5 ms·
Fat Men's Clubs (2016)
- demondemidi 3y agoThey are certainly dapper a/f. Nice suits.
- anonu 3y agoI wonder what we do in today's culture and society which we'll look back on and think, wtf were we thinking? Today most young kids are glued to an iPad. At dinner, in the car, at home, everywhere. Maybe we'll look back at this behavior one day, similar to how we think of smoking or eating too much.
- clearcoat 3y agoI think that's gonna be a hell of a long list.
- jaggederest 3y agoHyperbolically, you could just round up to "all major changes in day to day general human behavior since 1890, except indoor plumbing, vitamin supplementation, and vaccination" and be within shouting distance.
- bee_rider 3y agoOutlawing child labor was a good move IMO.
- hindsightbias 3y agoIf it’s fine for farm kids, it’s fine for any kid.
- cf141q5325 3y agoThats entirely depended on the context and assumes some other safeguards exist. Outlawing alone can be utterly horrific, there are quite a few examples of child labor unions (as in working children) fighting such laws. Its no surprise seeing as when there are no social safety nets they are at real direct threat of starvation once they loose their jobs. This sometimes being seen as an acceptable cost to not have to look at working children gets us into the very much evil category. Its quite gut wrenching how often such distanced simplified signaling results in horrific situations for the people on the ground, even without bad intentions.
- houseatrielah 3y agoI see the teens at the bus-stop and wow they are ruining their posture for life. Its very sad.
- scoot 3y agoAs if those of us glued to a laptop for the last 20+ years haven't already... And yes I have nerd-neck and I wish I could fix it, but I fear it's too late. Despite which, my habits persist <facepalm emoji>.
- jaggederest 3y agoTo be briefly serious, there are basically three colliding things here: a) posture is dramatically overrated, in general. Having good posture confers few benefits. Would love to see studies refuting this but I'm not aware of any. b) Posture is a habit. If you change your habits, it will change. There's no magic to it. Just remember to sit straight. If it's uncomfortable... that's just how it is. I don't recommend it. People have been lounging and slouching since we started walking upright. c) Postural muscles are often weak, so general strength and conditioning can make a big difference in how taxing it is to use your postural muscles often. A deadlift and some heavy shrugs or farmer's carry are often more effective in my personal experience than any amount of reminders and bracing. Anyway, there's no time like the present to make a change like that, and you're never too old to start. People in their 70s benefit markedly from strength endurance training and calisthenics as long as they're slow and cautious about ramping it up. I don't imagine you're 70, but even if you are, get a doctor's signoff and go nuts.
- nunez 3y agoBad posture throws off your kinetic chain and forces your joints and muscles to compensate in ways that are not ideal. For example, anterior pelvic tilt, which usually comes from being hunched over on a keyboard, causes gait problems (since your lower spine is curved more outwards than it should be), which causes additional stress to knees, ankles, and the lower back that can become problematic later in life. Then there's "tech neck", which happens when your neck is craned downwards towards a device for far far longer than it should be (yay infinite scrolling and endless content juiced for constant micro dopamine hits!). This causes your shoulders and traps to compensate for this unnatural position, which can lead to upper back injuries. Endemic back problems are basically game over for a comfortable lifestyle. You use your back for EVERYTHING, especially lifting things. Once you have irreversible back damage, your quality of life drops by a lot. Forget running or contact sports, and forget lifting anything heavy. In more serious cases, you can say hello to taking terminal pain meds to do normal light-touch activities that were easy in the past. But this is one of those things that rears its head at 45, not 25. Kind of like texting while driving (I.e. socionormalized addiction). It's totally chill to text at the red or in traffic because nothings happening...until you hit a car or a pedestrian who crossed the intersection late because you tapped the accelerator out of habit without gathering situational awareness.
- oh_sigh 3y agoMy best guess in 30 years will be the killing and eating animals. Not because everyone goes vegan, but because we will only eat lab grown meat, not meat plucked from an animal carcass. Just like we see some people being cancelled now for being casually racist in the 90s(eg blackface at parties), I think we might see people be cancelled who make jokes in 2020 like "I like my hamburger rare so you can taste the soul of the cow" and stuff like that.
- nemo44x 3y agoIf it’s of high quality then maybe. But I think those people will look back on previous people as doing what was necessary to thrive. Or more likely - lab grown meat will be inferior but natural animal meat will be highly regulated for some arbitrary moralistic reason so only the wealthy can partake.
- kcplate 3y agoGood luck…40 years ago we were told we were going to have jet packs and food would be yeast based with all nutrients needed for the day in a single convenient cube by now. Instead we got social media. Pretty sure if I am around in 30 years, I won’t be eating lab grown meat or yeast cubes and there will still be no jet packs for us consumers to be flitting about on avoiding traffic.
- stronglikedan 3y agoI'll be a guinea pig here. If animals didn't want me to eat them, then they wouldn't be so damned tasty! I'll check back in 30 years to see if I've been cancelled for that. /remindme!30yrs
- lusus_naturae 3y ago> Today most young kids are glued to an iPad. At dinner, in the car, at home, everywhere. Maybe we'll look back at this behavior one day, similar to how we think of smoking or eating too much. This is all a very selective lens, I'd say the younger generations now are better informed, more empathetic and curious. I don't blame them for "being glued" to their devices, they have the option to have friends and collaborators the world over, it's a more interesting life to be younger now than in any previous generation, notwithstanding the political and socioeconomic pressures (but I guess all generations have/had their demons to slay).
