From the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8314125.stm

Attacking someone for being fat should be a hate crime, campaigners say.

They want so-called "fat-ism" to be made illegal on the same grounds as race, age and religious discrimination.

A demonstration was held outside the offices of the mayor of London asking him to lead the way in making sure employers are not prejudiced.

Protesters want the UK to follow San Francisco, where a law bans "fat-ism" in housing and employment and stops doctors pressing patients to slim down.

Sondra Solway, a San Francisco lawyer, said: "The San Francisco ordinance says you may want to mention weight to the patient but if the patient says they do not want to talk about that then you are asked to respect those wishes."

Size acceptance

In the UK, size is not a protected characteristic under discrimination legislation.

The campaigners, who belong to the Size Acceptance Movement, say surveys show 93% of employers would rather employ a thin person than a fat one even if they are equally qualified.

Kathryn Szrodecki, who campaigns on behalf of overweight people, said that in the UK fat people were stared at, pointed at, talked about and attacked.

She said: "I have been discriminated against - I am a YMCA qualified fitness instructor, but I have gone for jobs and been laughed off the premises."

Another campaigner, Marsha Coupe, said: "I have been punched, I have had beer thrown in my face, I have had people attack me on the train.

"They say 'Move out of the way fatty! Well person coming down the aisle!'"

Ms Szrodecki said: "This is a very common event - someone being beaten up should be a crime.

"It is not about who you are or what you have done, it is just about the way you look.

"You are allowed to shame us just because of the way we look."

Dr Ian Campbell of the charity Weight Concern said he was doubtful that legislation would have any immediate effect on the situation.

He said: "People who are very overweight do experience a lot of prejudice both in their social life and working life and do need some protection.

"We know that genetic and social reasons can lead to this very complex problem.

"For instance, people in inner cities are much more likely to be overweight because of poorer education, poorer housing and poorer job opportunities.

"Not everyone has a free choice about controlling their weight."

A spokesman for the Equality and Human Rights Commission said size was already protected by the legislation if it was caused by a disability: "Potentially human rights legislation would also cover people by protecting their right to work."
​

------------

First off: did I read that right? There is now a law in San Fran stopping doctors from urging their patients to slim down? What the hell is wrong with people? It's now illegal for your doctor to advise shedding the pounds so you can get out your WalMart mobility scooter?

Second: this political correctness is out of control. I am all for the hefty punishment of those who discriminate on innate characteristics - that is, skin colour, physical disabilities, and other such examples. But protecting - by law - someone who simply has a poor lifestyle choice? This is insane.

"Hello. I like to eat burgers and fries all the time. I hate exercise - the closest I get to sports is the footie on my 52" HDTV. I drink beer like it's water, and think lifts and stairlifts should be more prevalent. Wait - you can't not hire me! It's not my fault I'm fat!"

This is like saying to me I should hire a drug addict - I mean, it's a lifestyle choice, isn't it? Like eating unhealthily. And - to my mind - being obese indicates a lack of self-control - not a trait I'd like to bring into a workplace.

Thoughts? Should we protect the rights of those who choose a lifestyle that is innately harmful? Should we make it illegal for doctors to urge them to change?

 

I would say you are mostly correct. Which is why I won't be surprised if the larger members of the forum tell you that you don't know what it's like to be fat, you don't understand, etc. etc.

-S-

 

uh hellooo have you taken into consideration those that are overweight BECAUSE of a physical disability?

 

See what I mean.

What percentage of the overweight are overweight because of a disability?

-S-

 

It's a farce Orion. At my work i've seen fucking huge people feeding their kids - under a year in some cases - Burger Kings. The poor mites can't properly hold the burger so the parents hold them to their mouths... I feel like physically throwing them out but of course I can't.

As for the law, I don't feel 'overweight' people should be discriminated against. I'm no skinny and i'd be devastated if I didn't get a job because someone thinner applied. We have a woman who works night shift and she is one of the most reliable and hard working people we have and I think she'll be in the region of 22 stone. I do know she is an exception and noone should be forced to employ someone who they feel is a sick note waiting to happen... As for doctors not being able to suggest loosing weight, all I can say is WTF, aint that their job?!

And in reply to the 'i'm fat because of my disability', perhaps it's caused by your lard arse... You should eat in relation to what your body needs - not what you desire...

 

Right.

In that case, I'd imagine the doctor would naturally be more sensitive and suggest alternative ways to lose weight.

So why is it illegal again?

And for those with physical disabilities, there are ways and means to lose weight - if you really want to. Hydrotherapy, swimming - and eating less all work.

 

The larger members of the forum, huh?

...you mean most of them?

Harsh, but true.

