Why is under-eating more demonized than overeating in society?

[Nightmare99]

I think the experience that the OP is talking about is fairly unique. It has always been my experience that people who over eat and are obese are objects of scorn and ridicule, whereas those who under eat to the point where their health is affected are viewed more along the lines of being mentally ill.

As an aside though, working in the healthcare field has shown me what the long term effects of obesity are first hand. Looking at the shape some of these people are in (amputations from diabetes, unable to bear their own weight for more than a few seconds, soiling and being unable to properly wash themselves), I would rather be put down like a dog than end up in that situation. This movement towards acceptance of the grossly overweight is dangerous, as is calling it a disease. Most of the people in this situation are already full of excuses for why they are the way they are, that adding any more only compounds the problem. There are a few rare genetic conditions tat predispose someone to put on weight, but most of these are glandular, and can be controlled with medication.

I put on 40 lbs when my wife was pregnant. I felt like crap all the time. After maybe a year or so I decided to do something about it. I fixed my diet (fresh veggies, meat, limited carbohydrates, whole grains, no processed sugar or junk), and got back into an exercise routine. I am currently running 30-40km per week and weigh in at 180-185lbs (at 6'1"). I feel better, I look better, and was able to do this while working and with a very young child at home (my wife also works). There is no reason that most people could not accomplish the same thing if properly motivated. It was a real lifestyle change, not a diet. You also really need to look closely at the nutritional information on food since a lot of stuff that is marketed as healthy is really full of garbage.

 

[The Funslinger]

People who under-eat are considered victims of societal standards of body image and tend to be pitied.

Overweight people are considered greedy and lazy, with no self control.

Which one is more demonised again?

True, true. There's this Youtuber, boogie2988, who does these videos under the character "Francis" who rages with a fake voice over shit. But he also does a lot of videos on topics of being fat, and depression and all that.

I'd recommend checking them out. This is a particular one that I found very interesting:

 

[DrunkOnEstus]

I should think any body type beyond "average" gets demonized one way or the other these days.

And isn't that the crux of it, what the fuck is "average"?

By World Health Organization standards, any weight that results in a Body Mass Index higher than 18.5 and lower than 25. Apparently if you have a BMI lower than 18.5 you're underweight, if you're higher than 25 you're overweight (physically unhealthy) and higher than 30 is diagnosed as morbid obesity. If you're anywhere between 18.5 and 25, science declares you "average" - or healthy, which I think is a prettier word.

There's another issue to that, BMI doesn't really tell you shit. It was neat experiment by a mathematician to measure the correlation between weight and height. Each person has different metabolisms, bone/muscle structure, and other factors that make the issue far more complicated than "your height is X, therefore your weight is 'supposed' to be Y". Here's a pretty good video regarding the matter with lots of sources in the description:


Penn & Teller also did a "Bullshit!" episode about it, but they got a bit heavy into genetics being the main deciding factor as if you couldn't exercise and properly eat your way to something that's healthy for you. That's the most important thing, that you're healthy for you and feel good and happy and satisfied, not pleasing the almighty chart regardless.

 

[The]

I'm pretty skinny and all I've ever gotten was slight teases (e.g. "Put some meat on those bones"), but never anything extreme about my physical appearance, not in the demonized way overweight people have been treated.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I should think any body type beyond "average" gets demonized one way or the other these days.

And isn't that the crux of it, what the fuck is "average"?

By World Health Organization standards, any weight that results in a Body Mass Index higher than 18.5 and lower than 25. Apparently if you have a BMI lower than 18.5 you're underweight, if you're higher than 25 you're overweight (physically unhealthy) and higher than 30 is diagnosed as morbid obesity. If you're anywhere between 18.5 and 25, science declares you "average" - or healthy, which I think is a prettier word.

