|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
DorkothyParker
Joined: 11 Apr 2009
Location: Jeju
|
 Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 9:05 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Speaking of threads, my dad told me that a person could get inexpensive clothing custom sewn in Korea so long as you provide your own threads as what they used was too thin/cheap.
He was stationed in Korea in the late 70's and while I'm sure a lot has changed in 30 years, I did hope there was some truth to this now.
I apologize yet again for my digressions. I have a short attention span. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
3MB
Joined: 26 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 10:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DorkothyParker wrote: |
| livinginkunsan wrote: |
It becomes everyone's business when she starts wearing clothes that are 3x too small and things start bulging out from all ends. . |
No, no it doesn't. Contrary to internet norms, it is not necessary for everyone to provide commentary on everything they encounter in the real world. Glance over it, move on. Don't you have more important/interesting things to care about?
She knows she's overweight and either A. doesn't care or B. thinks she looks good. Either way, who are you to rain on the parade? Happiness is a good thing. The more of it in the world, the better.
I also disagree with the other poster who says weight is a character issue. I've met plenty of overweight people who work for non-profits, volunteer, or better themselves through fierce mental regimens. An hour on the treadmill or an hour reading Being and Nothingness. Same difference. You can't assume character based solely on weight.
I've met dudes who were totally ripped but they were incredible jackasses who might bench 400 lbs but wouldn't help their elderly grandmother with home chores.
It takes dedication and perseverance to carry on with a fitness routine. While both of those items may be important aspects of good character, they certainly don't reflect this trait in its entirety. |
1. Honestly, how many people, fat or thin, do you think are working for non-profits, volunteer, or bettering themselves through fierce mental regimens?
2. Looking at people offers no information about the above. However when I look at a person I can mostly judge, though not with 100% accuracy but with enough to be mostly correct whether they are taking care of their bodies, or not.
I think both are important and I have just as much disdain for those who dont take care of their minds as those who dont take care of their bodies. Its a package deal, the mind is part of the body, and a mind in a healthy body is a better mind. The Greeks were convinced of this, so am I. One of the people I admire most is Roger Bannister who was a great example of this union of mind and body and the pursuit of both a healthy body and a healthy mind. He pushed himself to the limit in both the physical and intellectual arenas. I have no use for fat people who let themselves go just as I have no use for people whose only interests are pumnping iron. There needs to be a balance and its a CHOICE one makes to pursue and achieve that balance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bogey666
Joined: 17 Mar 2008
Location: Korea, the ass free zone
|
| Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 10:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 3MB wrote: |
| InFlames wrote: |
I can't say anything regarding the original topic since I'm not yet in Korea, but I don't understand why people think it is any of their business what a person, who isn't them, chooses to look like, eat, drink, read, watch, think, etc. If you don't like it don't look at it, but it's pretty shallow to base someone's worth on their outer appearance. What of Einstein, Hawkings, George Eliot? Not the most attractive looking individuals, but were/are extremely smart and made a huge impact in their fields.
And what about size makes a person unattractive? I've seen people with 'ideal' bodies who had unattractive faces, and the opposite as well. Marilyn Monroe was considered plus-size in her day (size 14 afaik); it's all about individual looks. Some people look better with some weight, some people look better with less. At the end of the day it is personal preference, but I find that people who focus on one thing about other people feels lacking in themselves. Just my two-cents. |
Wow, you don't see the difference between Stephen Hawking who has an actual disease that will kill him and which is directly responsible for his appearance and someone who chooses, through a disgusting lifestyle of bad nutritional choices and lack of physical exercise, to be overweight? One person has no choice and his appearance is in no way a reflection on who he is as a person. The overweight person, more often than not does have a choice and their appearance IS a reflection on who they are. I work hard to maintain a high level of cardiovascular fitness. I get up at 6 a.m. just to do cardio for nearly an hour 6 days a week and I maintain my fitness through eating well and avoiding large serving sizes. I know the work and discipline it takes to do that day in a day out, and to me someone who is overweight is lazy and I judge them to be just that.
