That said, body positivity shouldn't be thought of as having anything to say about objective physical health: there is zero reason a person who is obese should necessarily feel bad about themselves. Shame is a useless or detrimental approach to changing behavior; shame is oftentimes the reason people engage in unhealthy behaviors like overeating in the first place. Being overweight is an obvious health danger, but it does not make you a bad person.
Somewhere in the idiot echo chamber of social media the idea of a healthy sense of self worth got conflated with a healthy body.
I think this is where 100% body positivity falls short, and that is context.
Being a bigger person doesn't make you less of a person, it doesn't mean that you are weak, or even mean that you are unhealthy on its own. As a random person, a friend, whatever we should not pass judgment on other people in that regard.
But on the flip side context is incredibly important. For example in a doctor setting. It is deeply concerning that I see a ton of people that immediately think that if their doctor mentions needing to loose weight that they are immediately fat phobic.
I see people saying they want a "body positive" doctor. Sure Doctor's need to be better and understand that everyone's body, diet, etc is different. But I am concerned about this desire to have a doctor never talk about your weight.
I am overweight and my doctor mentions it... I mean we are tracking it and they weight me. Him not saying anything would be wrong and him not doing his job.
But you are very right that you can't shame someone even at the Doctor. But you also can't ignore it.
The desire to avoid getting lectured at the doctor's office can result in folks avoiding the doctor in general. Avoiding the doctor had strong negative effects.
The main issue is the cognitive dissonance between being fat and bring told that being fat is unhealthy so you're unhealthy. The easiest way for one's mind to resolve this is to retreat into the imaginary realm where being fat can be healthy. The retreat into the imaginary is easier than not being fat and the cognitive dissonance is avoided.
I get not wanting to be lectured, and I guess that is also where tact comes into play.
I have had my share of bad doctors but my current doctor is great and it never feels like a lecture. It feels more like a conversation. He makes a couple of small recommendations and we revisit it in a couple months.
Now I will acknowledge maybe this is because of where I am as far as being obese (as in it isn't a huge concern for my doctor) and I also mention that I am working on it.
But I view this the same way I view sexual health. I engage in some risky behavior, I go in for testing every 3 months. My doctor always asks me about what happened and mentions certain things that they encourage that I don't do. I don't take this as being lectured, I don't take this as them being judgmental or not sex positive, but instead just doing their job.
At the end of the day I am doing something that is not in the best interest of my long term health, and it is their job to tell talk about that.
Maybe there is some space between being shamed and being treated as a role model?
No obese people are not bad people but I would like to be able to say that I don't approve of their lifestyle and don't want my kids to believe that it is normal and fine to be obese.
For lack of other shared idols, the “common space” American society worships health and longevity. We measure everything against it and don’t make much room for debate.
We all do unhealthful things, of course, but our society makes it very hard to admit that we do so in sound mind. The role we’re asked to play is to say we’re addicted, indulgent, or ashamed.
The dissonance isn’t good for people and is not unlike the toxic dissonance we associate with religious communities that are too stringent and deny everyday realities of human behavior.
the only significant difference I've seen in brand-new devs from bootcamps vs CS programs is the devs from bootcamps are somewhat aware that they have a lot of learning to do
FB/Google/etc. don't actually need to make correct inferences, they just need to provide infographics that say they are correct so that marketing departments can report to their superiors that they are responsibly spending advertising dollars and getting "impressions" from the right people
They also just need to provide enough stimulus to the users to keep them engaged. Whether that means posting, commenting, or just refreshing their feed, the end result is a) the user counts as active and b) the user is contributing, for free, to the overall content that gives the userbase as a whole a reason to keep coming back.
The 'secret' I learned from AdTech is that while the social media companies do need, to some extent, to be able to show their customers that buying ads provides value, what the social media companies need for themselves is just to keep the users engaged and coming back, generating content (posts and comments) for free so that there are pages in which to place ads and generate impressions.
and since Big brand advertisers (that can't calculate ROI) are the biggest spenders, most ad dollar can not be attributed to purchasing behavior reliably and thus wasted. (queue the ebay 100% wasteful ad story)
a big chunk of the people who read HN are the exact people responsible for the systems and algorithms that create (and perpetuate) the solipsistic hell-mirror described in the article
my least favorite part of engineering is that it is led by smart, capable humans who diligently build systems to destroy the best things about being a human
Facebook was actually fun until monetization and creepiness destroyed the vibe.
Now you get reminded every two friend posts (of those that still do) of a creepily targeted ad, and then of course another 1-2 posts mixed in from "friends" trying to monetize their daily reiki personal training life coach bullshit, but you keep them around because you've known them for a long time.
Manipulative ads that are coarsely targeted I think we got used to from television. But manipulative ads with foreknowledge of your medical google searches is fucking creepy.
The engineers were following the orders of the businessmen. Does it excuse it? No, but I'm hard pressed to see any salaried employee not actively working against the greater interests of mankind and the world.
Hell is truly us. We are our greatest and only true enemy.
> Facebook was actually fun until monetization and creepiness destroyed the vibe
The same can be said of social media generally. Some manage to disguise it better than others, but they are all selling you, the user, your data and your attention, to sell ads. To do that, they work hard to show you a world that they think you want to see.
I’m still hoping it’s slowly getting better though.
I just recently had some eye-opening actual seeing-forest-from-the-trees moment myself through this book and the different insider perspectives collected therein:
There were a lot of smart capable humans working for the Nazis as well. The issue is not so much the individual, as the social/economic system they're a part of.
That said, body positivity shouldn't be thought of as having anything to say about objective physical health: there is zero reason a person who is obese should necessarily feel bad about themselves. Shame is a useless or detrimental approach to changing behavior; shame is oftentimes the reason people engage in unhealthy behaviors like overeating in the first place. Being overweight is an obvious health danger, but it does not make you a bad person.
Somewhere in the idiot echo chamber of social media the idea of a healthy sense of self worth got conflated with a healthy body.