<p>“Fat kids,” as you call them, nearly always have self-esteem problems. This would not be aggravated by a class that would make them healthier and slimmer. In the long run, they would gain much more self-esteem because they would be happier about their bodies. And while a person can indeed be skinny and unhealthy, the problem with obesity is the fat that builds up which accelerates heart disease, cancer, and stroke, which are the top three killers in America. Obesity also increases the risks of diabetes. In short, if you’re obese, you’re unhealthy. There’s no real way around that. Skinny kids can be unhealthy, but they don’t have to worry about cholesterol and plaque buildup in their arteries nearly as much as the obese. Those are the factors that kill the obese, which is why they should be preventing their ongoing obesity.</p>
<p>Interesting conversation here.</p>
<p>I think in theory it’s a good idea - but I feel they’re going about it the wrong way.</p>
<p>In many cases someone’s weight is just a symptom of an underlying cause. Be it an actual eating disorder, emotional eating, or simply due to someone being uneducated on health and nutrition, none of these things will be solved by mandatory fitness classes for obese students. That just isn’t productive.</p>
<p>A better option would be compulsory nutrition and exercise classes for everyone. Though this could be argued that yet more compulsory classes would detract from the students’ already hectic schedules. It could also be debated that college students are effectively adults and as such are free to make their own lifestyle choices.</p>
<p>azro I don’t see how being told you’re fat and you need to take a special class to make you lose weight <em>wouldn’t</em> upset some people’s self-esteem. I can imagine a lot of over weight people would feel horrible from being singled out.</p>
<p>Like I’ve said, college is already stressful enough without a ridiculous rule like this. </p>
<p>Not to mention I hate it when colleges keep adding on requirements that don’t have anything to do with your major. Don’t forget that people have to pay for these classes. It’s like saying oh, you’re fat, and in order to be in our school you’re going to have to lose weight. But it’s going to cost you hundreds of dollars to do so. Plus adding on requirements like this takes away from classes people could be taking for their major.</p>
<p>People who already speak a foreign language can test out of foreign language requirements, right? So why can’t skinny people test out of a program that’s supposed to make them thinner?</p>
<p>October47, you’re right. This requirement is no different than a gen ed requirement. It has nothing to do with your major, but the school wants you to be well-rounded and prepared for success. Have you heard somewhere that this requirement is a class that must be paid for? That would be unfair, IMO.</p>
<p>
I’m pretty sure that’s the opposite of this weight requirement!</p>
<p>^haha!!!</p>
<p>gotakun I’d assume it’s something they would have to pay for if it is an actual class. Colleges generally don’t like the word “free” unless this is apart of some fee…which they would still have to pay.</p>
<p>i think that this is the right thing to do. i agree with gotakun they are fight obesity, not trying to make people fit</p>
<p>I think it’s important to realize here that the students knew, before or upon entering the college, of this requirement for graduation. I think that it’s pretty sad that some students made no apparent attempts to either take an educational class or lose weight throughout their four years of undergrad. This is not to say that they don’t care about their health or aren’t active in some way, but they had four years to improve somehow. Let’s be honest, here - a 30 BMI is pretty hard to reach, even with a slow metabolism. Now, I’m sure that the school would make some sort of exception for a person with a legitimate medical condition like diabetes, but I express no sympathy for students that simply are lazy and did not pursue losing weight during their four years at Lincoln.</p>
<p>I would also like to say that overall, I can’t pick a side on this argument. Both camps bring up valid points. I’m not closing myself off to the possibility that the school’s definition of making a legitimate attempt to lose weight is rather acute, either. What I’m saying is that the students did have prior knowledge of this policy and probably could have taken measures to ensure better health, better self-esteem, and graduation - or they could have taken the class.</p>
<p>Finally, I saw one or two people mention that being overweight makes them self-conscious about exercising in public. I would like to say that I know of nobody who would belittle an overweight person exercising. In fact, if I ever saw anybody do such a thing, I would not support them in the slightest; I would defend the person trying to get in shape. The act of exercise is commendable and deserves no scorn whatsoever.</p>
<p>Well I mean it’s hardly telling someone they’re fat. If a person is fat, they know it and so does everyone else. While they may feel weird about it at first, the long term benefits (even just in the self esteem area) would more than balance it out. </p>
<p>And we can debate the much broader point that October47 brought up, but then it becomes a discussion about what sort of education is best. Many colleges require a core curriculum, so the point being debated then is whether or not college should be only about a person’s major, which it nearly never is (aside from Brown and similars, if there even are any). </p>
<p>Schmaltz also has a good point. It would probably be more fair to require it for everyone and let non-obese students “test” out. But it’s essentially the same situation.</p>
<p>