Having an ugly face or having a disease, again, doesnt say anything about the character of a person. being overweight does. |
btw. the Marilyn Monroe "size 14" lie has been around for a while and has been pretty much debunked.
l'm also not sure about the whole dress size thing.
here are her stats:
Height: 5 feet, 5� inches 166.62 (centimeters)
Weight: 118 pounds 53.5 kilograms
Dress size: 12
Pant Size: 8
Shoe Size: 7AA (US) 38-39 (European)
Bra Size: 36D
clearly at 118 lbs she was NOT fat, at 5'5.
not skinny -(which is fine) but not even remotely CLOSE to today's American/Canadian/British fat standards.
seems to me it takes a fairly unique body shape to wear a size 12 dress at 118 lbs, no???? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
prideofidaho
Joined: 19 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 11:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dress sizes were reduced because women felt better about having a smaller number. A size 14 would have been a 2(ish).
check this out:
Another thing people drag out as evidence of vanity sizing is the �inflation� of sizing numbers, that because what�s known now as a size 4 was formerly designated as a size 16 (pre 1960�s) that this is proof of size inflation but that�s not true either. The reason is that old sizes were based on -yet another- arcane principle related to pattern making and sizes were designated based on something known as �scale�. Scale was a pattern maker�s reference to use that given number on the back side of an L-square (a scale of aliquot parts) to generate the proportionate measures appropriate to that size so these numbers were not arbitrary.
from here:
http://www.fashion-incubator.com/archive/the_myth_of_vanity_sizing/#more |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AmericanExile
Joined: 04 May 2009
|
| Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 11:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The brain is part of the body. Mind is a contruct generally thought of as being generated by the brain. The assumed close relationship between brain and mind causes confusion between the two.
Fat does not mean out of shape. There are people who run marathons that arrogant thin people would call fat. Thin is not in shape. I have a friend who doesn't do sports because he knows when people see him they think he is athletic, but he isn't. You can't tell from looking at people. I promise you there are people who weigh over 300 pounds who can sprint faster than you. Short people can play basketball. Minorities can golf, or be president. You can't tell if someone is prone to criminal activity by examining the lumps on their head. There is no master race.
People don't wear their qualities. They live them.
You may think you can tell deep meaningful things about a person by looking at them. I don't think you can.
Historians don't write about history. They write about themselves. They reveal their values and the values of their time. Beware what you reveal that you don't intend. All hate is self hate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
3MB
Joined: 26 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 12:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AmericanExile wrote: |
| The brain is part of the body. Mind is a contruct generally thought of as being generated by the brain. The assumed close relationship between brain and mind causes confusion between the two. |
The mind IS part of the body, unless you subscribe to the notion that the mind is somehow external to the body. I don't and there is no confusion on my part.
| Quote: |
Fat does not mean out of shape. There are people who run marathons that arrogant thin people would call fat. Thin is not in shape. I have a friend who doesn't do sports because he knows when people see him they think he is athletic, but he isn't. You can't tell from looking at people. I promise you there are people who weigh over 300 pounds who can sprint faster than you. Short people can play basketball. Minorities can golf, or be president. You can't tell if someone is prone to criminal activity by examining the lumps on their head. There is no master race.
|
I already conceived that. However overall a thin person WILL be in better shape than a fat person. That there are fat people who do sports doesnt mean that this is true of the GENERAL population. We arent talking about people who are physical phenoms, we are talking about the average Joe in Itaewon. An obese person with a mad 40 yard dash would be making money playing pro sports not teaching in Korea.
| Quote: |
People don't wear their qualities. They live them. |
Well if people are obese then I can see the qualities with my eyes. So one out of 100 fat people can outrun me, gee, I'm still right about the other 99.
| Quote: |
| You may think you can tell deep meaningful things about a person by looking at them. I don't think you can. |
I can, with a certain amount of confidence tell that a fat person doesn't take care of his or her body. I would be wrong on occasion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blurgalurgalurga
Joined: 18 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 12:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AmericanExile wrote: |
| All hate is self hate. |
Zuh? Please explain further.
Does that mean that all love is self-love too?
Seems a little solipsistic.
Last edited by blurgalurgalurga on Thu May 07, 2009 1:36 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bogey666
Joined: 17 Mar 2008
Location: Korea, the ass free zone
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 12:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AmericanExile wrote: |
The brain is part of the body. Mind is a contruct generally thought of as being generated by the brain. The assumed close relationship between brain and mind causes confusion between the two.
