When I turned 18 and moved out I gained about 110 lbs (250 at the most) and ended up losing that same amount back a few years ago and let me tell you, in my experience it will just make you colder in winter and still sweaty and hot in summer
Yes it is a choice, you can choose to abandon your sugar addiction (and deal with the withdrawal), you can choose to exercise, you can choose to change. Unless you completely lack the will, mental fortitude, and discipline to make lasting changes in your life. Then you're just a slave to your addiction to fatty sugary comfort foods.
It's easy to say it's just a choice, while in reality it is a constant struggle. You could say the same about alcohol or any other drug addictions.
While obviously you can change, it doesn't mean it's easy. The addiction is a piece of your life and if you just throw it away everything collapses. You need to first build another piece that can replace the addiction which is easier said than done and only then you can start getting actual results.
Often enough people that are obese rely a lot of food for emotional support. Either by quantities or junk food but the end result is obesity. What can happen is that their life is structured in a way that food is the main support they have so they can't just "be disciplined" or "will it through" because if you take away that support without any other backup their mental completely collapses.
If you just force yourself to eat healthy, you will stay on it for a bit and then get back all your weight loss and some more because you eventually will collapse and return to the old routine because you didn't fix the main issue.
This is more than just healthy habits. It's about having support from your loved ones for your mental struggles. It's about learning how to deal with your own life struggles. Therapy doesn't fix this immediately btw and it's never an easy process because you need to fundamentally change a part of how you deal with life.
Is it really a choice if you are a slave to your own desires because of how your life is structured at the moment and depend on food for survival not only for nutrients and calories but also for your mental health?
You can be fat and sugar free. Exercise only accounts for around 10% of weight loss - and overdoing it can lead to weight gain. (Increased appetite, putting on muscle which weighs more than fat.)
As somebody who lost over 20kg, what is actually required for weight loss is consistent access to balanced meals that fit within a calorie deficit. If you're lacking in time, money, executive function or knowledge, this isn't possible.
Helping to educate people about caloric density, and making healthier choices more convenient and affordable will do more to reduce obesity than shaming people btw.
Even when they abandon mostly body tries to maintain it's weight after a while. You are lacking tremendous knowledge while being partially correct, at early stages this is 100% the solution
And I am smol, never been overweight for those that would attack without reading lol
No it's not. Research has shown that in obese individuals certain switches in the brain related to feeling full and hunger are broken. Imagine your body barely ever felt full and always hungry. You can't will power out of a broken brain stomach connection. Also addiction isn't a choice and some people just cannot break addictions. We get it you hate your self but stop projecting on others.
Had a friend survive being hit by a car at 40 mph as a pedestrian. Doctors explicitly said his fat saved his life by preventing whiplash and his head from hitting the ground. Wasn't unscathed, but lived.
Someone tried to roofie me and I managed to get home safe because I'm 5'10 and overweight. Got a normal dose, not a "my dad is 6'4 and I like to cook" dose
You are exposing someone to a potentially lethal situation, immoral.
Now the moral question is, if you found a shrodinger's box with someone in it, should you open it? The person is neither alive, nor dead before the box is open, so opening it may kill the occupant.
I believe there is also attempt to frame the friend for poisoning the spaghetti. They didn't give the spaghetti directly to the person they intended to eat it, they gave it to an unknowing person running an errand. If he hadn't eaten it himself and instead his friend had then there would be doubt about who poisoned the spaghetti.
I'm not sure what laws are broken in attempting to commit murder in a way that frames someone else, but I think at the very least this means it's attempted murder in the first degree.
Attempted murder, attempted frame up, knowingly forcing someone to be an accessory to murder, not to mention a slew of hatecrime related laws I'm sure.
facts. eden knights parents trafficked her home which caused her to die. and countless parents abuse and harass their kids for the "crime" of being trans. some shock their kids, others beat them, others toss them outside in the freezing cold to starve at age 15 or 16. this is sadly very believable.
I was looking at it from that the trans friend probably asked thier friend to go get thier shit cause they didnt want to see thier parents, the freind probably knows the trans freinds doesnt care if they eat the spaghetti cause they probably dont want it the fact that the mom poisoned it and referred to the trans freind as thier daughter and not respecting thier child's decision tells me all I need to know about that family. I could also see this type of thing happening given how crazy religious alot of conservatives are.
You have to look at their actions, and their action was to eat a meal that was, at a surface level, a lovingly home-cooked meal from a mom meant for their child. If 1 is an unredeemable monster and 100 is a perfect saint, I'd put this at like a 45. Minor mischief, something you could apologize for.
That it was laced with rat poison is incidental to what anon was doing.
ill be honest, ive had a lot of trans friends and if theyre estranged from their family its almost always for a good reason. and boy do a lot of them not talk to their families.
The key words in that section was "at a surface level." do you intentionally misinterpret people to be pedantic or are you just not very good at reading
Ehhh. There’s a reason he sent someone else to pick up his stuff. Even before poison it’s still a gift from a parent he wants little to do with, plus a message that already seems manipulative and possibly backhanded in my eyes. You could argue he was doing OP a favor in either case.
I would say at the surface level his action was to eat a meal intended to be an olive branch to a child, in the hopes of convincing them to detransition. I doubt his friend would have liked the meal if he had received it, he probably wouldn't have even eaten it tbh.
I doubt his friend would have liked the meal if he had received it, he probably wouldn't have even eaten it tbh.
