moon_custafer: neon cat mask (Default)
moon_custafer ([personal profile] moon_custafer) wrote2010-06-04 09:15 am

(no subject)

Someone just brought round a petition to have Weight Watchers covered under our company health insurance. I noticed reaction to this was rather sharply divided along gender lines, with most of the men in the room worrying that this would increase the deduction off their paychecks, and suggesting that they send round a petition asking for a tv at work. The women countered by alternately arguing that obesity is the new century’s big health problem, but also asking the men “don’t you want to see nice-looking girls at work.” This is pretty much why I ultimately didn’t sign it; also because it specified one particular diet company by name. At the same time I worry that I’m in a “that’s easy for you to say” position here.

Everybody else signed, including the men (they caved pretty easily under pressure).

[identity profile] crankydon.blogspot.com (from livejournal.com) 2010-06-04 04:25 pm (UTC)(link)
At least we've moved beyond 300 pound women suing their doctors for making "sexist" comments about their weight such as "you should try and lose some weight". I take your co-workers point that preventative medicine, such as diet and nutrition advice, would be a better expenditure of money than paying for the heart-attacks and renal failures later. However tying it to one particular for-profit company seems wrong.

[identity profile] moon-custafer.livejournal.com 2010-06-04 04:42 pm (UTC)(link)
Re the doctor - even that can depend. If you're talking about the same case I recall hearing about, the problem was that the doctor hadn't said "you should lose come weight for health reasons, " he'd said "you should lose some weight or no man will want you." Pretty big diff.