Fat does not mean out of shape. There are people who run marathons that arrogant thin people would call fat. Thin is not in shape. I have a friend who doesn't do sports because he knows when people see him they think he is athletic, but he isn't. You can't tell from looking at people. I promise you there are people who weigh over 300 pounds who can sprint faster than you. Short people can play basketball. Minorities can golf, or be president. You can't tell if someone is prone to criminal activity by examining the lumps on their head. There is no master race.
People don't wear their qualities. They live them.
You may think you can tell deep meaningful things about a person by looking at them. I don't think you can.
Historians don't write about history. They write about themselves. They reveal their values and the values of their time. Beware what you reveal that you don't intend. All hate is self hate. |
re fat and out of shape.
TRUE, up to a point and ONLY with specific athletes.
like linemen in football. Even defensive linemen , think the "Refrigerator" Perry.
but if you're not a lineman or sumo- wrestler, or a handful of other related athletes, this is a non-sequitour. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eperdue4ad
Joined: 22 May 2006
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 1:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 3MB wrote: |
1. Honestly, how many people, fat or thin, do you think are working for non-profits, volunteer, or bettering themselves through fierce mental regimens?
2. Looking at people offers no information about the above. However when I look at a person I can mostly judge, though not with 100% accuracy but with enough to be mostly correct whether they are taking care of their bodies, or not.
I think both are important and I have just as much disdain for those who dont take care of their minds as those who dont take care of their bodies. Its a package deal, the mind is part of the body, and a mind in a healthy body is a better mind. The Greeks were convinced of this, so am I. One of the people I admire most is Roger Bannister who was a great example of this union of mind and body and the pursuit of both a healthy body and a healthy mind. He pushed himself to the limit in both the physical and intellectual arenas. I have no use for fat people who let themselves go just as I have no use for people whose only interests are pumnping iron. There needs to be a balance and its a CHOICE one makes to pursue and achieve that balance. |
Please explain if your judgement equally applies to people not taking care of the body by means of anorexia. It's unclear.
Let it be said that I'm not talking about the average Korean thin girl. Think instead of a painfully underweight person you've seen at the gym doing hard cardio for the better part of an hour.
And also please explain what sort of self-improvement, mental or otherwise, are you gaining after you make these judgements? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
3MB
Joined: 26 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 1:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| eperdue4ad wrote: |
Please explain if your judgement equally applies to people not taking care of the body by means of anorexia. It's unclear. |
Its unclear only if you are not reading with comprehension. Otherwise it should be clear that I am advocating physical fitness through a healthy diet and proper exercise regimen. Anorexia comes nowhere near.
| Quote: |
Let it be said that I'm not talking about the average Korean thin girl. Think instead of a painfully underweight person you've seen at the gym doing hard cardio for the better part of an hour. |
Why would such a person be anorexic? Anorexia is a very specific eating disorder. A person doing cardio, and being thin most likely isnt anorexic unless he or she has an eating disorder. Many runners are very thin, which doesn't mean they are anorexic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AmericanExile
Joined: 04 May 2009
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 2:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
3MB. Mind is a contruct. If it is a part of the body you could point to it. You can point to where the brain is. It is an organ. If you die your brain still exists (under the assumption it hasn't been blown up or something). Your mind does not still exist.
Your brain has thoughts. Your mind is thoughts.
You offer a perspective. That perspective can be flipped. Thin implies weak. Weak is unhealthy. Why don't you lazy thin people put on some muscle? Weak implies dieased. Other people can put on weight. Why can't you? I can't hire you because I'm afraid you will bring your disease to work. I'm reasonable. I know not all thin people have disease. Some people are naturally thin and can't help it. But, let's be honest 99% of thin people are carriers. I can't take the chance.
Silly. Yes. But, no more silly then your points about overweight people.
Same-same. Well, there is one difference. Your perspective is more common. Appeal to popularity is a fallacy. Having others agree with you doesn't make you right but you could start a club. You've got that right.
You frame the world a certain way and pretend the view was always that way. You may not see your frame anymore. I see it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
3MB
Joined: 26 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 2:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AmericanExile wrote: |
3MB. Mind is a contruct. If it is a part of the body you could point to it. You can point to where the brain is. It is an organ. If you die your brain still exists (under the assumption it hasn't been blown up or something). Your mind does not still exist.
Your brain has thoughts. Your mind is thoughts.