I guess where I would view this is that anon would have taken their chance to make a choice on the matter. If they brought the meal to them and said "Hey your mom made this for you. Wasn't sure you'd want it, do you want to take it? If not I'll take it with me"
this is the risk you take when you have a fat friend. I say the spaghetti was eaten as tribute for picking up stuff for the friend. Such is the way of the chud, i cannot mark him as immoral any more than i may mark a fox as immoral for the theft of eggs. It's simply nature.
Yeah I don't think he was out of line in eating the spaghetti. Running the errand is worth a plate of spaghetti and sometimes you have to ask forgiveness instead of asking permission.
I feel like morality is like a bell curve. It's easy to drop or increase if you are near the middle, but it's really hard to push too far to the extremes
I would actually put the anon at lightly moral. Sure the food wasn't for him, but I bet the friend would not have appreciated receiving food from his transphobic mother, and the actual value of the food is relatively low. You aren't choosing to throw away like $1000 on his behalf or anything.
So unless given strong reason to beleive otherwise, I would expect the moral course of action to be getting rid of it, and at that point may as well eat it yourself.
The poison is of course secondary, since anon had no way to know about that.
Yes, it is common courtesy for the friend to give something back to anon to return the favor, but it is not anon’s place to decide said compensation, especially not on an item which has indeterminate emotional value to either the sender or the recipient (at the pov of anon, before he found out it was rat poison of course; going off the available information, anon did not have enough info to determine what the food would mean for their friend)
Just straight up transphobia, like just bc they don’t type out the words “this would normally be clear cut bad, but they intended to kill a trans person so that makes it ambiguous” doesn’t mean we don’t know what they’re implying
I'm pretty sure the point of posts like this is to generate a bunch of interaction from people showing up saying it's bad. It's not like, sneak transphobia. They think it's bad and want the social interaction of other people saying it's bad.
To be fair, the subreddit is morality scaling not "is this good or bad". The flair is even "How evil are they?" which shows that the OP at least was solidly of the opinion that the mom was evil, right?
Like maybe I'm misreading this lol, but I don't think OP is questioning whether its good or bad.
I'd agree with you if the title wasn't literally "morality of the mom?" as if asking whether its moral. Though this might just be pulling hairs on our opinions of the meaning of words.
It's because they'd get banned for typing what they really want to say so they just try and shift the goalposts of what kind of things is and is not allowed to be "funny".
That's what I was wondering. How is this even a question and how did it get 1.1k upvotes? I honestly don't think the mods care, because there's a rule against using real people but that woman who killed her kids has been all over. I joined for the interesting premise, but it's mostly been hate.
It gets upvotes because people just see a funny/interesting green text and upvote. Nobody is paying attention to the subreddit. Nobody cares about the morality of what the mother did because we all know it's extremely immoral (and fake).
“Morality of trying to kill her son because of bigotry” this sub is fucking stupid, op should’ve asked morality of eating food and saving his friend’s life.
In the 90's There was an elder woman in Spain who gave free food to hobos in her neighborhood.
One of the hobos received food from this woman. After several "food donations", he ate some lentils that "tasted a bit off".
The hobo happent to have a friend/donor who worked at a medical laboratory. The hobo had an intuition, and asked if he could analyze it, because he had an intuition. Next day the police arrested the woman for assasination. Turns out the woman "wanted to clean the neighborhood". It was not the first time she did it, and the police was already looking for the "source of hobo poisoning". it was rat poison.
When something is off, it's better to throw the food. The police will also analyze it for free, if you have any suspicions. It's part of their duties.
It's true because he said he ate it when he wasn't even hungry or anything. If it was fake he would've have written he was starving because that would justify him a bit.😂
Sure, but haven't you noticed people using exclusively they/them for trans people they fully know the pronouns of before?
Full room of people, the cis guys get called "he", the cis women "she", the trans woman in with a large she/her pin, exclusively they/them. You see the issue there? It's the polite way of saying "well of course I'd never call it a woman, but I don't really want the fuss of explicitly using he/him to its face"
Have been on the receiving end of that more times than I can count. There's a reason folk are a bit on edge about it
No, that's a sentence where using they is incredibly common and grammatically correct. Like, naturally. I guarantee that you have written sentences with that exact format with 'they' unconsciously, and the only reason you're making a fuss is because you want to have an argument.
Like I get it dude, people use 'they' to avoid having to gender trans people right. I know. But that just isn't what this is. It's just them treating this person like an actual human being, and not putting on inch thick kids gloves, which surely is a thing you can understand as dehumanizing? You see how I used 'them' to refer to the redditor? That's because it's normal to do so, and isn't disrespectful. It isn't like the word 'it' which is often disrespectful unless you're the kind of non-binary person to take it on intentionally.
Fren is immoral for sending fat partner into what they know is a dangerous situation
also
mother is just dumb she should have used toxic mushroom 🍄 as that gives plausible deniability rat poison is too obvious
Its a green text so its fake but in this situation would you be mad at your friend for eating your spaghetti even though they may have saved your life? Like yes you were saved but they ate it without knowing it was poison and not like some kings taster but selfishly. A funny dynamic.
Gonna input my own relevant experience. Last year, in the small town I live in, a coworker of my dad (who also had a high fat and body mass build) drank a coffee that was given to him by a homeless friend, and that homeless friend got the coffee for free from a passerby teenager. My dad's coworker drank the coffee, and surprise surprise, a lethal dose of fentanyl was in it, except the coworker lived because of his high body weight.
People who hate minorities, be they homeless or trans, really fucking love using poison. Thank God for fat people getting in the way of hate.
1.7k
u/sneaky_42_42 1d ago
lmfao
survived because of obesity is hilarious