Obese females, but not males, suffer on payday
Jean C
Obese females, but not males, suffer on payday
March 19, 2004
Never mind the cute tush, rock-hard abs or clog-free arteries.
You better cut the carbs, fats and calories for the cash.
In a yeah-that-sounds-about-right kind of study released this month,
researchers found that fat women earn 30 percent less money than their
slender counterparts.
So what's new, asks Kathy Summers, who works at the fitness and exercise
facility Curves For Women on Thompson Road.
"That's kind of the way society in general works," says Summers, who
doesn't consider herself thin, but says she's "halfway decent."
"I've always seen the better-looking women get the privileges," she says.
Actually, normal-weight women and even plump ones earn an average of $5,000
more a year than obese women, according to the Finnish study published in
the American Journal of Public Health.
To be discriminated against paywise, the study says, women had to be
considered obese -- not just chunky. Obesity is measured in terms of Body
Mass Index or body fat.
In plain pound terms, an obese woman would be a 5-foot-4-inch female who is
30 pounds or more overweight.
The pay barrier was most evident in professional women who worked
white-collar jobs, where it seemed looks were more important and equated to
intelligence or success.
Obese men, according to the study, faced no sinking salaries due to weight.
Like that's fair. Women already were behind in pay without having to worry
about their behinds.
Full-time working females earn 73 percent of what a full-time male makes,
according to the latest U.S. Census Bureau statistics. Working women's
families lose an average of $4,000 annually because of unequal pay.
It seems the fat factor is yet another area women have to fight through to
be recognized for their abilities.
Career consultant and author Sarah Banda Purvis says "double standards
based on gender differences have been applied in the work world for far too
long."
Among the most tasteless practices, she says, is paying a man more because
of some twisted belief that he has more financial responsibilities and
paying a woman less because she probably has a boyfriend or significant
other who is contributing to her income.
Add some fat to the woman's hips and thighs and the pay disparity is even
more glaring.
But instead of fighting what's a reality of corporate America, Joan
Breibart suggests fighting to get healthy.
"It's not fair, and I don't think any (company) would admit to doing it,
but I know it's the case," says Breibart, a 63-year-old size 6 who is the
president and co-founder of New York-based DietDirectives.com.
"In New York, there are all these retail stores, and they hire people on
the basis of what their size is," she says. "You can't get a job in a
restaurant here unless you are thin."
You can't do much about how employers behave, but you can at least change
yourself, she says.
Breibart's DietDirectives is a weight-loss system based on eating low
quantities of food in an effort to shrink the stomach.
Her concern is wiping out obesity, a super-sized American dilemma. "We have
to fix this problem," she says.
And, we hope, the rest will follow.
And just in case fat women feel picked on, here are a few other random pay
barriers based on physical characteristics, according to a study by London
Guildhall University:
• Plain-looking women earn 11 percent less than their gender average.
• Plain-looking men earn 15 percent less than their gender average.
• Short men earn 10 percent less than tall men and 5 percent less than
average-height men.
Contact Dana Knight at (317) 444-6012 or dana....@indystar.com .
Lady Veteran
Hash: SHA1
On 28 Mar 2004 11:28:08 +0100, Jean C <Jean...@yahoo.com> did not
write:
NR is troll in case you didn't already know.
He likes photography and he may live in Chicago...excuse he may
EXIST in Chicago. Poor Chicago.
LV
Lady Veteran
- -----------------------------------
"I rode a tank and held a general's rank
when the blitzkrieg raged and the bodies stank..."
- -Rolling Stones, Sympathy for the Devil
- ------------------------------------------------
People who hide behind anonymous remailers and
ridicule fat people are cowardly idiots with no
motive but malice.
- ---------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBQGcdkekoPZAZfLgsEQLU0QCgwoIbQLSe22nKNKQTFNMGi37s5b8AoNaJ
08noOrJLs/zM1GhQj8rkpwQD
=Z5Hp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
The Troll Hunter
too much:
>
>On 28 Mar 2004 11:28:08 +0100, Jean C <Jean...@yahoo.com> did not
>write:
>
>NR is troll in case you didn't already know.
I traced the Jean C message back to this IP addy: 67.30.10.247. This IP
addy belongs to you according to your NNTP Posting Host. You should learn
how to chain your remailers.
>
>He likes photography and he may live in Chicago...excuse he may
>EXIST in Chicago. Poor Chicago.
So, what's your excuse? Are you the troll or is NR sending these Jean C
messages from your PC?
It looks like case of the one who smelt it, dealt it. Now that you have
been caught, crawl back under your rock.
Lady Veteran
Hash: SHA1
On 28 Mar 2004 22:12:43 +0100, The Troll Hunter
<catchm...@cannothaveit.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 28 Mar 2004, Lady Veteran <arm...@jeepweb.com> protested a
>little too much:
>>
>>On 28 Mar 2004 11:28:08 +0100, Jean C <Jean...@yahoo.com> did not
>>write:
>>
>>NR is troll in case you didn't already know.
>
>I traced the Jean C message back to this IP addy: 67.30.10.247.
>This IP addy belongs to you according to your NNTP Posting Host.
>You should learn how to chain your remailers.
OF COURSE IT IS MY IP ADDRESS NUMBNUTS!!! I REPLIED TO THE
MESSAGE!!!! I DO NOT USE REMAILERS IN ANY SIZE SHAP OR
FORM-FUCKWIT!!!!
>
>>
>>He likes photography and he may live in Chicago...excuse he may
>>EXIST in Chicago. Poor Chicago.
>
>So, what's your excuse? Are you the troll or is NR sending these
>Jean C messages from your PC?
>
>It looks like case of the one who smelt it, dealt it. Now that you
>have been caught, crawl back under your rock.
>
>
STICK THAT UP YOUR ASS YOU FUCK!!!
LV
Lady Veteran
- -----------------------------------
"I rode a tank and held a general's rank
when the blitzkrieg raged and the bodies stank..."
- -Rolling Stones, Sympathy for the Devil
- ------------------------------------------------
People who hide behind anonymous remailers and
ridicule fat people are cowardly idiots with no
motive but malice.
- ---------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBQGdIpukoPZAZfLgsEQIeEQCffw2gJsPrrgZsyxoyEBcnDTTiLbgAnRUl
6NKkzwNbq2Jz+6/iyJYxTJmB
=kiPX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Robin King
news:i7ie60ph1aqjr99b7...@4ax.com...
|
| Perhaps it is not directly the weight that results in lower pay. If
| they are not smart enough to take off the weight they may not be
smart
| enough to warrant a higher paying job.
|
| James
Actually, strenuous dieting can shrink brain tissue, so your
assertion
does not make sense. Brilliance comes in all sizes, and so does
stupidity.
Robin
Lady Veteran
Hash: SHA1
You gave me my laugh for the day. Thanks....These idiots have been
nipping at my heels for quit awhile I thought I would enjoy some
primal therapy and tear their asses up for awhile. Yes it is profane
and even vulgar but they are only good as objects of vile profanity
and vulgar wishes anyway.
I have never encountered such a collective buck of sleaze in my life.
LV
Lady Veteran
- -----------------------------------
"I rode a tank and held a general's rank
when the blitzkrieg raged and the bodies stank..."
- -Rolling Stones, Sympathy for the Devil
- ------------------------------------------------
People who hide behind anonymous remailers and
ridicule fat people are cowardly idiots with no
motive but malice.
- ---------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBQGhHqukoPZAZfLgsEQKgJgCaA3fgtr3zXKshu4xI5MYIosoCRVgAn1fv
eeApH671RLczvynercEw3vhi
=jk3+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Daedalus
wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 05:00:32 GMT, "Robin King"
><mapl...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>><James> wrote in message
>>news:i7ie60ph1aqjr99b7...@4ax.com...
>>|
>>| Perhaps it is not directly the weight that results in lower pay.
>>| If they are not smart enough to take off the weight they may not
>>| be
>>smart
>>| enough to warrant a higher paying job.
>>|
>>| James
>>
>> Actually, strenuous dieting can shrink brain tissue, so your
>>assertion
>>does not make sense. Brilliance comes in all sizes, and so does
>>stupidity.