But I know that I, personally, think it looks funny. I don’t know why, but I find it humorous. I guess it’s irony? I’m probably not alone, either… We don’t mean to belittle; it’s just a natural reaction (to laugh). The opposite is in fact true: I have respect for them for exercising. They might look funny, but they look much better than the obese person dormant in a chair…</p>
<p>
I agree. This forces people to admit that they’re fat, both to themselves and to everyone else, which is an important step to recovery. It would ease tension, too. Tension similarly arises when, for instance, a black person is in a crowd of white people and the topic of skin color is avoided altogether out of “respect.” That’s not respect, in my eyes… If I can’t address that someone has a different skin color than me, there’s a problem. The same is true with weight.</p>
<p>I’m much more likely to make fun of the tools in the gym exercising only biceps, pecs and abs with their effeminate skinny legs, drinking their creatine shakes and taking up the squat racks to do bicep curls so they can look at themselves in the mirror.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I personally am 5’6 and weighed about 180 lbs by the time I was fifteen. I exercised two times a week for at least an hour and probably ate about 2000 calories a day. When I was 19 I started eating more than 3000 calories a day and stopped exercising and weighed 196 lbs. Then I started exercising three times a week on top of teaching children’s dance classes four hours a week and cutting down my calories to 1800 a day or less. I weigh ~175 lbs. To be “normal” I’d have to lose at least 25 lbs and I don’t have that much to lose! I’m not even fat, there is no muffin top to be found on me. The BMI is crap.</p>
<p>And about exercise being humiliating, for females it is not only humiliating if you weigh a lot, but also humiliating if you have large breasts. I personally never ran in PE class because I considered it a huge embarrassment.</p>
<p>
So then you did both increasing caloric intake AND decreasing energy consumption, which means your weight gain wasn’t due solely to metabolism fluctuation. Unless your current weight is muscle, then how else can you explain it if not fat tissue? While it’s worse to have fat concentrated in one area, even if it’s evenly distributed, even if no one notices, it’s still there and still poses a risk to health.</p>
<p>I’ve reconsidered the proposal that people underweight should also be required to exercise. I’m all for that! ;D Universities should fight anorexia, too. As someone who is underweight, even though I’m not anorexic, I’d be willing to participate.</p>
<p>Also, the bouncing boobs is another one of those things that looks funny. If people were exposed to it more often, no one would even think about it. Once it’s normal, then all you have to worry about is turning people on. And what kind of worry is that? We’re building self-esteem here! :)</p>
<p>^ the argument is that BMI isn’t by itself a good metric for obesity. the test doesn’t work for some people. if you have a big frame or are very muscular, you get classified as overweight. e. g. probably every halfback in the nfl is overweight or obese according to BMI, and those guys are in incredible shape.</p>
<p>silence_kit:
You’re right. I’ll edit my post. BMI is just one factor in determining whether someone is over- or underweight.</p>
<p>The weight gain was caused by eating too much, but my point was my weight is always about 170 lbs even when I cut my calories and exercise often. I do have some fat on my stomach, but it’s normal for women to have round stomachs. Silence_kit was right: I’m a dancer; my legs and abdomen are a lot of muscle covered in some fat. I also have a wide build, my friends call me “the amazon”. When people look at me they think my weight and body is healthy, not overweight. It surprises people that my BMI isn’t normal. I was considered borderline “obese” in high school and I still looked normal, not fat or overweight. It’s such a stupid way to measure healthy weight. </p>
<p>Wouldn’t people who are “underweight” need a health class that stresses healthy limits on exercise and caloric intake? Not that everyone who is underweight is anorexic, it just seems counter intuitive to have someone who doesn’t weigh enough run on a treadmill and lose more weight. Seems two different health problems should have two different treatments.</p>
<p>Pfft, I’m anti-bouncing boobs. Just makes me feel extremely self-conscious while being extremely uncomfortable. I do suppose it’s better than bouncing moobs though…</p>
<p>
Haahaha! Whoop. There I go again with the laughing… Let’s just set the record straight: I think it would be equally as funny to see a man running naked with his schlong bouncing around. But I’m not belittling him for being naked and exercising in public. I respect him for it.</p>
<p>Yeah, I guess it’s probably better not to let the underweight people try to figure out on their own how best and quickest to gain weight… Scrap that idea :).</p>
<p>Also, from what you’re saying, you aren’t overweight. And if you aren’t overweight, then what do you have to fear? Surely, they can take into account that someone might just be muscular.</p>
<p>I will admit that BMI is not the be-all, end-all for fitness, and I will also concede that Lincoln would do well to make exemptions for students with a BMI of 30 or higher but who play on sports teams or do dance or are weightlifters and something similar. I do believe I said that I hadn’t decided on whether the policy, as it is currently, is a good idea or not. What I said in my post is that I express no sympathy for lazy, obese students who have never pushed themselves.</p>
<p>My college requires everyone to take a physical activity class in order to graduate. Which I personally think is great. I have taken one every term just because I miss playing sports, but I do think that if they are going to require P.E. courses they should be for everyone.</p>