The respected Italian daily, Corriere della Sera, has a thoroughly engaging article about the acceptance of obesity among Americans. In times gone-by in various cultures, as is well known, largeness was attractive because, it is said, it indicated wealth or power, since only the wealthy or powerful could afford to eat so well. Now, in modern America, where even the poorest tend not to starve, obesity indicates (with the exception of the few whose cause of obesity is clinical) lack of self-control, which is decidedly unattractive. Or is it?
According to this article, the U.S. has reached a point where,
Many obese people are beginning to consider the extra weight as an acceptable price for their relaxed and somewhat decadent lifestyles. Fatness has not become trendy, but it can be an acceptable compromise: Advertising, which for spots now uses models that are becoming more and more chubby, encourages this new psychology.
Apparently, the U.S. has a “National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance”, an organization that sprung from the ‘Fat Liberation Movement’ of the 1970s, and has reraised its head. Is this the political arm, apparently, to the greedy restaurant chains for greedy people:
.. the famous ‘Monster Thickburger’ from the Hardee’s chain – a mega-sandwich with 1410 calories and 107 grams of fat – is outdone by the ‘Double Burger’ of Carl’s Jr. (1520 calories and 111 grams of fat) while the ‘Double Quarter Pounder’ of McDonald’s, with barely 740 calories, struggles behind the front line, surpassed now even by the ‘Baconator’ (830 calories and 51 grams of fat) which was just introduced to the market by Wendy’s
Enough already. I recently heard another very un-PC idea that disgusts me a little less, and raises a plethora of interesting questions: the prosecution of parents for child abuse if they allow their children to become morbidly obese when they have the financial means to prevent it. I’m not sure I could quite countenance it, either, but the thought is at least as tempting as that Monster Thickburger.