo there is no way you can be considered overweight if you still fit into the same pants as you did when you had a six-pack.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

I'm not reading all of this back and forth argument mess, but imo there is no way you can be considered overweight if you still fit into the same pants as you did when you had a six-pack.

A simple google search would've proved otherwise

http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/healthyliving/fitandfat.htm

 

[Loveless]

Does my name suggest trollishness?

That's not what I was suggesting.

Someone so enamored with LotR as to name his alias after one of the main characters is really in no shape (herp derp!) to be making arguments about aesthetics.

 

[KnuxNole]

Someone should make a cool brand for plus sized men and women. Considering there is a HUGE market out there, it can sink in a sweet profit!

 

[Status Sciaticus]

That's not what I was suggesting.

Someone so enamored with LotR as to name his alias after one of the main characters is really in no shape (herp derp!) to be making arguments about aesthetics.

Nah, I made this account while I was watching LOTR. Im really bad at creating accounts. Took me a solid 30 minutes to decide what character I wanted to be in Skyrim...

Lol Im actually into bodybuilding so aesthetics and self-betterment so my shape is really not too concerning at the moment.

Someone should make a cool brand for plus sized men and women. Considering there is a HUGE market out there, it can sink in a sweet profit!

 

[Loveless]

Nah, I made this account while I was watching LOTR. Im really bad at creating accounts. Took me a solid 30 minutes to decide what character I wanted to be in Skyrim...

Lol Im actually into bodybuilding so aesthetics and self-betterment so my shape is really not too concerning at the moment.

Cool story bro.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

Cool story bro.

why you mad bro?

 

[mehc012]

Again, being out of shape is synonymous with not being at your target weight, thus being OVERweight. The difference between overweight and obesity is significantly larger than between out of shape and overweight as you put it.

If I did not pick up on your bias, I never wouldve asked you if you were chubby. How else would I arrive at that conclusion?

As for people shopping elsewhere, you cant make that claim. A&F's CEO made the opposite claim, I'm sure, after talking with his PR and marketing board. Otherwise the plus sizes wouldve existed before he even became CEO.

Im sure after this whole controversy subsides, you will see that A&F will exist as it always has and the chubsters who complain about this will not have had their way. They arent the first to bring this issue up and wont be the last. Its the same issue about fat girls complaining about not fitting into VS underwear and lingerie... blaming other people for your own problems.

And as for me being rude, I disagree. I am blunt yes, but I am not making fun of you or lying about you. As for me not staying on topic, I can concede that I discuss multiple things at once so it can seem that I dont stay on one issue.

And if I have hurt your feelings regarding your weight problems, then I'll go ahead and apologize.



Does my name suggest trollishness?

Out of shape has nothing to do with weight, it has to do with fitness. I cannot, at this moment, play 9 90-min Ultimate games in 2days and be competitive. Therefore I am not as in shape as I was. The difference between "term that involves weight" and "term that involves athletic ability" is as LEAST as large as the difference between "term involving weight" and "more extreme term involving weight."

You did not 'pick up on my bias'. You started discussing something off-topic, decided I was against it when I hadn't mentioned it at all, decided you were correct that I was overweight, and are now using that 'confirmation' as evidence that the bias existed in the first place.
It's nice that you can keep multiple topics going, but the problem is that I was discussing ONE topic, and you responded to me on multiple topics that I hadn't discussed. I'm more than capable of keeping several threads of a conversation going, but I am sorry to say that I'm not prescient and cannot anticipate the random, irrelevant viewpoints you keep assigning to me.

You're not lying about me, you're just delusional and keep using (inaccurate) weight comments as weapons, which is rude and not actually helpful for debate. You didn't hurt my feelings because again, your assumptions are incorrect and so I don't have a weight problem to be sensitive about...but your attitude is overall quite off-putting. I don't think you can apologize for it, because it's not like you're going to change it.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

Out of shape has nothing to do with weight, it has to do with fitness. I cannot, at this moment, play 9 90-min Ultimate games in 2days and be competitive. Therefore I am not as in shape as I was. The difference between "term that involves weight" and "term that involves athletic ability" is as LEAST as large as the difference between "term involving weight" and "more extreme term involving weight."

You did not 'pick up on my bias'. You started discussing something off-topic, decided I was against it when I hadn't mentioned it at all, decided you were correct that I was overweight, and are now using that 'confirmation' as evidence that the bias existed in the first place.
It's nice that you can keep multiple topics going, but the problem is that I was discussing ONE topic, and you responded to me on multiple topics that I hadn't discussed. I'm more than capable of keeping several threads of a conversation going, but I am sorry to say that I'm not prescient and cannot anticipate the random, irrelevant viewpoints you keep assigning to me.