You offer a perspective. That perspective can be flipped. Thin implies weak. Weak is unhealthy. Why don't you lazy thin people put on some muscle? Weak implies dieased. Other people can put on weight. Why can't you? I can't hire you because I'm afraid you will bring your disease to work. I'm reasonable. I know not all thin people have disease. Some people are naturally thin and can't help it. But, let's be honest 99% of thin people are carriers. I can't take the chance.
Silly. Yes. But, no more silly then your points about overweight people.
Same-same. Well, there is one difference. Your perspective is more common. Appeal to popularity is a fallacy. Having others agree with you doesn't make you right but you could start a club. You've got that right.
You frame the world a certain way and pretend the view was always that way. You may not see your frame anymore. I see it. |
1. Semantics. Do you mean to propose the mind is independent of the health of the brain? Does a sick brain work as efficiently as a healthy brain? There are many things that have a direct effect on the brain. What is the effect of alcohol abuse on the brain and therefore the mind? The mind is nothing but the result of the processes that occur within the brain. Thats all it is. The performance of the brain is dependent on its health and its health is dependent on the health of the body.
2. The weakness argument would only fly if fat people were actually stronger than thin people. Most fat people couldn't outlift thin people. Fat isnt muscle, fat doesnt move weights. I dont think anyone really thinks fat people are stronger than thin people.
The thing is, you arent reading with comprehension. I am not advocating thinness I am advocating FITNESS. That doesnt mean anorexic and weak. It means fit, which includes muscle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bogey666
Joined: 17 Mar 2008
Location: Korea, the ass free zone
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 3:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 3MB wrote: |
| AmericanExile wrote: |
3MB. Mind is a contruct. If it is a part of the body you could point to it. You can point to where the brain is. It is an organ. If you die your brain still exists (under the assumption it hasn't been blown up or something). Your mind does not still exist.
Your brain has thoughts. Your mind is thoughts.
You offer a perspective. That perspective can be flipped. Thin implies weak. Weak is unhealthy. Why don't you lazy thin people put on some muscle? Weak implies dieased. Other people can put on weight. Why can't you? I can't hire you because I'm afraid you will bring your disease to work. I'm reasonable. I know not all thin people have disease. Some people are naturally thin and can't help it. But, let's be honest 99% of thin people are carriers. I can't take the chance.
Silly. Yes. But, no more silly then your points about overweight people.
Same-same. Well, there is one difference. Your perspective is more common. Appeal to popularity is a fallacy. Having others agree with you doesn't make you right but you could start a club. You've got that right.
You frame the world a certain way and pretend the view was always that way. You may not see your frame anymore. I see it. |
1. Semantics. Do you mean to propose the mind is independent of the health of the brain? Does a sick brain work as efficiently as a healthy brain? There are many things that have a direct effect on the brain. What is the effect of alcohol abuse on the brain and therefore the mind? The mind is nothing but the result of the processes that occur within the brain. Thats all it is. The performance of the brain is dependent on its health and its health is dependent on the health of the body.
2. The weakness argument would only fly if fat people were actually stronger than thin people. Most fat people couldn't outlift thin people. Fat isnt muscle, fat doesnt move weights. I dont think anyone really thinks fat people are stronger than thin people.
The thing is, you arent reading with comprehension. I am not advocating thinness I am advocating FITNESS. That doesnt mean anorexic and weak. It means fit, which includes muscle. |
actually technically, fat people are stronger, other things being equal.
powerlifters tend to be on the fat side almost 100% of the time.
you need to ingest a lot of calories to lift a lot of weight.
you also can't change the laws of physics.
Power = mass x acceleration |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
3MB
Joined: 26 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 3:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Most fat people aren't powerlifters. Just like most thin people aren't 4 minute milers. We are talking about regular people, why are extreme examples even mentioned? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bogey666
Joined: 17 Mar 2008
Location: Korea, the ass free zone
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 3:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 3MB wrote: |
| Most fat people aren't powerlifters. Just like most thin people aren't 4 minute milers. We are talking about regular people, why are extreme examples even mentioned? |
true.
but if you take an average person with average exercise/athletic background, the fatter person is more likely to be stronger.
you're the one that is tilting to the extremes, talking about the obese lardass who never lifts a thing except a donut and never moves except to open the refrigerator door.
I basically agree with your overall theme here, but let's be fair. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