There's another issue to that, BMI doesn't really tell you shit. It was neat experiment by a mathematician to measure the correlation between weight and height. Each person has different metabolisms, bone/muscle structure, and other factors that make the issue far more complicated than "your height is X, therefore your weight is 'supposed' to be Y". Here's a pretty good video regarding the matter with lots of sources in the description:


Penn & Teller also did a "Bullshit!" episode about it, but they got a bit heavy into genetics being the main deciding factor as if you couldn't exercise and properly eat your way to something that's healthy for you. That's the most important thing, that you're healthy for you and feel good and happy and satisfied, not pleasing the almighty chart regardless.

I'm going to side with the World Health Organization and leave crackpots to their webcams, I think. Creds to Penn & Teller though, I have huge respect for those guys, but how's genetics an argument AGAINST the Body Mass Index? It just shows some people have it (genetically) easy to be fit, and others not so much because of slow metabolism. And lastly, about the "feeling good and happy with yourself", I agree with the feelgood vibes, but health is not an opinion, either you have it or you don't.

 

[deathzero021]

although i don't believe that undereating is criticized as much as overeating (mostly due to the fact that it isn't as big a problem in the US as overeating is) i can assume it's used as an excuse to favor overeating more than undereating. i've actually heard quite a lot of chunky people i know who would say something like that. if you criticize their eating habits they react in a manner that says "well undereating is worse so i have to eat a lot!" which doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

the scale maybe tipping in favor of overeating due to just how many people are doing it. more people in society that are doing it means more people who favor it and in turn criticize undereating.

 

[Olas]

I'm not sure what OP is talking about. People who undereat are generally treated, at worst, as victims of either a health problem or societies unfair standards on women. Yet even then you still occasionally get crazy shit like

Because in some industries being normal, or even vaguely human is demonized. But in general nobody will look down on you as a person if you're a little underweight, some people might even be envious. If you're a little overweight however you're a lazy greedy slob with no self control and an extension of everything wrong with America. Being overweight is embarrassing and you should be angry at yourself. That's basically what I've been lead to believe.

 

[absulute]

I am kinda fat myself, and people assume that it's because I'm greedy and lazy.

And they would be right.

 

[hermes]

More demonized? Not really. Just perceived as different problems: Under-eating is perceived as being the result of a mental or social disease. Over-eating is perceived as a lack of mental discipline. Of course, there are other factors, as both can be caused by physical diseases or glandular problems, but those are more rare.

Socially, in most cases, overweight people have a harder time than underweight people. That is because a) in daily life situations, people suffering from underweight are harder to spot than people with overweight, and b) since overweight is perceived as mostly the result of personal decisions, while underweight can be the result of serious illnesses (like HIV or cancer), being extremely fat is considered a fairer target of mockery than being extremely thin.

 

[rasputin0009]

Ya, I've never heard of this "demonizing people who don't eat enough" thing. I've definitely made fun of fat fat fatties, though. I only know one person (friend's fiance) who doesn't eat enough. She's got no energy, she's sick almost all the time, and she's more or less a boring person. I'm pretty sure she's got some deep self-respect issues behind the non-eating, even with a very supportive fiance. I definitely don't demonize her habits, but rather take pity.

But then there's the fat people. I demonize the hell out of fat people habits. It's really not that hard to eat real food and go for a walk once in a while. Seriously, if you eat fast food and take less than 100 steps daily, and expect some respect, go fuck yourself.

 

[DrunkOnEstus]

I'm going to side with the World Health Organization and leave crackpots to their webcams, I think. Creds to Penn & Teller though, I have huge respect for those guys, but how's genetics an argument AGAINST the Body Mass Index? It just shows some people have it (genetically) easy to be fit, and others not so much because of slow metabolism. And lastly, about the "feeling good and happy with yourself", I agree with the feelgood vibes, but health is not an opinion, either you have it or you don't.