You're not lying about me, you're just delusional and keep using (inaccurate) weight comments as weapons, which is rude and not actually helpful for debate. You didn't hurt my feelings because again, your assumptions are incorrect and so I don't have a weight problem to be sensitive about...but your attitude is overall quite off-putting. I don't think you can apologize for it, because it's not like you're going to change it.

Actually there are more people that would fit your description of "out of shape but not overweight" than would fit the obesity classification. To say that they are ATLEAST equal is to say there are as many obese people as out of shape people which is obviously not true.

How would me confirming that you are out of shape be construed as delusional? and my comments about weight are true regardless of the terminology used.

And you are right that I am not going to change. People rarely do.

Regardless of this conversation, I hope your ACL heals well.

And its a bit disappointing that you and I will end it on such terms. Its quite rare to find a Firefly fan on these forums.

 

[Loveless]

why you mad bro?

Y u so srs?

Put a 😀 on that face.

 

[touchpause13]

Ok seriously its weird and creepy to be so focused on someones weight on the internet. I'm just sayin. Gandalf u are so in the wrong here.

For the record I think the AFs CEO was a douchy attempt to make their company cool again. I mean AF was cool like what? 5 years ago?

 

[gettheleadout]

Being out of shape is absolutely not synonymous with being overweight. That's just stupid.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

Ok seriously its weird and creepy to be so focused on someones weight on the internet. I'm just sayin. Gandalf u are so in the wrong here.

For the record I think the AFs CEO was a douchy attempt to make their company cool again. I mean AF was cool like what? 5 years ago?

Considering that their revenue for 2011 was 4.1 billion, I think A&F is still pretty "cool" amongst their fan base.

And I am not focused on her weight, I just pointed out that her opinion was biased because she was 'out of shape'. And you're saying its wrong to focus on someones weight on the internet? So is it ok to do it in person?

For the record, I dont approve of A&F's CEO, but I do defend his right to run his company how he wants without being forced to create clothing for some fat girls who want to wear his brand.

Being out of shape is absolutely not synonymous with being overweight. That's just stupid.

So are you suggesting that overweight people are in shape?

 

[Ost3oclast]

So are you suggesting that overweight people are in shape?

I think what he is saying is that you can be of average weight and still be out of shape.

One of my buddies is exactly my height and about 5 pounds less than me at 165 lbs. he drinks huge amounts of beer, doesnt exercise and eats junk all the time. His body reflects his habits.

However, I'm 5 pounds heavier and live a lifestyle nearly opposite of his. I'm in much better "shape" and my body reflects this.

Its less about weight and more about body composition. I think A&F is pretty ridiculous though. I have a bodybuilder buddy who is like 6'4 240. He has like 7% body fat. A perfect physique, yet he can't fit into any of their jeans because his waist is so "big" (although his abs and midline are flawless) oh well.

 

[touchpause13]

Considering that their revenue for 2011 was 4.1 billion, I think A&F is still pretty "cool" amongst their fan base.

And I am not focused on her weight, I just pointed out that her opinion was biased because she was 'out of shape'. And you're saying its wrong to focus on someones weight on the internet? So is it ok to do it in person?

For the record, I dont approve of A&F's CEO, but I do defend his right to run his company how he wants without being forced to create clothing for some fat girls who want to wear his brand.



So are you suggesting that overweight people are in shape?

So aren't u also biased for being "in shape"? and no I don't think it makes any sense to focus on someones weight on the internet because you can't check. And focusing on weight in general is pretty pointless

And I think that ppl who you think are overweight can be in shape. Look at olympic weight lifters.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

I think what he is saying is that you can be of average weight and still be out of shape.

One of my buddies is exactly my height and about 5 pounds less than me at 165 lbs. he drinks huge amounts of beer, doesnt exercise and eats junk all the time. His body reflects his habits.

However, I'm 5 pounds heavier and live a lifestyle nearly opposite of his. I'm in much better "shape" and my body reflects this.

Its less about weight and more about body composition. I think A&F is pretty ridiculous though. I have a bodybuilder buddy who is like 6'4 240. He has like 7% body fat. A perfect physique, yet he can't fit into any of their jeans because his waist is so "big" (although his abs and midline are flawless) oh well.

GTLO said being out of shape is not ABSOLUTELY synonymous with being overweight. I was just trying to point out that the overweight people ( defined using the BMI & Body Fat) scale are out of shape. While it may be true that not all out of shapes are overweight, that connection is never absolute.

The extremely fit who have lots of muscle constitute a small minority and A&F does make XL and XXL for men for that reason. Personally, I am 190 5'8 and 10% BF so I can relate to what you are saying, but if I was not able to fit into A&F clothing, I would just shop elsewhere instead of bitch and moan about it.

 

[Ost3oclast]

GTLO said being out of shape is not ABSOLUTELY synonymous with being overweight. I was just trying to point out that the overweight people ( defined using the BMI & Body Fat) scale are out of shape.