>>
>>Robin
>>
>You gave me my laugh for the day. Thanks....These idiots have been
>nipping at my heels for quit awhile I thought I would enjoy some
>primal therapy and tear their asses up for awhile. Yes it is profane
>and even vulgar but they are only good as objects of vile profanity
>and vulgar wishes anyway.
>
>I have never encountered such a collective buck of sleaze in my life.
>
>LV
>
FYI - You are stupid and insane. - Very very stupid, very very insane
HTH
Jade
boobala
importantly, their largeness is simply the posterboard for the defects in
their personality. Any person who cannot control what they put in their
mouth, for any reason, is not someone I would even consider having as a
partner. Fat is the outward result of low-self esteem, lack of impulse
control, and obsessive-compulsive behavior. Take away the fat and you still
have a defective person, except that you might not readily recognize the
problem hidden in a thin person. Fatness is actually a good thing. It is
the warning sign for other's to take heed.
Sorry, but Fat-Acceptance is simply another symptom (denial) of your
disease. Don't mean to be cruel, but you put yourself out on the block for
it.
One other thing that I notice about fat young women. A lot of them dress
provocatively. Low cut blouses, and too tight clothes. That only makes the
problem worse, and is further announcement of their inability to deal with
their issues. I would suspect if fat men wore tight jeans, and muscle
shirts they would get the same type of reaction that these women get.
Oh, and another thing as far as the work environment. Fat women are
incredibly consistent at prejudicial behavior against good looking thin
women. I worked for a company where most of the management consisted of fat
women. It was almost impossible to get a fair evaluation out of these
women. If you did well, it was because it was easy for you because you were
thin and pretty. If you didn't do as well it was because you didn't know
anything and just relied on your looks. Fat women held thin attractive women
to a much higher standard of performance. My performance evaluations rose
and fell by the size of the person doing the evaluation. Since it was
difficult to find anything wrong with my work, the total number was always
very high, but the fat women never failed to put in some negative comment
about me. That never happened when my evaluation was completed by a non-fat
woman.
BTW, the reasoning above regarding performance was the same reasoning I ran
into with some men co-worker's when I outperformed them.
Boobala
"Daedalus" <jad...@iknowyouarebuttobeornottobeis.com> wrote in message
news:mrhg609bdsmqe4iin...@4ax.com...
Lady Veteran
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 19:25:54 GMT, "boobala"
<boo...@boobalaisnthere.com> wrote:
Didn't get any last night? I hear Miss Dead Anus is available-if you
can get close enough, that is...
LV
Lady Veteran
- -----------------------------------
"I rode a tank and held a general's rank
when the blitzkrieg raged and the bodies stank..."
- -Rolling Stones, Sympathy for the Devil
- ------------------------------------------------
People who hide behind anonymous remailers and
ridicule fat people are cowardly idiots with no
motive but malice.
- ---------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBQGiqlukoPZAZfLgsEQJtrwCgn09/tjnxHAobZdft6HB+Xp2X7o0An0Hj
jb79fENedlD01GlOTJm9qBG4
=r31K
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Boobala
>
> On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 19:25:54 GMT, "boobala"
> <boo...@boobalaisnthere.com> wrote:
>
> Didn't get any last night? I hear Miss Dead Anus is available-if you
> can get close enough, that is...
>
> LV
>
>
> Lady Veteran
Your responding to me? You could have at least reposted my comments. The
only thing you could come back with is a vulgar stupid comment? No
intelligent discourse? I wouldn't have been as hard on you as you have been
yourself. But, there you go, you have made my point. Fat obsessive
compulsive woman = defective personality.
Thanks!(what a no brainer)
Boobala
Lady Veteran
Hash: SHA1
A vulgar comment was more than fitting for the garbage you and other
fools have been laying on fat women forever. It deserves nothing more
than what it got.
What makes you think that you have the right to set the standard for
fat women.
You get your cock sucked and you like it and I bet you aint too
particular who does it.
If you think I have a defective personality because I am my fat
sisters are not going to accept what you and your fellow pukes think
a fat woman is and what she can contribute to a relationship than you
can go to hell and stay there.
I don't give a good goddam what you think.
You can not even use an email addy that work you are so convinced you
are Mr. Perfect.
I have absolutely no use for you and your fellow walking dicks that
think they have a right to try and hurt people and deny them the
basic dignity of being human.
Someday somehow, someone will hurt you and you will be so distraught
you may want to put your head in the oven.
Believe me it will be no loss to decent people anywhere.
Not go crawl back under your rock you fucking subhuman.
LV
Lady Veteran
- -----------------------------------
"I rode a tank and held a general's rank
when the blitzkrieg raged and the bodies stank..."
- -Rolling Stones, Sympathy for the Devil
- ------------------------------------------------
People who hide behind anonymous remailers and
ridicule fat people are cowardly idiots with no
motive but malice.
- ---------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBQGi6hekoPZAZfLgsEQLgZACfYKj82ldMqo5tJg3ejYRaJASYL2cAn1ev
+TkInh2rdojx06hGr+VoCLq6
=meEv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
The Danimal
> I find excessively fat people to be physically unattractive.
What percentage of excessively fat people would you
guess you would find physically attractive if they lost
the excess fat?
> But, more
> importantly, their largeness is simply the posterboard for the defects in
> their personality.
That, and the failure of others around them to set clear
conditions to guide them.
For example, how often do people who post as slender attractive
women on Usenet promise some morbidly obese guy they would
"do" him if he lost, say, 100 pounds of fat?
A lot of morbidly obese people probably have no way to predict
exactly what social and monetary benefits they might obtain by
learning to restrain their gluttony. But they certainly know
how good the next box of doughnuts will taste.
So we are basically asking them to sacrifice a sure thing
in exchange for an iffy thing.
> Any person who cannot control what they put in their
> mouth, for any reason, is not someone I would even consider having as a
> partner.
I feel much the same way about people who post to Usenet.
Which is sad because I think I have some potential as a
narcissist.
> Fat is the outward result of low-self esteem, lack of impulse
> control, and obsessive-compulsive behavior.
I don't think it's that general. Obesity is probably due to
more specific defects in brain chemistry. Few people have
much in the way of impulse control. It's more a matter that
different people feel different impulses.
There are lots of fat women who can't say no to a doughnut but
can easily say no to sex. Unless the sex includes doughnuts.
Lots of men are the opposite. Screw the doughnuts, give us
the sex.
Also, I think you are flat wrong about self-esteem. If anything,
fat people have FAR TOO MUCH self-esteem. How many fat people
would agree with your assessment they are physically
unattractive?
> Take away the fat and you still
> have a defective person, except that you might not readily recognize the
> problem hidden in a thin person.
A thin person can hide a Usenet addiction pretty well.
> Fatness is actually a good thing. It is
> the warning sign for other's to take heed.
> Sorry, but Fat-Acceptance is simply another symptom (denial) of your
> disease. Don't mean to be cruel, but you put yourself out on the block for
> it.
> One other thing that I notice about fat young women. A lot of them dress
> provocatively. Low cut blouses, and too tight clothes. That only makes the
> problem worse, and is further announcement of their inability to deal with
> their issues. I would suspect if fat men wore tight jeans, and muscle
> shirts they would get the same type of reaction that these women get.
That's why I'm telling you you've got the self-esteem
thing backwards. Fat young women dress provocatively because
they actually think they are hot.
That's excessive self-esteem bordering on delusions of grandeur.
It's the female counterpart to a Napolean complex.
> Oh, and another thing as far as the work environment. Fat women are
> incredibly consistent at prejudicial behavior against good looking thin
> women. I worked for a company where most of the management consisted of fat
> women.
Why? You should work for a company run by old-school unreconstructed
male sexists who understand the value of slender attractive young
women---i.e., that slender attractive young women are the most
valuable objects in the universe.
> It was almost impossible to get a fair evaluation out of these
> women. If you did well, it was because it was easy for you because you were
> thin and pretty.
Depending on the line of work, that might be true. Was this
company running an escort service? Or was it a modeling
agency? Even in businesses that are not overtly about selling
sex, being sexy can be an advantage. Not that I have ever
been in a position to cash in personally.
