citydreams said:
No, I'm ever the optimist
good i'm glad.. no really
Noone is accusing you of attributing EDs to be "the sole product of capitalism". What you did say though was that it's "it's the envitable consicuence of capitalism" and suggested that people with eating disorders should attribute their illness to "the fact that billions is spent every month on advertising aimed at alienating your from yourself ". Do you see what you're doing here? You're telling Zenie (Zenie, forgive me if I'm jumping to conclusions) that you know her mind better than she does. Pretty offensive, no?[/QUOTE]
no i haven't i was talking about a whole raft of things and using your assumption, zeine has then personalised it to her specific circumstances and attempted to make it a pointed comment directed at her, it wasn't it isn't, her points not actually engauging what was said.
and sadly, to make me sound oh so conceited, if a tad uncaring, The underlying cause of all modern faddy dietry issues is fundamentally capitalism.
Look if on a thread a few weeks ago we can all agree that the underlying cause of obesity is capitalism then the flipside must also be true.
moreover, Zenie and anyone else (sorry to keep using you as an example) wasn't alive in roman times and hasn't be culturally influenced by them. She and many others are cultrally influncec by a massive campagin of alineation, they are told as we all are and are all influneced (it's not singling one person or a group of people out it happens to us all) that you have to conform, to cowtow, to measure up too the predictiated standards else no one will shag you.
This si the same line which has in effect been used to control populations for centries and with good reason it get's you on somelevel to consdier you mortalitiy and if your genes you name you family line cease with you then you have failed. that's the underlying message behind all advertising. and what's the ad mans best axim? sex sells.
So you see to say i know her mind better than her is to place rather to much personaliseation on the matter this incidious indoctrination happens to all who come into contact with the western world, be it zenie you me russia iraq or whatever. It's how it is. there's no condesention in that, it's not like i or anyone else (inc you) sit in an abstract bubble and obsever from the outside, we are immersed in it everyday. couplled to the fact that most times you (by you i mean ll of us) have a number of other issues which are clashing for your time and energy investment and so on, so we plumb for the path of least resistance on most things which includes being told repeatdly that this or that is the definition of beauty, joy, happieness. in what is in essence the vaccum of dead spirtuality humanity still seraches for the answers and hacing answers being force fed to you means that sooner or later you are going to absorb those answers. a good example would be chirs langham, not actually done for pedophillia but for having illegal porn but in most circles he's now regarded as a pedophile, why because people are influenced and change their charcters by what they have been told and they trust or cannot be bothered or are to busy to find out for themselves...
so in a society which is obessed with physical perfection you are influneced by that desire, that's why they don't have realistic models adverts or indeed anything. and what's at the root of this? capitalism drives those desires it exerts influence on people every day, be it their choice of food or drink or they feelings of inadqucey.
citydreams said:
Ah, I see. In your view, being influenced is synonymous with having your character altered. Ok, the difference here is that I can chose when to be influenced by the media. I'm not dictated to by it as you seem to be. Not all influence is negative. As I suggested in my last post - I'm old enough to make my own choices. Consumer sovereignty is very much alive in this anti-capitalist.
I hope that puts your mind at rest.
not really i don't think that it's an honest assement of your own circumstances or the reality of life. you say you don't have your charchter altered by being able to name all the brands in the straplines quoted. yet can you not see how indelably scoring those very brands into your mind is altering you charchter as such as if you were to be branded by cattle iron.
you claim to be able to make your own choices really? and what great resource do you have which others don't to be able to avoid buying what is put out there for consumption? why do you choose to drink x cola rather than y cola (assuming you drink cola) smoke x brand of cigs rather than y brand? you only have the choices of the products which are presented to you, and the choice to buy those products or not. that isn't choice that's picking flavours, the core products on sale to you are still governed by others, ie not your choice. and consumer empowerment doesn't come from being able to pick chocolate over vanilla.
citydreams said:
Perhaps now we could return to your OP? Trying not to offend anyone else, can you please justify, elaborate or care to explain what you were going on about in this post...
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=6687085&postcount=67
Are you suggesting that standing outside McDonald's handing out vegan burgers is
"disenfranchising the majority with hardline militant viewpoints with limited scientific basis and a whole lot of voodoo nonsense..."?
is it the case that consumers have never considered the alternatives or in general have no access to information regarding say mcdonals foodstuff?
do they go in there despite the wall to wall coverage of a high fat high sodium low nutrition diet will definatly kill them?
do they like being told what to think or how to consume by others, do you?
so would they be disenfranchised by someone telling them that they know their own mind better than they do? to use your own words. can you not draw the paralle between how you view what i have said to zenie as me know her mind better than her and telling people have a veggie burger??
and sadly there is no basis that vegan or vegitarian diets or any other form of diets are actually better for you v's a balanced diet. everything else bar a balanced diet is either personal choice or prefference.
both annorexia and bulima are extreme dietry choices but no more extreme than deciding that you wish to limit your in take of food to say things your body cannot digest, such as only plants or plants and diary (depending on your extremism). human being's were designed to eat a range of food stuffs and whilst i accept that this doesn't include gourging yourself on meat and two veg every night all limitations we place on that are of our own makings saving of course famine, which is usually OUR making (meaning all of us).