The extremely fit who have lots of muscle constitute a small minority and A&F does make XL and XXL for men for that reason. Personally, I am 190 5'8 and 10% BF so I can relate to what you are saying, but if I was not able to fit into A&F clothing, I would just shop elsewhere instead of bitch and moan about it.

Yeah I can see your point I guess. Personally I can't fit into their jeans and I'm actually really fit. It seems they make jeans for people who not only have tiny waists, but tiny lower bodies in general which only fits a specific subgroup of people. Personally, I think they would make much more if they started opening their market to more people. Maybe not though?

 

[Status Sciaticus]

Yeah I can see your point I guess. Personally I can't fit into their jeans and I'm actually really fit. It seems they make jeans for people who not only have tiny waists, but tiny lower bodies in general which only fits a specific subgroup of people. Personally, I think they would make much more if they started opening their market to more people. Maybe not though?

I can only speculate the reasoning as to why they went that route without being definitive.

The really amusing thing is that this comment was issued in 2006, and the overweight crowd is still demanding plus sizes... Why are these overweight people demanding to wear a brand that clearly doesn't like them?

 

[KnuxNole]

At least A+F could still satisfy overweight guys who could fit into XXL clothes. 😛

Also, I doubt people in their 20s depend on a clothing line to make them "cool". That statement by the CEO seemed highly juvenile.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

At least A+F could still satisfy overweight guys who could fit into XXL clothes. 😛

Also, I doubt people in their 20s depend on a clothing line to make them "cool". That statement by the CEO seemed highly juvenile.

I concur. As I previously state, I dont defend what he said, just his right to run his business how he wants.

 

[Ost3oclast]

just his right to run his business how he wants.

Yep. No matter how stupid or shallow I think it is, he does have that right. We can call it whatever we want, but until his business starts to suffer because of his decisions he will continue as usual.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

Yep. No matter how stupid or shallow I think it is, he does have that right. We can call it whatever we want, but until his business starts to suffer because of his decisions he will continue as usual.

EXACTLY... and the fact that he hasnt been fired 7 years after making that comment clearly shows that his board of directors agree with him, even if they wont publicly admit it.

 

[gettheleadout]

GTLO said being out of shape is not ABSOLUTELY synonymous with being overweight.

1) That's not what I said.

So are you suggesting that overweight people are in shape?

2) Let's have a logic and verbal reasoning lesson:

You claimed the following:

"being out of shape is synonymous with not being at your target weight, thus being OVERweight."

Thus, your claim reduced is simply: "being out of shape = overweight"

My refutation was the following:

"Being out of shape is absolutely not synonymous with being overweight."

Note that I preceded "not" with "absolutely" the denote the strength of the correlation; I did not place the modifier after the relationship, which would in effect weaken the correlation.

Thus, my refutation reduced is simply: "being out of shape =/= overweight."

Now, you ask if I'm suggesting that overweight people are in shape. That claim reduced would be: "overweight = being in shape."

Let's compare that to my claim.

My claim - "being out of shape =/= overweight"
Your proposed extrapolation - "overweight = being in shape"

Note that there is an obvious disconnect between the two relationships. Your suggestion is not a direct conclusion from my claim, so no, of course I am not suggesting that overweight people are, by the fact that they're overweight, in shape. That would be ridiculous.

To put this all in very simple terms for you, fitness is arbitrarily defined based on context. "Being in shape" implies a sufficient level of fitness, but fitness to do what? Exert great force over short time? Exert small force for a great period of time? Bench 2 x BW or run a marathon? And what does this have to do with one's body composition?

You cannot define "being out of shape" by BMI. Especially considering the irrelevance of BMI in the context of someone with above average muscle mass. The fact that you seem to have such a strict view on these concepts is, frankly, concerning.

Is someone who is out of shape overweight? Of course not. My sister cannot do a push-up; I can reasonably conclude, from this and other measures which would be quite reasonably affirmed to represented overall "fitness" (though again this concept is relative), such as her aerobic output, flexibility, etc., that she is "out of shape." She is also at a perfectly normal body weight and composition. Since you seem to give the BMI scale some credibility, her BMI is centered in the normal range.

Many, many people, are not "overweight" by any definition, but placed in numerous contexts of "fitness" would be "out of shape."

As a side note I suggest you give little credence to your body fat measurement unless you've been hydrostatically weighed or DXA scanned.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

1) That's not what I said.



2) Let's have a logic and verbal reasoning lesson:

You claimed the following:

"being out of shape is synonymous with not being at your target weight, thus being OVERweight."

Thus, your claim reduced is simply: "being out of shape = overweight"

My refutation was the following:

"Being out of shape is absolutely not synonymous with being overweight."

Note that I preceded "not" with "absolutely" the denote the strength of the correlation; I did not place the modifier after the relationship, which would in effect weaken the correlation.