Being sexy can also be a distraction to cow-orkers, however.
If the business is not directly about selling sex in some
form, the gains that might accrue to a sexy individual
might not produce a net gain for the business as a whole.
For example, if a sexy woman is able to motivate male
co-workers to help her out with something, that simply
pulls them away from their other projects.
> If you didn't do as well it was because you didn't know
> anything and just relied on your looks.
Just in case anybody might ever wonder, I definitely would
inflate my evaluations of a hot chick, provided she flirts
reasonably well and is a team player.
> Fat women held thin attractive women
> to a much higher standard of performance.
White people also look out for each other.
> My performance evaluations rose
> and fell by the size of the person doing the evaluation. Since it was
> difficult to find anything wrong with my work, the total number was always
> very high, but the fat women never failed to put in some negative comment
> about me. That never happened when my evaluation was completed by a non-fat
> woman.
I'm guessing you rarely bring boxes of doughnuts to the office
for your cow-orkers. Do that more often and watch your evaluations
skyrocket.
People aren't very objective except in very limited venues
such as sports with objective rules. Everywhere else, people
judge everything primarily according to how things make them
feel. Then they think up logical-sounding reasons to justify
their arbitrary preferences.
If you make your boss feel good, for example by consistently
feeding her doughnut cravings, she's going to have a hard time
hating you.
> BTW, the reasoning above regarding performance was the same reasoning I ran
> into with some men co-worker's when I outperformed them.
I'm guessing you rarely give your co-workers blow jobs.
I saw a show on the History Channel that said in
San Francisco, 1850, during the gold rush gambling boom,
the lady card dealers did very well because men at
the time did not mind being cheated by attractive women.
Whereas a cheating male card dealer risked being shot
by an angry drunk pistol-packing prospector.
-- the Danimal
boobala
news:cac1ad88.04032...@posting.google.com...
> "boobala" <boo...@boobalaisnthere.com> wrote in message
news:<6L_9c.6688$lt2....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> > I find excessively fat people to be physically unattractive.
>
> What percentage of excessively fat people would you
> guess you would find physically attractive if they lost
> the excess fat?
No way to answer that. I suppose there would be a great many. But, pure
physical attraction does not address the personality disorders that would or
could still reside within the person.
>
> > But, more
> > importantly, their largeness is simply the posterboard for the defects
in
> > their personality.
>
> That, and the failure of others around them to set clear
> conditions to guide them.
That may be true. But, each of us are ultimately responsible for taking
control of our own lives.
>
> For example, how often do people who post as slender attractive
> women on Usenet promise some morbidly obese guy they would
> "do" him if he lost, say, 100 pounds of fat?
I would not know the answer to that. But, how does your question relate to
your statement above in terms of their ability to take responsibility for
their condition?
>
> A lot of morbidly obese people probably have no way to predict
> exactly what social and monetary benefits they might obtain by
> learning to restrain their gluttony. But they certainly know
> how good the next box of doughnuts will taste.
I don't agree. The social and monetary benefits are glaring at them
constantly.
>
> So we are basically asking them to sacrifice a sure thing
> in exchange for an iffy thing.
Possibly. But, therin lies their defect.
>
> > Any person who cannot control what they put in their
> > mouth, for any reason, is not someone I would even consider having as a
> > partner.
>
> I feel much the same way about people who post to Usenet.
lol
>
> Which is sad because I think I have some potential as a
> narcissist.
>
ok
> > Fat is the outward result of low-self esteem, lack of impulse
> > control, and obsessive-compulsive behavior.
>
> I don't think it's that general. Obesity is probably due to
> more specific defects in brain chemistry. Few people have
> much in the way of impulse control. It's more a matter that
> different people feel different impulses.
I don't agree. Most people have some degree of impulse control. Otherwise
a society would not endure.
>
> There are lots of fat women who can't say no to a doughnut but
> can easily say no to sex. Unless the sex includes doughnuts.
> Lots of men are the opposite. Screw the doughnuts, give us
> the sex.
>
Perhaps sex does not give them the satisfaction that a doughnut does. Also,
a doughnut doesn't condemn your big butt.
> Also, I think you are flat wrong about self-esteem. If anything,
> fat people have FAR TOO MUCH self-esteem. How many fat people
> would agree with your assessment they are physically
> unattractive?
Most people do not consider themselves unattractive. When asked to rate
themselves on a 1 -10 scale in terms of attractiveness, most people choose
7.
>
> > Take away the fat and you still
> > have a defective person, except that you might not readily recognize the
> > problem hidden in a thin person.
>
> A thin person can hide a Usenet addiction pretty well.
Of course. What's the point?
>
> > Fatness is actually a good thing. It is
> > the warning sign for other's to take heed.
> > Sorry, but Fat-Acceptance is simply another symptom (denial) of your
> > disease. Don't mean to be cruel, but you put yourself out on the block
for
> > it.
> > One other thing that I notice about fat young women. A lot of them
dress
> > provocatively. Low cut blouses, and too tight clothes. That only makes
the
> > problem worse, and is further announcement of their inability to deal
with
> > their issues. I would suspect if fat men wore tight jeans, and muscle
> > shirts they would get the same type of reaction that these women get.
>
> That's why I'm telling you you've got the self-esteem
> thing backwards. Fat young women dress provocatively because
> they actually think they are hot.
I don't agree. They dress that way because they think the only thing they
have to offer is sex. A fat girl (I am told) is much easier to get into
bed than an attractive girl. Fat girls don't have the same number of
choices.
>
> That's excessive self-esteem bordering on delusions of grandeur.
> It's the female counterpart to a Napolean complex.
They confuse a guy wanting to get laid with a guy being attracted to them.
>
> > Oh, and another thing as far as the work environment. Fat women are
> > incredibly consistent at prejudicial behavior against good looking thin
> > women. I worked for a company where most of the management consisted of
fat
> > women.
>
> Why? You should work for a company run by old-school unreconstructed
> male sexists who understand the value of slender attractive young
> women---i.e., that slender attractive young women are the most
> valuable objects in the universe.
I have worked for both.
>
> > It was almost impossible to get a fair evaluation out of these
> > women. If you did well, it was because it was easy for you because you
were
> > thin and pretty.
>
> Depending on the line of work, that might be true. Was this
> company running an escort service? Or was it a modeling
> agency? Even in businesses that are not overtly about selling
> sex, being sexy can be an advantage. Not that I have ever
> been in a position to cash in personally.
Has nothing to do with the line of work. This was a huge corporation
employing professionals at large salaries. No one was selling sex. Except
some of the fat girls.
>
> Being sexy can also be a distraction to cow-orkers, however.
> If the business is not directly about selling sex in some
> form, the gains that might accrue to a sexy individual
> might not produce a net gain for the business as a whole.
>
> For example, if a sexy woman is able to motivate male
> co-workers to help her out with something, that simply
> pulls them away from their other projects.
>
> > If you didn't do as well it was because you didn't know
> > anything and just relied on your looks.
>
> Just in case anybody might ever wonder, I definitely would
> inflate my evaluations of a hot chick, provided she flirts
> reasonably well and is a team player.
Well, that's a problem. You shouldn't be inflating your evaluations based
on looks, nor should anyone deflate evaluations based on looks. That it
happens I am not disagreeing with.
>
> > Fat women held thin attractive women
> > to a much higher standard of performance.
>
> White people also look out for each other.
I don't know that I agree with that. Many minorities in my field. There
are very explicit company policies against discrimination because we live in
a very litigous society.
>
> > My performance evaluations rose
> > and fell by the size of the person doing the evaluation. Since it was
> > difficult to find anything wrong with my work, the total number was
always
> > very high, but the fat women never failed to put in some negative
comment
> > about me. That never happened when my evaluation was completed by a
non-fat
> > woman.
>
> I'm guessing you rarely bring boxes of doughnuts to the office
> for your cow-orkers. Do that more often and watch your evaluations
> skyrocket.
No, lol, never brought any doughnuts. But, I did bring them to the chubby
secretaries of my clients. I am not dumb.
>
> People aren't very objective except in very limited venues
> such as sports with objective rules. Everywhere else, people
> judge everything primarily according to how things make them
> feel. Then they think up logical-sounding reasons to justify
> their arbitrary preferences.
