Just gave my first negative rep (on MC)

[Morrigoon]

I take it back.... that thread's been posted to this very afternoon. Prudence, please share your eloquent thoughts!

[Prudence]

Re: airplane seats

In theory, I don't have a problem with objective requirements that people be required to pay for the space they occupy.

However, my experience is that these policies are applied subjectively and frequently illustrate the biases that are the subject of this discussion.

For example: I'm short. Weight on me looks different than it does on someone taller whose butt might be just as wide as mine. But their butt "appears" smaller.

Second: My butt does fit in an airplane seat. It takes up the whole seat, I'll grant you, but it fits. (I still have a lot of muscle in my tush, so when I sit I go more "up" than "out," if that makes sense.) Meanwhile, my more normal-sized husband has room to spare in the butt, but does the guy sprawl where he is incapable of confining his legs to the the floor space aligned with his seat. It annoys me to no end and I'm married to him! I would be really ticked if he was a stranger occupying my floor space, where I was planning on putting my own feet. (But since he's my husband I just kick him!)

Third: parents aren't obligated to buy seats for kids under 2. But if that's the case, they should keep the kid in "their" space, not stick their feet in my lap because sonny boy wants to take a nap and they weren't required to buy him a seat so it's okay. Um, not with me?

If they had some kind of "butt" measure like they use for carry-ons, and if the standard was clear, I would be hard pressed to object, even if it meant I had to buy two seats. But when the standard is Joe "looks" fat and Bob, who's taller but with equal rear real estate doesn't -- and when other people are allowed to occupy more than their space for their non-obesity-related comfort -- then I object.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Prudence

If they had some kind of "butt" measure like they use for carry-ons, and if the standard was clear, I would be hard pressed to object

LOL! THAT would go over REALLY well!

[alphabassettgrrl]

Well, if you're going to charge someone for two seats, you'd better have *some* sort of standard in place. You can't base it on poundage, and you can't base it on a person "looking" like they'd need two seats.

Yes, I did see something about obesity not being as dangerous to health as previously thought. I was pleased that it saw some air time. I'm surprised, but that's ok. I was always told that extra pounds were bad. Apparently my information was somewhat incorrect.

[Mousey Girl]

I have BP issues, mostly brought on by work stress. The people who are gaining the weight back are the ones who had it for cosmetic purposes, the ones who are keeping it off did it for medical reasons. My Dr isn't concerned with my weight and I see her every 2-3 months (she is more concerned about my mental health and work related stress and depression).

[Not Afraid]

You know, my LEGS don't fit in an airplane seat and, if my thyroid meds don't kick in soon, my butt won't either! I just need the entire plane supersized for me.

[Mousey Girl]

NA!! hehehe Luckily we flew business class, not economy. David would have had the same problem. Poor guy is allllllll legs. lol

[Ghoulish Delight]

Actually, if I read those results correctly, the conclusion was that it's better to be slightly overweight than slightly under weight. It's still best, in terms of health risk, to be within the "ideal" range, and being singificiantly overweight is still a considered a major health risk. But it seems that carrying a few extra pounds might not be a big deal.

[Prudence]

They also ranked it lower (than is currently asserted) on the list of things what kill you.