Thus, my refutation reduced is simply: "being out of shape =/= overweight."

Now, you ask if I'm suggesting that overweight people are in shape. That claim reduced would be: "overweight = being in shape."

Let's compare that to my claim.

My claim - "being out of shape =/= overweight"
Your proposed extrapolation - "overweight = being in shape"

Note that there is an obvious disconnect between the two relationships. Your suggestion is not a direct conclusion from my claim, so no, of course I am not suggesting that overweight people are, by the fact that they're overweight, in shape. That would be ridiculous.

To put this all in very simple terms for you, fitness is arbitrarily defined based on context. "Being in shape" implies a sufficient level of fitness, but fitness to do what? Exert great force over short time? Exert small force for a great period of time? Bench 2 x BW or run a marathon? And what does this have to do with one's body composition?

You cannot define "being out of shape" by BMI. Especially considering the irrelevance of BMI in the context of someone with above average muscle mass. The fact that you seem to have such a strict view on these concepts is, frankly, concerning.

Is someone who is out of shape overweight? Of course not. My sister cannot do a push-up; I can reasonably conclude, from this and other measures which would be quite reasonably affirmed to represented overall "fitness" (though again this concept is relative), such as her aerobic output, flexibility, etc., that she is "out of shape." She is also at a perfectly normal body weight and composition. Since you seem to give the BMI scale some credibility, her BMI is centered in the normal range.

Many, many people, are not "overweight" by any definition, but placed in numerous contexts of "fitness" would be "out of shape."

As a side note I suggest you give little credence to your body fat measurement unless you've been hydrostatically weighed or DXA scanned.

I understood your 'absolute' to mean that it works in all cases. Thats my mistake for reading it differently than what you meant.

Again, I understand the BMI scale is outdated for people who have more than the average amount of muscle mass by weight. However, how many people fit into that category when compared to those with higher BMI due to a higher BF%?

Not many.
http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/news/testimony/obesity07162003.html
2 out 3 americans are overweight or obese. Thus the BMI scale will be correct for them. the other 1/3 are not overweight, but the BMI scale will work for them as well unless they fit into the minority that have larger than average muscle mass.

I have had my BF measured through a DEXA scan which came out to ~10%

 

[gettheleadout]

I understood your 'absolute' to mean that it works in all cases. Thats my mistake for reading it differently than what you meant.

Again, I understand the BMI scale is outdated for people who have more than the average amount of muscle mass by weight. However, how many people fit into that category when compared to those with higher BMI due to a higher BF%?

It doesn't matter, that was just a comment on the BMI scale as a particular measure of body composition. It doesn't change the fact that being out of shape is not synonymous with being overweight.

Not many.
http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/news/testimony/obesity07162003.html
2 out 3 americans are overweight or obese. Thus the BMI scale will be correct for them. the other 1/3 are not overweight, but the BMI scale will work for them as well unless they fit into the minority that have larger than average muscle mass.

Not that I disagree that obesity is a problem in this country, but that statistic was probably arrived at by evaluating population distribution along the BMI scale, so your conclusion would be tautological.

I have had my BF measured through a DEXA scan which came out to ~10%

Well congrats. Bottom line is there are plenty of people who are out of shape but not overweight, therefore the two descriptors are not synonymous.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

It doesn't matter, that was just a comment on the BMI scale as a particular measure of body composition. It doesn't change the fact that being out of shape is not synonymous with being overweight.


Not that I disagree that obesity is a problem in this country, but that statistic was probably arrived at by evaluating population distribution along the BMI scale, so your conclusion would be tautological.



Well congrats. Bottom line is there are plenty of people who are out of shape but not overweight, therefore the two descriptors are not synonymous.

We cant just blindly assume that they used the BMI scale to arrive that that conclusion.

Self-identifying as being out of shape doesnt necessarily mean that they are not overweight.

I do agree that it is not true in all cases, but a majority of people who are out of shape are also overweight are they not?

 

[gettheleadout]

We cant just blindly assume that they used the BMI scale to arrive that that conclusion.

A good point, and in turns out that the statistics on obesity in the US come from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (as cited by the CDC), which includes, in recent years, a DXA for body composition for selected participants.

Self-identifying as being out of shape doesnt necessarily mean that they are not overweight.

Of course not, but that has nothing to do with the fact that "being out of shape" is not sufficient qualification for being "overweight."

I do agree that it is not true in all cases, but a majority of people who are out of shape are also overweight are they not?

I have no idea, I would have to see data on this. I can say that I would believe that a lot of people who are overweight are out of shape, and I would also believe a lot of people who are out of shape are overweight. That still doesn't mean the two are synonymous terms.

 

[a1b2c3d4]

A job is a job. It shows that you're punctual and responsible. For this reason alone, I would include it in my app.