Pretty much agree.
>
> If you make your boss feel good, for example by consistently
> feeding her doughnut cravings, she's going to have a hard time
> hating you.
Not really. If you are moving up in the company because of performance and
she sees you as a threat, dougnuts are not going to be the cure. She can
buy them herself and she usually does.
>
> > BTW, the reasoning above regarding performance was the same reasoning I
ran
> > into with some men co-worker's when I outperformed them.
>
> I'm guessing you rarely give your co-workers blow jobs.
Nope.
>
> I saw a show on the History Channel that said in
> San Francisco, 1850, during the gold rush gambling boom,
> the lady card dealers did very well because men at
> the time did not mind being cheated by attractive women.
> Whereas a cheating male card dealer risked being shot
> by an angry drunk pistol-packing prospector.
That's a male problem. If males did not respond then it wouldn't happen.
If your selling something that nobody buys, you'll find a new product if
your smart.
>
Boobala
> -- the Danimal
boobala
news:d6eh601dom7t0uuap...@4ax.com...
That's the way to win converts to your side.
LOL
Boobala
Nemesis
(Steve Chaney, NR's Tormentor ®) with the help of a thousand monkeys
banging on keyboards, was finally able to type out the following:
>Lashing out at your betters again, eh?
>
>
More like lashing out at her inferiors, as you are a perfect example
of.
--
Nemesis
ICQ #4610826
Daedalus
wrote:
>On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 21:38:17 GMT, gunh...@NRismykicktoy.pacbell.net
>(Steve Chaney, NR's Tormentor ®) with the help of a thousand monkeys
>banging on keyboards, was finally able to type out the following:
>
>>Lashing out at your betters again, eh?
>>
>>
>More like lashing out at her inferiors, as you are a perfect example
>of.
Didn't you know, dude? Steve Chaney aka Wonderbra aka Wacky
Information Minister has spanked all of his 'enemies' off usenet.
*snicker*
Jade
Jim Dutton
Look'a'like Boarella lost it again.
-Jeem, whooeeee. Or is it SueEeEeeeeee
Archive-name: stevechaney-faq
Posting-Frequency: whenever
Last-modified: 2003/11/04
Version: 2.1
gunh...@pacbell.net
alt.bonehead.steve-chaney FAQ
Table of Contents
1. Who is Steve Chaney?
2. Why is he hated by almost everyone?
3. Is Chaney a loser?
4. Is Chaney obese?
5. How long has be been making an ass of himself on usenet?
6. Does he really have a girlfriend?
7. What other names does he go by?
8. What qualifies Steve as a net loon?
9. Was Chaney thrown out of school?
10. Did Chaney threaten his ex-girlfriend?
11. Is Chaney insane?
12. Is Chaney a welcher?
13. Is Chaney a stalker?
14. What does Chaney think of Shakespeare?
15. What does Shakespeare think of Chaney?
16. Does Chaney have a learning disability?
17. Why does Steve Chaney have his own newsgroup?
18. Is Steve Chaney insanely jealous of Brad Pitt?
19. Where can i learn more about Steve Chaney?
20. Where can i learn more about Chaney's girlfriend?
21. What is my final advice for Steve Chaney?
22. What will happen to Chaney if he does not take my advice?
23. What Does Steve Chaneys friends say about him?
24. What has Steve Chaney been flipping out about lately?
25. Recent threats, rants and a view into the mind of psychosis
****
1. Who is Steve Chaney?
Steve Chaney is the official loser of soc.singles. When he isn't shoving
his foot in his mouth on soc.singles he squanders his time playing Quake,
farting around on IRC, watching Highlander, drooling over Japanese
cartoons and creating web pages devoted to these extremely productive
activities among which are such diverse elements as:
http://www.clandenial.org
http://www.self-acceptance.org
The real Steve Chaney is revealed through his posts at:
http://www.pat_acceptance.org
Bring a vomit bag.
2. Why is he hated by almost everyone?
He is that most annoying of creatures: The total failure who thinks he
knows it all. Everywhere he goes he can be seen offering worthless advice
on subjects he knows nothing about. He thinks he is terribly clever.
Combine this mediocre intellect with a total lack of any wit or charm and
you have a potent combination that led him to be dubbed the Natural Born
Troll.
He is particulary hated on soc.singles:
Steve's participation in soc.singles is characterized by four things:
(1) he professes to hate all snigglers [regular participants in
soc.singles], yet he is always seeking to prove that he is the equal
of a sniggler; (2) he attempts, endlessly, to advise others who are
obviously more intelligent, successful, and happier than he about how
to become an unhappy failure just like him; (3) he argues with
everything any sniggler tells him, but mysteriously months later the
advice he received is the advice he is now giving. He claims, however,
that it's his own; and (4) documentation. Steve claims to be the king
of documenting claims. However, his feeble attempts at documenting his
claims either prove nothing or prove the opposite of what he's
arguing.
---- From: m...@oz.net (Mike)
Message-ID: <3456834b....@news.oz.net>
Important revision (1999/2/10):
Originally I believed that Chaney was not hated for his politics.
However Daniel Mocsny (dmo...@mfm.com) has argued convincingly that
within the culture of soc.singles social conservatives are anathema
especially if they are anti-abortion.
So my fiscal conservatism or tree's opposition to high taxes or Dawn's
pro-gun stance not inspiring the same degree of opprobrium as Chaney does
not mean that conservatism is acceptable there.
On soc.singles it is indeed possible to be politically incorrect.
3. Is Chaney a loser?
Yes.
He is a fat slob.
He is in denial about being a fat slob.
His girlfriend is a fat slob.
His previous long-distance girlfriend was a fat slob.
He lived with his mommy til he was 25 years old.
Like many losers he hates and envies those doing better than he is.
He whines constantly.
He blames social forces for his own failures and inadequacies.
His idea of dating advice is to brag about how you eat Ramen Noodles but
plan to learn to cook for your wife (whine, grovel, whine)
He is almost universally despised everywhere he posts.
He enjoys many loser hobbies including listening to Rush Limbaugh and Dr.
Laura, babbling on IRC, playing Quake, watching and obsessing over
shallow
TV shows, and producing garish, clumsily constructed web pages about the
above loser topics. (see question 1.)
4. Is Chaney obese?
Yes. He claims he weighs 230 pounds and is 5 foot 11 inches tall.
>Tokeman wrote:
>>I challenge you to post your current weight and body fat percentage.
>
230lbs; I haven't got a bodyfat percentage figure yet.
---- gun...@crl.crl.com (Steve Chaney)
Message-ID: <6cu62m$o...@crl.crl.com>
He had managed to lose about 10 pounds in six months as of 3/98. At this
rate he might attain a healthy weight in about two and a half years.
However his recent reticence about posting his current weight might be an
indication that he has failed to make any progress since the last update.
I would also note that the original claim in this FAQ that he was
morbidly obese may have been in error. Steve's BMI is over 30 but it is
not 40. Recently Crash Street Kidd helpfully pointed out that a BMI of 40
is the threshold of morbid obesity. Of course he never said a peep about
it before but better late than never.
Any further data on the medical definition of morbid obesity would be
helpful.
However:
Tokeman wrote:
>Jim Dutton wrote:
> > Said the 5'6" 330 lb lump of lard.
>
> Jeem, what is your source of those numbers?
> I am revising the alt.bonehead.steve-chaney FAQ and I am trying to
resolve
> this mystery once and for all.
I've been suspicious about that all along. My suspicions were
heightened when the letter from his ex girlfriend (Toni?) was included
in the bonehead faq - wherein she states "He weighs close to 300
lbs..."
---- Leanne R Campbell <lrca...@hsc.vcu.edu>
- Message-ID: <Pine.A41.3.96.990207...@taurus.vcu.edu>
It is possible that Steve has been lying about this all along.
However Jeem admits his figure is a guess so it should also be taken with
a grain of cheesy poof flavoring:
>> >Tokeman wrote:
>> >> Jim Dutton wrote:
>> >> > Said the 5'6" 330 lb lump of lard.
>> >>
>> >> Jeem, what is your source of those numbers?