The video was more for the sources under it, but I think it's probably safe to just respect each other's opinions here. The point I was getting at I suppose is that the BMI is merely a guideline, not a hard number to cause yourself undue stress over. Even the WHO is considering different cutoffs for the BMI based on different cultures and geographical areas, and stress the different factors that may require interpreting one's BMI differently.

http://apps.who.int/bmi/index.jsp?introPage=intro_3.html

It's an easy to obtain number that simply assigns a value based on your height and weight, and I can't help but believe that weight as it relates to health is much more complicated and difficult to quantify than that. Here's the Penn & Teller video I was talking about in case you were still curious about it:


And here's one that's pertinent to the topic as a whole, probably worth watching:


I hope that you have a good day and I thank you for the healthy discussion.

 

[Zantos]

I'm going to side with the World Health Organization and leave crackpots to their webcams, I think. Creds to Penn & Teller though, I have huge respect for those guys, but how's genetics an argument AGAINST the Body Mass Index? It just shows some people have it (genetically) easy to be fit, and others not so much because of slow metabolism. And lastly, about the "feeling good and happy with yourself", I agree with the feelgood vibes, but health is not an opinion, either you have it or you don't.

The problem here is that you're assuming a certain BMI is healthy, which is the problem people with BMI. It's worked out on your weight and height, but bears no regard to the composition of the weight. A good example of this problem would be with the British and Irish Lions team currently on tour. These are extremely fit professional sportsmen with big frames and large amounts of muscle, yet if you check their stats you'll see that according to the BMI scale many of them are overweight or obese (something like half and a third, respectively). To put it as you did they have health, even though their BMI puts them as people at risk of heart disease and diabetes. You might say that that's just a special case and doesn't count for everyone, which is true, but only in the same way that weight can also be an indicator of being unhealthy. Things like body fat percentage may not be possible to work out at home, but provide a far better picture of someone's health than their BMI.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Over eating is seen as you being a fat greedy bastard for eating to much (not insulting - just how people may think). And under eaters are seen as ill due to anorexia. Eventhough eating can be an illness due to depression and comfort eating.

Amazing to think in victorian times, being fat was seen as a great thing as it showed wealth for sugar etc and being thin was bad as poor peoples diet was vegetables etc.

 

[The AmeriCanadian Gamer]

Amazing to think in victorian times, being fat was seen as a great thing as it showed wealth for sugar etc and being thin was bad as poor peoples diet was vegetables etc.

Its strange isn't it? now being thin (in my eyes) shows money. Some facts about this could be argued, but when I go to the store why buy a single bell pepper when I can buy a box of macaroni and cheese with money leftover? Not to mention many of us don't have time to cook real food anymore. Ugh, what I would do with more time in a day.

OT: I went to school with a girl that went to the hospital for being to thin, almost died. Everyone pittied and tried to help her, while at the same time scoffing at me for having a little extra weight (even though at the time I wasn't that big, but it was middle school, so life sucked)

Edit: I also think ppl need to shift their idea of overweight, well - moreso from a medical perspective. I went to college with a girl that rode dirt bikes, and she was very attractive. About 5'4", not an ounce of fat on her, but she was strong, and her muscle mass pushed her BMI over the edge, and she was considered overweight, despite the fact she had a flat stomach.

 

[GonzoGamer]

There's more money for big industry in overeating. Its harder to make money off people unwilling to consume.

 

[Arkynomicon]

Because starvation is a negative thing. Your body needs the right amount of nutritions to work properly and eating too much is an easy way to make sure you get enough of them.

The best option would be to keep a healthy balance, though.

 

[CrystalShadow]

I should think any body type beyond "average" gets demonized one way or the other these days.

And isn't that the crux of it, what the fuck is "average"?

By World Health Organization standards, any weight that results in a Body Mass Index higher than 18.5 and lower than 25. Apparently if you have a BMI lower than 18.5 you're underweight, if you're higher than 25 you're overweight (physically unhealthy) and higher than 30 is diagnosed as morbid obesity. If you're anywhere between 18.5 and 25, science declares you "average" - or healthy, which I think is a prettier word.

Yeah, but that's from political pressure in and of itself.

25 is actually the midpoint. below 25 is 'underweight', above 25 is 'overweight', because 25 is the exact 'ideal' weight according to BMI calculations.