- eindiran 3y ago> younger generations now are better informed, more empathetic and curious. None of the generational research I have seen even remotely supports the "better informed" conclusion, and my anecdata from interacting with current undergrads suggests the opposite very strongly -- current undergrads are *substantially* less well-informed than the zillenials and millenials were about politics, current events, etc. Not sure about about empathetic and curious, though those smell less implausible.
- safety1st 3y agoIn any evidence-based discussion of "the kids these days" I think the elephant in the room is the mental health crisis - they have the highest rates of depression, anxiety, loneliness and suicide, they may be the most stressed out and unhappy generation ever.
- lusus_naturae 3y agoAre they any more or less stressed than kids who grew up during the great depression or during the world wars? Or is that we just have better tools for data collection and analysis, and a better culture around being open about mental health issues?
- pmarreck 3y agoThe weight is largely not behavioral, it is diet. Hence why every single weight loss advice says 10% of it is physical exercise, 90% of it is diet (but highly recommends the physical exertion anyway for many side bennies) https://www.wsj.com/health/pharma/weight-loss-drugs-obesity-e4bb2173 https://www.wsj.com/health/pharma/weight-loss-drugs-obesity-... Unless you believe we're not animals too, numerous animal studies have shown this. The GLP agonists were discovered, I believe, during an experiment on diabetes meds with rats, where the rats ate so little that they nearly starved themselves. Hunger is a drive controlled by hormones, and something in the Western diet has hijacked it.
- autoexec 3y agoSeems like there's an environmental competent to weight gain as well. Wild animals have also been putting on weight. So have lab animals which have had the same controlled diets and activity levels for decades.
- streptomycin 3y agohttps://www.lesswrong.com/posts/7iAABhWpcGeP5e6SB/it-s-probably-not-lithium https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/7iAABhWpcGeP5e6SB/it-s-proba... A Chemical Hunger opens up with a list of mysteries related to the obesity epidemic. I don’t endorse the list – for one, “wild animals are becoming obese” seems to have been pretty much made up (see the fourth point in this comment), and all evidence we have that “lab animals are becoming obese” is exactly one (1) unreplicated paper co-authored by a guy that has been involved in numerous controversies regarding his conflict of interest with the processed food and restaurant industries.[8]
- monocasa 3y agoDiet is behavioral. The people who successfully change their diet have to radically change their relationship with food on a deeper level than a lot of people think. For instance many processed, high carb foods are so nutrient poor that simply reducing to a healthy intake number of carbs means that now you're so nutrient poor that your body screams for more. It can even send people to the hospital if you stay in that state long enough. You really have to put your frame of reference for nutrition down and start fresh.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- throw__away7391 3y agoI think the medications will someday be viewed similar to how we view the way Coke used to include cocaine. Everyone I know in the US is either regularly using recreational drugs or has some kind of prescription for a condition like ADHD or anxiety. Either that or they will make far more sophisticated drugs in the future and laugh at how primitive our approach used to be.
- jaggederest 3y agoAt the moment, over 40% of adult males would qualify for the fat men's club membership. Demographic shifts have been enormous.
- bee_rider 3y agoThose are definitely some big guys in the picture there, but it is remarkable that that was the body type that would warrant joining a club and having newspaper articles written about you.
- SamoyedFurFluff 3y agoTo be fair, there’s newspaper articles being written around fat women social communities around body positivity or whatever these days, too. I don’t think much had changed!
- gweinberg 3y agoI think you're missing the point. The "fat men" weren't fat at all, not by today's standards. 200 lbs is all it takes.
- Telemakhos 3y agoThat's the minimum, not the mean.
- nemo44x 3y agoJust look at the size of American football players. William Perry was considered a giant in the 1980s coming in around 330lbs. College linemen are often bigger today. Up into the 70s the average lineman was 250.
- owenmarshall 3y ago“Some coaches pray for wisdom. I pray for 260-pound tackles. They'll give me plenty of wisdom.” - Chuck Noll, Pittsburgh Steelers head coach (69-91)
- JackFr 3y agoEvery starting quarterback in the NFL is over 200 lbs with the large majority over 220 lbs. I guess they all could be in fat mens clubs. Wild.
- pmarreck 3y ago> Being fat was no longer so feted. Membership at fat men's clubs began to dwindle, as did waistlines. For instance, at the last meeting of the New England Fat Men's Club, in 1924, only 38 members showed up, none of whom met the 200-pound mark, Tafrate reports. Ouch. I'm about 235 and 6'3" (190cm). I haven't seen the other side of 200 since 1993 Down from 275 and trying to reach 200 though (Mounjaro)
- scoot 3y agoCongrats on your progress. Keep it up - you've got this!
- version_five 3y agoI think the average person was shorter then. I'm 6'3" and flirting with 200 lbs, and other than a bit of a dad bod am (or so I tell myself) pretty slim. My guess is these guys were mostly well under 6'
- aaron695 3y ago[dead]