Off the top of my head. I figure we might as well all be making crap up.
Trish is a crack whore. Chaney is an expert on dating. I have seen him
and one of his low self esteem victims pictures tho. The numbers are not
far off
Pictures don't lie.
---- j...@MCS.COM (Jim Dutton)
- Message-ID: <79pdd0$2c5v$1...@Mercury.mcs.net>
My apologies to Steve for saying he was MORBIDLY obese for the past year
based on an erroneous definition.
In future I shall not take John Fereira's (ja...@cornell.edu) word on
anything.
Incidentally - how's the diet going chubs?
5. How long has be been making an ass of himself on usenet?
Since the summer of 1992 -- at least that's when I first noticed him
waddling
into talk.abortion.
---- pat...@io.com (Patrick L. Humphrey)
Message-ID: <szksotv...@pentagon.io.com>
6. Does he really have a girlfriend?
Unknown. He claims to. He says she is 180 pounds and 5 foot 5 inches tall
ie obese.
7. What other names does he go by?
Gunhed. Tunastankboy. Airplane Boy. PropellerBoy. The Hamster. Anime.
Lordfeff. SharonFan. Richie Ryan. Gund00d. fatcrack. Eric Cartman.
Readingdisabilityboy. Pat Bastard. Mailbomber. Pelican Gullet. Welchboy.
Anal plug. Stebo Spnako. Fuckhead.
8. What qualifies Steve as a net loon?
He is mentioned in the net.legends FAQ as a noted talk.abortion wacko.
His qualifications are also bound to be on display in any thread where he
is at work.
9. Was Chaney thrown out of school?
It is widely claimed that he flunked out of college. This may be
usenet legend only. Hopefully someday Steve will clear this whole
thing up.
---- From: m...@oz.net (Mike)
Message-ID: <3456834b....@news.oz.net>
Chaney wrote:
>I, on the other hand, have been asked to explain the claim that I was
>thrown out of college. Seeing as I never was, what can I say? Jim,
mind
>you, will never provide any documentation showing I was ever thrown out
of
>college, because it never happened.
Hmmm Your ex -fiancee who glows now that she's married to what she
refers
to as "a real man" states you were unable to maintain a "c" average and
were
thrown out of school.
---- j...@MCS.COM (Jim Dutton)
Message-ID: <69vnn6$85i$1...@Jupiter.Mcs.Net>
10. Did Chaney threaten his ex-girlfriend?
Absolutely without a doubt, first hand knowledge, yes.
---- Ben Tersian <ter...@modwiz.com>
Message-ID: <344CA4EC...@modwiz.com>
We have her firsthand testimony as well:
>Date: Wed, 31 May 1995 19:21:16 -0600 (MDT)
>From: What happens if I press THIS button? <ana...@math.enmu.edu>
>To: Talk-List <talk...@leba.net>
>Subject: This is the side of Tawnya that GunHed won't tell anyone.
(snip)
>There was a lot that caused me to no longer want to be with Steve. Some
>of it was the fact that he was too .. rigid. To me, he had no sense of
>humour and he took all my questions to be personal attacks. Yes, I
>admit that I was a bitch to him for the last year. That's because I did
>not want to be with him. Since April of '94, I told him that I wanted
>out of the relationship. But he wouldn't let me go. He refused to let
>me leave him even though he knew I wasn't happy with him. So, I started
>arguments at any opportunity I could. I made his life a living hell
>trying to get him to let me go, but he wouldn't.
(snip)
>It was almost fateful the night that Steve and I got into a monstrous
>argument. It was a stupid argument over which wordprocessor was better:
>WordPerfect 6.0 for DOS or MS-Word6.0. For nearly 2 hours, we argued.
>Finally, Steve cut the "TALK" session that we were holding at 6:58pm,
>MST, on Thursday, March 9th. Since I had a class at 7, I simply logged
>out and went to class. I came back at 10pm, MST, and there was a very
>nasty letter in my box saying that I "fucked up" and he was leaving me
>because "he was tired of my bullshit and how I was treating him like
>shit". It was then that I realized that I was finally free of him. I
>didn't leave him, he left me.
(snip)
>Monday morning when I went back online, I found out that Steve had
>started spreading that I cheated on him. I tell you this. I did not
>cheat on him. It was not until the 10th of March, the day AFTER Steve
>left me, that I finally agreed to go out with John. AFTER he had left
>me.
>
>Then, he swore to me that if I did not leave John then he would come
>after me with a shotgun. Now that seems a little farfetched as he won't
>come to New Mexico, where I have always lived and he also swore that if
>I came to California, then he would have a shotgun ready for me and/or
>have me arrested.
>
>But for what? I never once said that I would go see him, and I don't
>think that he owns all of California. He has threatened to do too many
>things to me, anything from Netdeath to reality death. And this hasn't
>been just because I left him, but because I wasn't lett him control me
>any longer.
>
>When he came here in January of '94, it was a happy time. Until I saw
>that he lived for control. I went on IRC one night just to check my
>mail and to say Hi to anyone I knew, I was kicked off by a dork who had
>taken over #talk. But because I didn't go into catatonics, Steve went
>crazy.
>
>He stomped around my room with fists clenched and there was a wild look
>in his eyes. Now I'm 6' and weigh approximately 200 (give or take 5
>lbs) lbs and I know how to defend myself. However, I was afraid of what
>Steve was going to do as he slammed his fist against the wall (which
>caused it to boom out loudly) and I knew that if he were to strike me, I
>wouldn't be in a good position to do anything against him considering
>he's 6'0 and weighs nearly 300lbs. Basically, I was not safe with him,
>or so I felt.
>
>Probably by now, all of you are bored stiff. I admit that this is not
>what you designed this talk-list for. But please, realize this. I did
>NOT cheat on Steve. He dumped me and there was someone here who was
>willing to go out with me. John is here, with me, in the same area as I
>am. He's not pushing marriage on me. Steve was going to make me either
>have his children or raise them, whereas I didn't want either. Also,
>John shares my love for animals, whereas Steve would rather seem them as
>roadkill.
(snip)
>I leave the judgement up to God's hands, as we humans are too flawed to
>judge ourselves. Only the Purest may decide.
>
>Toni A. Anaya
11. Is Chaney insane?
Yes.
12. Is Chaney a welcher?
Chaney offered to meet any sniggler on at the sniggler's locale and on
his terms to engage in a "pickup" contest. When his offer was
accepted, he revoked it.
---- From: m...@oz.net (Mike)
Message-ID: <3456834b....@news.oz.net>
13. Is Chaney a stalker?
I'd say so, seeing as he's been promising for the past five years to
confront
me at my workplace -- Rice University -- for my alleged racism (and,
whether
he admits it or not, for nothing more than being pro-choice and a parent
_and_
grandparent). Funny thing is, even now that he's making tons of alleged
money, he _still_ can't figure out how to get from Los Angeles to Houston
to
do his confronting.
----pat...@io.com (Patrick L. Humphrey)
Message-ID: <szksotv...@pentagon.io.com>
He is a netstalker. He mercilessly hounded Trish Roberts and accused
her of being a crackhead.
---- From: m...@oz.net (Mike)
Message-ID: <3456834b....@news.oz.net>
14. What does Chaney think of Shakespeare?
Generally, the LOWLIEST of Japanese cartoons have a deeper plot and more
creativity, than the very BEST of William Shakespeare's plays.
---- gun...@crl.crl.com (Steve Chaney)
and time has not diminished his idiocy:
Liliolanus wrote:
>Steve Chaney (gun...@surf.side.net) :
>> Question:
>> I do however wonder why most Americans could give a rat's ass about
>> such a presumed prestigious fellow as Shakespeare, who but for the
>> help of a few fans who rediscovered and redistributed his work, would
>> have never amounted to anything. Shakespeare is big shit with the
>> literary academia, and with students trying to get through the
>> bullshit english lit classes
>
>Yo Steve - this opinion about Shakespeare? You know how much I
>respect this opinion about Shakespeare? I respect it like I respect
>
>the common cry of curs, whose breath I hate
>as reek o' th' rotten fens, whose loves I prize
>As the dead carcasses of unburied men
>That do corrupt my air: I banish you.