Incedentally, original definitions put anything between 20 and 30 as healthy, but the whole 'overweight' stigma seems to have killed that, and the extension down to 18.5 still being considered healthy is entirely due to the fact that most models would otherwise be classed as severely underweight.

Bleh. Politics and fashion. The original definition of 20-30 being healthy makes much more sense than the modified 18.5-25 range.
Being slightly overweight is hardly a huge health risk. It's only once you start to really get large that you get serious health problems.
For that matter, someone being in the 25-30 BMI range could easily be due to muscle; It weighs more than fat, and BMI is not a system that takes body composition into account - only weight and height.

 

[Jenvas1306]

to me it seems that these days the beauty standard for women is somewhat underweight. no muscles, no fat, while for men its toned and no fat either. If your bmi is a bit in the underweight range that supposely good looking. If you are just skin and bones you are often considered a victim of such beauty standards or some people just think you are stupid for not eating.
fat people are seem as gross, greedy and stupid, I doubt most pity them ever, they are target of jokes also very often.
I would say that overweight has a way worse image.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Amazing to think in victorian times, being fat was seen as a great thing as it showed wealth for sugar etc and being thin was bad as poor peoples diet was vegetables etc.

Its strange isn't it? now being thin (in my eyes) shows money. Some facts about this could be argued, but when I go to the store why buy a single bell pepper when I can buy a box of macaroni and cheese with money leftover? Not to mention many of us don't have time to cook real food anymore. Ugh, what I would do with more time in a day.

OT: I went to school with a girl that went to the hospital for being to thin, almost died. Everyone pittied and tried to help her, while at the same time scoffing at me for having a little extra weight (even though at the time I wasn't that big, but it was middle school, so life sucked)

Edit: I also think ppl need to shift their idea of overweight, well - moreso from a medical perspective. I went to college with a girl that rode dirt bikes, and she was very attractive. About 5'4", not an ounce of fat on her, but she was strong, and her muscle mass pushed her BMI over the edge, and she was considered overweight, despite the fact she had a flat stomach.

Thats nothing. In victoria time black teeth was a sign of wealth, because sugar was a luxury. Poor people would use soot to make their teeth look black. Now days, bad teeth are a bad sign. lol

My friend is anorexic. I take her out when i can and we enjoy having a meal together. Just when she is at home she doesnt eat much. Its a symptom of something else its a mental issue thats causing it. Its really complicated. Im over weight abit also but im fine with that. Never feel bad about how you look, if your happy with how your are then great. Maybe your friend felt guilt and took it out on you? Same as cheaters always accuse their partner of cheating out of guilt.

But your friend is about the same size as mine. She had a slim build and goes to the gym loads. So they look thinner though they can be healthy. In the UK there were issues because some school kids were given letter saying they are obese. Even though some of those kids were very busy and did dance and sport. Just, as you say, they had muscle mass. But also some kids keep their baby fat (not sure what the proper word for that is) till 7 or so years old.

 

[Xanadu84]

The overeating that is demonized is generally having a few too many ice cream sundaes, which leads to problems in the long term, and makes you less attractive. Its also something that most people are guilty of to some extant. I, for example, consider myself pretty healthy, and I try to pay attention to my diet. But from time to time, I find myself stopping by Dunkin Donuts for the 2nd or 3rd time in a week, when I really should have just bought an apple and a bagel from home. It's something that everyone does, so the low level of overeating is generally acceptable. So most overeating is glossed over. However, it should be mentioned that for people who are particularly overweight, overeating is probably more viciously mocked then undereating. And overeating is demonized more WIDELY, because it is more common.

Undereating is demonized more strongly because, well, overeating may lead to early onset health problems in a decade or 2, but under eating can kill you in months. Overeating can be seen as a lack of willpower, and bad choices regarding something you are doing anyways, while undereating involves seriously hurting yourself when the solution to your problem is available in abundance.You have to go to a much farther extreme to undereat, and the problems are more acute. If a person reaches the level of undereating, then they are already MUCH worse off then the vast masses of people who just happen to like food a bit too much.