 

I heard on the radio about an hour ago that a 70stone man has to be moved from Ipswich to Chichester for a "life saving" operation. They are considering an airlift... I wonder who'll pay for this special treatment?

 

if you wanna know, why not do research?

 

UH Suze, I DID NOT SAY "MY DISABILITY" MAYBE I SHOULDA used a larger font so you could see it better!!

 

swimming? Doesnt swimming involve use of your legs? And its not always the amount of food

 

Cheeky...

I was meaning collectively. You're a little irate in your replies...Did Orion touch a nerve by any chance? Are you a lard arse?

Just because someone is disabled does not mean they can't use their legs.

Dumb bitch...

Oh, and nice name. Did you make it up yourself?...

 

Actually, it is about the amount of food. Let me explain this to you.

Obesity is caused by the body laying down fat. You lay down fat if the energy you intake is greater than the energy you output. Unless you are a plant, and use photosynthesis to obtain your energy, your energy comes from the food you eat. If you eat too much of it, you intake more energy than you output. This is laid down as fat. Therefore: too much food = too much energy = creation of fat.

I think that refutes your statement. To put it more bluntly: there were no fat inmates in Bergen-Belsen.

{edit} Something else that sickens me: 'Fat Pride' groups. You have pride groups for your irresponsible lifestyle? Well, excuse me while I set up a 'Heroin Pride' group here in Glasgow. I'll get a lot of members.

Doesn't that sound awful? Same thing, though.

 

Now that made me 'lol'...:excited:

 

I think this is only SEMI ridiculous.

The whole issue is very subjective, but i can see a lot of issues arising if this law gets passed. An example would be occupation. It is of course wrong to not hire somebody because they are black or mormon, but not hiring somebody because they are fat can be justified; what if the job is physically strenuous and an overweight person either couldn't do it or could harm themselves doing it? Is that unreasonable? This law would contend that it is illegal to do so. While i am sure lines would be drawn to prevent such situations, it is hard to clearly define when things like this become "unreasonable", and therefore illegal. Considering how much individuals chose to litigate in this day an age, i could see some very very unfair lawsuits taking place every day by an overweight person claiming "discrimination", when really somebody was just being practical.

Another issue is the issue of choice. Laws have put in place against descrimination mainly for people who cannot chose to be or not to be what they are being discriminated for, e.g. gender or race. While it is technically true that people chose their belief systems, it is a sensitive topic in our culture and is well protected.
Many would argue that being overweight is genetic, and there is no doubt that in many cases it is, if not the majority of cases, but even with being dealt poor genetics in that respect, there is no reason a healthy lifestyle cannot prevent being overweight, even if you must try harder than most people. People can be born unintelligent, but are still held accountable for their successes, because after all, even if it is harder to grasp and understand things, there is no reason a person cannot work harder and become just as or more successful than anybody else. Is it "fair"? Not really, but it's not up to us.
My point is that, even with genetics being as important as they are, i think we can all agree that being overweight comes down to one thing: lifestyle. Even with the most shitty genetics ever, NOBODY is "destined" to be overweight; that is, it is never "impossible" for one to be fit and healthy.

I also want to point out that this is also more of a social issue. An employer is more willing to hire a thin person i am sure, but part of that is because how DO people become overweight? In many cases, it is being gluttonous and, well, "lazy". It definitely displays an air of not being motivated and hard working. Now I understand this isn't at ALL true for all cases, but it IS true for some, and thus you cannot get rid of that social perspective.

Due to this, I think this law has very little support. It would be similar to outlawing "discriminating" against people who smoke or something. I think that passing such law would have fairly insubstantial results, and if only cause an increase in bogus civil litigation.

Just my two cents.

-SOOD

 

I lost a lot of weight in the past (70 lbs). And it wasn't easy at all - I still have a few founds to loose. Of course, food is a major aspect of gaining (and keeping) weight. But it's not all. I didn't eat all that unhealthy prior to changing my diet. I ate like a regular woman of my size and age. There are people that have to eat like a monk in order to keep their weight and I am one of them. Besides that, I never feel full after eating. I'm either hungry and craving more - or I've eaten so much that I feel like I have to throw up. There is no in between. So in order to keep my weight, I am constantly hungry.
It takes a lot of will power to not eat, and I (kind of) understand people who have problems bringing up that will power.

Mind you, this is no excuse for those who constantly eat unhealty food.

 

What do you know anyway? You are just a young "know it all" or so you think.

 

Taken from an American company website this has been their policy for about 10 years now.

XXXXXX is an Equal Opportunity Employer

XXXXXXX offers a competitive compensation and benefits package. It is company policy to hire only non-users of tobacco products. XXXXXX is an Equal Opportunity Employer.