- From: wey...@teleport.com (Lydia van der Weyden)
Message-ID: <3957aec0....@news.teleport.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000
References: <2c12fd335fb7aaf9...@anon.xg.nu>
<396c6a48...@news.earthlink.net>
<MPG.13be05ef9...@news.cis.dfn.de>
15. What does Shakespeare think of Chaney?
"Think him a great way fool, solely a coward"
-- All's Well That Ends Well, I,1
"A whoreson beetle-headed, flap-ear'd knave!"
-- "Taming of the Shrew", IV,1
15b. What would ol' Will say to him if he were on the internet?
"Hang, cur! hang, you whoreson, insolent noisemaker!"
-- The Temptest, I,1
"A pox o' your throat, you bawling, blasphemous, incharitable dog!"
-- same
---- contributed by the...@inlink.com (The_Doge of St. Louis)
Message-ID: <thedoge-0111970153330001@ppp-207-193-20-
62.stlsmo.swbell.net>
16. Does Chaney have a learning disability?
Unsure, he was placed in a special school as a child for a learning
disability.
---- Ben Tersian <ter...@modwiz.com>
Message-ID: <344CA4EC...@modwiz.com>
Most of your difficulties here stem from your own misunderstandings and
poor reading and comprehension skills. The classic example was when you
claimed to have seen Seth's plate at a gathering, at a time when he was
3,000 miles away. The plate in question actually belonged to someone
named Keith (and was so marked), but you were so convinced that Seth was
there to torment you that you imagined his presence, as verified by his
---- m...@news.pe.net (Michael K. Lerch)
Message-ID: <7lils0$uj$1...@magnolia.pe.net>
17. Why does Steve Chaney have his own newsgroup?
Because he's a bonehead of course!
18. Is Steve Chaney insanely jealous of Brad Pitt?
Sure looks that way:
"Fortunately I know enough women who don't like him, that Brad Pitt
doesn't bother me. There's too many Brad Pitt's to get jealous of
them all."
"I don't like very much of this sick and twisted, narrow-minded,
MTV-poisoned, Brad Pitt and Claudia Schiffer, you're-a-nice-guy-but,
women can be victims but men have to suck it all up and yet we call
this equality society."
"The same is true of good looking guys. Look at Brad Pitt (ick)."
"But I do have to admit, I personally have seen the "I have to be in
love first..." and then Brad Pitt's picture comes on the tube and it's
all "I'd love to be with him!" (and you know what that means)."
"I have to love him before I bed him - OOH there's Brad Pitt I'd love
to take him home!".
"Tut tut tut. What evidence do you have that Brad Pitt *IS* smart?"
"Brad Pitt is the worst actor to have ever existed. Jerry's kids
could do better than he can!"
"I love Brad Pitt's role as an insane asylum inmate in '12 Monkeys.'
It was so fitting."
"Rarely does any other country's women give a whit about David
Hasselhoff or Brad Pitt."
"For many women, conversational skills basically constitute how much
you know about sports and Brad Pitt, or how many jokes you can tell."
"They watch soap operas and think Brad Pitt is the be all and end all
of mankind - of course there is that rebellious "Long Live Tom Cruise"
splinter group."
"They may be desperate for a Brad Pitt Man, mind you, but they're
desperate."
---- gun...@crl.crl.com (Steve Chaney)
19. Where can i learn more about steve chaney?
20. Where can i learn more about chaney's girlfriend?
http://www.fatchicksinpartyhats.com
but seriously you can judge for yourself whether or not stebe is a
desperate loser by perusing the followink actual photographs of his
female equivalent in her natural habitat:
http://www.ejeem.com/p.jpg
http://www.ejeem.com/i.jpg
http://www.ejeem.com/g.jpg
21. Whats this stuff about Chaney being a pedophile?
Chaney often makes pedophile comments about his antagonists children.
On 5 occasions he has failed to accept offers to repeat said comments
to the face of parents of these children. He appears proud of his extensive
history of being a snivelling coward.
22. What is my final advice for Steve Chaney?
Commit suicide.
Ditch the boybra.
23. What will happen to Chaney if he does not take my advice?
Listen up Steve, this is your life:
Here's what will happen to you. You will get older and each year you will
get fatter. Your inactivity and reclusiveness will make you more and more
repulsive. If you're LUCKY this obese sow you're porking will deteriorate
at the same rate and have just as few options as you do. You will have
sex about once every two weeks, then once a month, then every other
month. You will fall into a rut at a job paying a little more than the
average income. You will spend endless hours watching TV and playing
video games. Time will slip away. And then one day you will be
contemplating your life. And you will feel a terrible emptiness as you
look back at the horrible void that was your existence. You'll shiver not
knowing why. And then the grim reaper will reach out and erase you from
the world and they'll bury you and no one will remember and no one will
care because in your 42 years you never, ever, no not ever, not even
once, did anything bold or interesting or original.
The End.
24. Why Steve Chaneys supporters say he's insane:
What Steve Chaneys most adament supporter says about him:
In article <3D5BDB06...@shoggoth.net>,
Subject: Re: Speaking of columbine
Date: Thu Aug 15 11:47:02 CDT 2002
Kthulah <kth...@shoggoth.net> wrote:
The answer as to the whys would be:
Because he was already sick, and people (some who even stated that he
was sick) pushed him and pushed him until he snapped.
I don't push crazy people.
There's a reason I don't talk to certain people here. There's a reason
that if I do talk to certain other people here, it's very light or very
constructive. Whatever may go on in your little world, I've seen people
go over the edge.
25. What has Steve Chaney been exhibiting his insaness about lately:
Mr. Chaney is mentioned twice in part 4 of the net legends
faq:
http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/faqs/legends/legends4.html
Mr. Chaney also has his own faq, a copy of which can be
found at:
http://www.pat-acceptance.org/steve_FAQ.html
Recently, Mr. Chaney bragged about hiring a private
investigator to track down an ex girlfriend (from nine years
earlier) whom he claimed defamed him nine years ago. His
rationale for tracking her down was to be able to sue her in
case she ever defamed him again. Of course, this girlfriend
hadn't uttered a peep in Mr. Chaney's direction in the
preceding nine years. When she found out and questioned him
about throwing threats to her about the internet he responded by
threatening to post a sexually explicit video of her he had obtained when
they where dating. A video he promised and swoar he had disposed of.
He then crowed about how tough he was by threatening to post naked pictures
of women he knew.
To see Mr. Chaney's explanation of
these events, see:
http://www.pat-acceptance.org/kookrant.html
http://www.pat-acceptance.org/kookrant2.html
Mr. Chaney's net-kook credentials were recently acknowledged
in alt.usnet.kooks, wherein Mr. Chaney was voted kook of the
month for July 2003.
Message ID: <bgrguq$p90$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>
Some of Mr. Chaney's other notable achievements include
initiating child molestation remarks in the newsgroup
soc.singles, running a self-acceptance/fat-acceptance
website (http://www.self-acceptance.to) while insulting the
size and weight of posters with whom he has disagreed,
posting over 10,000 forgeries of other posters to usenet,
and having a movie of his life story made and published on
the internet.
That movie can be viewed here:
http://www.pat-acceptance.org/pat.html
26. Recent threats, rants and view into the mind of psychosis:
If I catch you busting into a mass and vilifying a church, the last thing
you'll hear in your entire life, will be the ratatatatat of an automatic.
- --Steve Chaney to Mark Ira Kaufman
Message-ID: <1992May19.2...@csus.edu>
Young Mr. Chaney, the man who has told me that he wants to murder me and
sodomize women in my family, has said, repeatedly, that advocates for
choice had vandalized churches.
- --Mark Ira Kaufman
Message-ID: <1992Jun6.1...@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
she probably has to have her picture taken by satellite because no normal
camera can fit all that whale blubber into one picture.
- --Steve Chaney
Message-ID: <1992Oct28.0...@csus.edu>
Excessively fat women look ugly. It is impractical to try and have sex when
she's 100lbs overweight and the weight is all fat - but most women ain't
that big.
- --Steve Chaney
Message-ID: <3814f6ca$0$2...@nntp1.ba.best.com>
You of course do know what a lot of Asian women prefer, right? Besides,
after fucking a cute asian chick, experience tells me it isn't all that
except that she looks good on your arm. In bed it ain't much at all. If the
lights go out, any guy whose hormones are more fixed on performance than
looks, is going to go to sleep right there and then.
- --Steve Chaney
Message-ID: <3a569378...@207.217.77.23>
Clarice and Allisson were well beyond a BMI of 25 in their pictures where
they were called cows.
- --Steve Chaney
Message-ID: <3e005dd...@news.sf.sbcglobal.net>
If Dutton knocked on Steve's door and Steve shot him in the face, I would
really not care.
- --Crash Street Kidd about Steve Chaney
Message-ID: <bjqq7...@drn.newsguy.com>
If you have any questions about this ragingly insane
netkook, post them to soc.singles, and someone will
certainly be glad to answer them for you.
LV
Original Author jackie 'anakin' tokeman
lies are stebe's only avenue to access his ultimate ambition .. which
is prety much just to perceive himself as a glowing hero.
- cb
The Danimal
> "The Danimal" <dmo...@mfm.com> wrote in message
> news:cac1ad88.04032...@posting.google.com...
> > "boobala" <boo...@boobalaisnthere.com> wrote in message
> news:<6L_9c.6688$lt2....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> > > I find excessively fat people to be physically unattractive.
> >
> > What percentage of excessively fat people would you
> > guess you would find physically attractive if they lost
> > the excess fat?
>
> No way to answer that.
In some cases people might have recently gotten fat and you
might have photos or personal memory of what they looked like
before.
> I suppose there would be a great many. But, pure
> physical attraction does not address the personality disorders that would or
> could still reside within the person.
Are you saying if a fat person overcame gluttony and
became slender he would still have the personality disorders
that originally made him fat?
> > That, and the failure of others around them to set clear
> > conditions to guide them.
>
> That may be true. But, each of us are ultimately responsible for taking
> control of our own lives.
The western frontier of the United States worked that way in
the year 1790. But today we have a government that carries a
multi-trillion dollar deficit largely because the government
often assumes ultimate responsibility for its citizens.
A lot depends on just how offensive a particular
person's offense happens to be. The more offensive a person
is, that is the more strongly that person evokes negative
emotions in others, the more people tend to throw the book
at him.
For example, child molesters are very offensive, so they
get no love.
> > For example, how often do people who post as slender attractive
> > women on Usenet promise some morbidly obese guy they would
> > "do" him if he lost, say, 100 pounds of fat?
>
> I would not know the answer to that.
I cannot recall ever observing an instance of it in the
embarrassingly large fraction of my life I have wasted on
Usenet due to my uncontrollable compulsion to waste time
here.
> But, how does your question relate to
> your statement above in terms of their ability to take responsibility for
> their condition?
People are feeling machines. We choose our behaviors based on
our (largely subconscious) evaluation of how the various choices
available to us will probably make us feel.
A fat glutton knows exactly how eating the next box of doughnuts
will make him feel: as good as he felt eating the previous box
of doughnuts.
In contrast, the fat glutton may have no clear idea of what sex
with an attractive woman feels like. It's difficult for him to
correctly evaluate the net hedonic impact of choosing to
sacrifice his immediate pleasures of gluttony.
Doughnuts are a sure thing. Women are not.
A man might do all the "right" things, control his weight,
stay in good shape, and still fail to get sex with
attractive women, let alone reliably. He might even occasionally
see some fat guy scoring with some of the chicks he wants.
My question relates to my statement above in terms of
their ability to take responsibility for their condition
in that each individual, through his or her choices, not
only responds to the prevailing reward structure of
society, as it filters through his or her reward processing
system, but also contributes to the reward structure
other people feel.
Because of politeness and other social constraints, people
like you may not be sending the clearest possible message to
fat gluttons in real life. You can express your opinions
more honestly on Usenet, because in real life honest people
get punished harder, but they carry more impact in
face-to-face interactions.
Even though fat gluttons experience a degree of disapproval,
what they see is probably just the tip of the iceberg compared
to what others around them feel.
> > A lot of morbidly obese people probably have no way to predict
> > exactly what social and monetary benefits they might obtain by
> > learning to restrain their gluttony. But they certainly know
> > how good the next box of doughnuts will taste.
>
> I don't agree. The social and monetary benefits are glaring at them
> constantly.
But only in some vague statistical way. On an individual
basis it's easy to find slender people who are social and/or
monetary disasters.
The actual reward a fat glutton gets by overcoming gluttony
will vary by the individual and is not easy to predict.
Also, fat gluttons may be the victims of incorrect beliefs
such as the notion that their weight is not a strict function
of how much they eat.
Studies have found that fat gluttons tend to underreport their
actual food intake, in proportion to how fat they are. If a
fat glutton does not even understand why he is fat, how is
he going to properly evaluate the consequences of his behavior?
He may get the wrong message from such social disapproval as
he can detect, as if he is being persecuted for something he
did not choose.
> > So we are basically asking them to sacrifice a sure thing
> > in exchange for an iffy thing.
>
> Possibly. But, therin lies their defect.
Or society's defect, depending on how you look at it.
Suppose everybody tells you the ice on the pond is safe.
You skate out there and fall in. Whose fault is that?
Granted, you chose to skate on the ice. But other people
misled you, either because they lied or because they were
mistaken.
It's not practical to independently confirm everything you
hear yourself. There is just too much information. We
constantly trust other people to lead us in the right
directions. We routinely trust peers and experts.
> > > Any person who cannot control what they put in their
> > > mouth, for any reason, is not someone I would even consider having as a
> > > partner.
> >
> > I feel much the same way about people who post to Usenet.
>
> lol
There are always compelling reasons to reject any human.
The species would go extinct if humans were not occasionally
willing (or drunk enough) to overlook a few problems and hook up.
> > > Fat is the outward result of low-self esteem, lack of impulse
> > > control, and obsessive-compulsive behavior.
> >
> > I don't think it's that general. Obesity is probably due to
> > more specific defects in brain chemistry. Few people have
> > much in the way of impulse control. It's more a matter that
> > different people feel different impulses.
>
> I don't agree. Most people have some degree of impulse control. Otherwise
> a society would not endure.
People have some impulses that override other impulses.
> > There are lots of fat women who can't say no to a doughnut but
> > can easily say no to sex. Unless the sex includes doughnuts.
> > Lots of men are the opposite. Screw the doughnuts, give us
> > the sex.
>
> Perhaps sex does not give them the satisfaction that a doughnut does.
That's the reward side of the equation. There's also a
cost side. For all but the sexiest people, sex of good
quality and reliability is often harder to obtain than
a box of doughnuts.
And of course sex can be as spectacularly destructive as
getting fat if things go wrong.
> Also,
> a doughnut doesn't condemn your big butt.
Doughnuts practice fat acceptance.
> > Also, I think you are flat wrong about self-esteem. If anything,
> > fat people have FAR TOO MUCH self-esteem. How many fat people
> > would agree with your assessment they are physically
> > unattractive?
>
> Most people do not consider themselves unattractive. When asked to rate
> themselves on a 1 -10 scale in terms of attractiveness, most people choose
> 7.
Just like every driver thinks he is better than average.
I'm still waiting to meet one of those "other drivers" who
are so reputedly bad in snow.
> > > Take away the fat and you still
> > > have a defective person, except that you might not readily recognize the
> > > problem hidden in a thin person.
> >
> > A thin person can hide a Usenet addiction pretty well.
>
> Of course. What's the point?
I was agreeing with your claim that thin people can sometimes
be defective and not readily recognizable as defective.
> > That's why I'm telling you you've got the self-esteem
> > thing backwards. Fat young women dress provocatively because
> > they actually think they are hot.
>
> I don't agree. They dress that way because they think the only thing they
> have to offer is sex.
They think the sex they have to offer is good enough to
advertise.
When in fact they have to advertise more because the product
is not as good.
If you see a product on TV commercials every time you turn on
the TV, you know the product sucks compared to a product with
similar sales that requires no advertising. Really good products
generate their own sales through word-of-mouth referrals from
happy customers. The miracle of modern advertising technology
is that ad companies have sufficient powers of mind control
to hide this glaring truth from almost everyone. They can
build a positive image for a product which lacks the qualities
necessary to create its own image.
When a woman is actually attractive, men can see that she is
attractive when she advertises very subtly.
A sexy woman looks better when she is wearing a shapeless
sweat suit than a fat woman looks wearing supposedly sexy
lingerie. The sexy woman does not have to go out of her way
to call attention to her sexiness. She would have to go out
of her way to hide it, say with a burqa.
To quite a degree men are able to "see through" a woman's
clothes. This is especially true in real life when people
walk around. Even somewhat baggy flowing clothes tend to
drape in such a way that the observer builds up a fairly
accurate mental model of the underlying body shape.
But most attractive women help out a lot by wearing clothes
that fit very well. For example, when I go to the gym, the
sexiest women there are not necessarily showing tremendous
amounts of skin, but the clothes they do wear are basically
painted on. I have a fairly good imagination but they
do not strain it.
> A fat girl (I am told) is much easier to get into
> bed than an attractive girl.
That depends on how you look at it.
An attractive woman is likely to get into bed with men
more often than the fat girl, making the attractive woman
more of a slut. The attractive woman makes herself easy
for the men she chooses.
But so many men hit on the attractive woman that she
does not seem easy to most of them. For most of them
she is more difficult than going to the moon.
But when she is easy she is totally easy.
> Fat girls don't have the same number of choices.
Yes. But all women are easy when they meet a man who
turns them on. Attractive women attract more men,
increasing their chances of meeting men who turn them
on.
> > That's excessive self-esteem bordering on delusions of grandeur.
> > It's the female counterpart to a Napolean complex.
>
> They confuse a guy wanting to get laid with a guy being attracted to them.
Men who merely want to get laid have other options besides
fat women: goats, sheep, each other, RealDolls, etc. If a
man chooses a fat woman out of the options available to him,
he probably finds her more attractive than those other options.
A person's attraction can be less than 100%. For example, a
man might find a fat woman's large breasts attractive, and
her large butt unattractive, but he might be willing to
overlook the butt and focus on the breasts.
The fat woman would be mistaken if she thought the man found
her *comprehensively* attractive, when in fact she is
attractive enough to him to get him over the threshold, but
not necessarily more attractive to him than other women he
cannot attract.
It's like the way taking a McJob does not mean the person
likes everything about it, but he likes it more than no
job.
> > Depending on the line of work, that might be true. Was this
> > company running an escort service? Or was it a modeling
> > agency? Even in businesses that are not overtly about selling
> > sex, being sexy can be an advantage. Not that I have ever
> > been in a position to cash in personally.
>
> Has nothing to do with the line of work.
That could only be true if everybody telecommuted.
If your work involves any face-to-face contact with
people who find you sexually attractive, your sexual
attractiveness *will* be a factor.
Hopefully not the deciding factor but a factor
nonetheless. As I mentioned earlier, being sexy is
not always an advantage. A very sexy woman might
disturb some of her male co-workers who experience
painful frustration every time they see her. It
depends a lot on her personality. It's not easy
for a sexy woman to make men feel good while
simultaneously making sure they are fully aware
she is rejecting them. But it can be done.
> This was a huge corporation
> employing professionals at large salaries.
Professional humans, or robots?
Humans are the product of a billion years of evolution,
ruled by their glands. Not the sort of thing one can
magically un-do by putting on a suit and watching a
30-minute sensitivity training video.
> No one was selling sex. Except some of the fat girls.
Sexy women don't have to sell.
> > Just in case anybody might ever wonder, I definitely would
> > inflate my evaluations of a hot chick, provided she flirts
> > reasonably well and is a team player.
>
> Well, that's a problem. You shouldn't be inflating your evaluations based
> on looks,
See above. I explicitly said the hot chick must also flirt
with me, preferably in ways that make me feel good without
creating any false expectations. A (very) few women know how
to do this. I don't know if I could explain exactly how they
do it. They let a guy know he has no chance of scoring with
them and yet they somehow make him feel good at the same time.
If she's an ice princess who makes me feel sexually worthless
then I would lower my evaluations.
I'm not saying I would do this consciously. If you want to
get ahead in any group of humans the key is to make the
others feel good.
Look at how some people automatically react with negative
emotion every time I address them on Usenet, simply because
by pointing out their numerous errors I made them look
stupid in the past. Now they associate negative hedonic
tone with my messages, so they are already biased against
me before they even start to read.
This is just how people operate.
If you go to work in a physical office with glandular
humans (not robots), your sexiness or lack thereof will
inevitably be a factor. As will your tendency to feed
egos by giving compliments. Certainly not the only factor,
but don't be fooled by the thin facade of "professionalism."
People aren't judging you like a piece of equipment, based
solely on how well it operates.
> nor should anyone deflate evaluations based on looks. That it
> happens I am not disagreeing with.
I agree that I should be a robot. Unfortunately I have
not yet figured out how.
Like every other human I will naturally favor other humans
who make me feel good.
Unlike most other humans I have absolutely no problem
admitting that I am human. But I understand their
embarrassment.
> > > Fat women held thin attractive women
> > > to a much higher standard of performance.
> >
> > White people also look out for each other.
>
> I don't know that I agree with that. Many minorities in my field. There
> are very explicit company policies against discrimination because we live in
> a very litigous society.
Would there need to be policies against something if it
did not occur?
> > I'm guessing you rarely bring boxes of doughnuts to the office
> > for your cow-orkers. Do that more often and watch your evaluations
> > skyrocket.
>
> No, lol, never brought any doughnuts. But, I did bring them to the chubby
> secretaries of my clients. I am not dumb.
You don't sound dumb. But sometimes you work for a boss who
is as dumb as your clients' secretaries.
> > People aren't very objective except in very limited venues
> > such as sports with objective rules. Everywhere else, people
> > judge everything primarily according to how things make them
> > feel. Then they think up logical-sounding reasons to justify
> > their arbitrary preferences.
>
> Pretty much agree.
If you are a sexy woman, that amplifies the hedonic impact
of every little thing you do.
For example, if you praise a man's work, he will experience
a much greater mental reward than if an ugly woman (or man)
praises his work. Unless the other evaluator has very high
rank.
> > If you make your boss feel good, for example by consistently
> > feeding her doughnut cravings, she's going to have a hard time
> > hating you.
>
> Not really. If you are moving up in the company because of performance and
> she sees you as a threat, dougnuts are not going to be the cure. She can
> buy them herself and she usually does.
Your clients' secretaries can also buy doughnuts themselves.
Surely you understand gifts can have an emotional impact
far out of proportion to their monetary value.
With the boss it can backfire, of course, if the boss gets
the idea that you are trying to bribe her. Unless she's
open to bribery.
I have to agree with you that people are exasperating. It
will be nice when we can surround ourselves with intelligent
robots that do only what we want, and we never have to deal
with humans again.
> > > BTW, the reasoning above regarding performance was the same
> > > reasoning I ran into with some men co-worker's when I
> > > outperformed them.
> >
> > I'm guessing you rarely give your co-workers blow jobs.
>
> Nope.
That would be one way to take the sting out of showing them up.
But you could probably achieve some of the same benefits
by being "sweet."
The trick is to acknowledge men as sexual creatures and
cater subtly to that without leading them to think they
can score with you. I've seen a few sexy women who know
how to do this, but I could not tell you exactly how
they do it. Obviously that is not a skill I've ever
needed to master.
I read about women who go to science bases in Antarctica
where there are ten men to every woman. The women find the
only way they can get any work done is to hook up with men
right away. Otherwise, in the close proximity of the bases,
all the men know they are available and hit on them
relentlessly.
I suspect that when high-quality ultra-realistic sex robots
are affordable to the average man, men and women will be
able to work together more efficiently, because men will
be fully relieved of all their sexual urges when they go to
work.
-- the Danimal
aXis Computers & Communications
--
Looking for a date/hookup/sex partner?
http://accfq2.linksysnet.com:999/match/index2.htm
^^ Free dating services & Swingers Pages! ^^
"Lady Veteran" <arm...@jeepweb.com> wrote in message
news:fkhg60hso596422s8...@4ax.com...