# lifestyle solidarity in the size acceptance movement



## FAelitist (Jan 7, 2011)

Hi everyone, In addition to being a supporter of fat acceptance, I am also a smoker, and active in the fight against the anti-smoking movement. I've always thought the two were very similar, with people made pariahs because of a lifestyle choice that is purely personal(Please don't bring up secondhand smoke, you don't want me to post my entire archive of evidence proving it's falsehood.). It just seems that they could join forces as part of a larger, Health Freedom type of movement. Other similar movements perhaps could be amalgamated.
I do't know, does that make sense to anyone? Solidarity!


----------



## penguin (Jan 7, 2011)

I have no interest in merging the two. Me being fat doesn't directly impact on the health or lifestyle of anyone else (unless I sit or fall on them, I suppose), but someone smoking near me affects me and everyone else around. I get physically ill if I smoke cigarettes, and I don't like smelling like smoke or having it around me. I don't see how the two are comparable.


----------



## Grundsau 11 (Jan 7, 2011)

I am a fat man; unfortunately I am treated in a different way than my feminine counterpart...fat men are supposed to be jolly,and as I look at the world around me it's impossible not to be so for very long periods...
Yes, I too do smoke; both a pipe and a GOOD cigar (each in it's turn holtzkopf!). As I specified a GOOD cigar, since they don't make Julia Marlowe any more,I smoke 'em less & less; BUT,(YES,THAT WAS A BIG BUT,NOW SHUT UP...) when I did, I only smoked it outside in public. The one who enjoys a cigar the most is only the one that smokes it...same's true for a pipe...people get far too damn militant about cigarettes...if people weren't so arrogant back in the day when you could (&did) smoke everywhere, this anti-smoking ukase would never gotten a toehold...


SAVE THE ELLIPSIS!!


----------



## penguin (Jan 7, 2011)

Grundsau 11 said:


> if people weren't so arrogant back in the day when you could (&did) smoke everywhere, this anti-smoking ukase would never gotten a toehold



I hardly think it's arrogant to want to be able to go out and not come back reeking of smoke. Smoking directly impacts on the health and lifestyle of other people. I think it's arrogant to think that it's okay to smoke wherever and whenever you want without thinking about how it impacts others.


----------



## Angel (Jan 7, 2011)

FAelitist said:


> Hi everyone, In addition to being a supporter of fat acceptance, I am also a smoker, and active in the fight against the anti-smoking movement. I've always thought the two were very similar, with people made pariahs because of a lifestyle choice that is purely personal(Please don't bring up secondhand smoke, you don't want me to post my entire archive of evidence proving it's falsehood.). It just seems that they could join forces as part of a larger, Health Freedom type of movement. Other similar movements perhaps could be amalgamated.
> I do't know, does that make sense to anyone? Solidarity!



Not similar. 

Solidarity? No way!

Not every human that happens to be fat has *chosen* to be fat; nor did they make a "lifestyle choice" to be fat. In fact, very few humans that are fat ever chose to gain even one ounce intentionally. (Sorry FAs and weight gain enthusiasts.)

As far as fat acceptance, I don't think those who happen to be fat have ever desired anything other than to be treated with dignity and respect and to be viewed as "normal" and to be allowed to pursue the same dreams or opportunities as anyone else. The desire is for those who are fat to be treated without prejudice in regards to size or weight. There is no 'agenda' as far as pushing fatness on anyone or any claim that being fat makes anyone more (or less) superior than anyone else. Fat people are not asking for any special treatment; just to be treated as equal.

Your "entire archive of evidence" that secondhand smoke is a falsehood will never change the *FACT* that my lungs were indeed damaged by second hand smoke when I was a child, change any of the test results I have been given, change the fact that I had chronic bronchitis as a child, change the fact that I now have asthma, change the fact that I am now dependant upon several medications just so that I am able to breathe normally and easily. Your "entire archive of evidence" will never be able to give me back all of the days and nights that I have been ill, the time I have suffered needlessly, the hours spent in fear when experiencing full blown asthma attacks, the time spent in doctors' offices or in the emergency room, much less all the related costs.

Your "entire archive of evidence" would be of no solace to the families of the countless victims that never smoked a day in their life yet died of lung cancer that was directly proven to be a result of secondhand smoke. 

Get your head out of the sand. At least most fat people know and admit that there are related health risks associated with being fat or obese.


----------



## Dr. Feelgood (Jan 7, 2011)

penguin said:


> I think it's arrogant to think that it's okay to smoke wherever and whenever you want without thinking about how it impacts others.



I believe that's the point Grundsau was making. I'm old enough to remember when people would ask, "Do you mind if I smoke?" before they lit up. And I can remember when it all changed: in the '60's, we all became "entitled", and it was important to "do your own thing." Suddenly everyone was lighting up and blowing smoke directly into your face, and if you dared to cough, they'd yell "I gotta righta smoke!" And very shortly thereafter, smoking was _verboten_ on airplanes. And then in more and more places. Thank goodness. 

OTOH, there's one thing I like about the OP's suggestion: the idea of t-shirts that say, "Fatties are Smokin'."


----------



## Fat Brian (Jan 7, 2011)

I do believe in the empowering effect of saying size is a choice, but for many it isn't. I could be smaller if I wanted to, I just don't want to. Others desperately desire to smaller for health or aesthetic reasons but due to factors truly out of their control they cannot lose weight. I believe if fat people presented themselves as making a lifestyle choice instead of as victims of circumstance we would get more respect over time, but I don't believe enough fat people actually enjoy being fat enough to stay that way on purpose. I also don't like the thought of fat bring to tied to a vile and disgusting habit like smoking. There are similarities but my fatness doesn't cause other people in my proximity to get cancer.


----------



## Tau (Jan 7, 2011)

Um...what????  I assume this is some kind of devils advocate type post??


----------



## CastingPearls (Jan 7, 2011)

I'm allergic to tobacco and tobacco smoke (and yes, I've been tested) so your so-called evidence is bullshit. No support for the OP from this fatty.


----------



## AmazingAmy (Jan 7, 2011)

I agree with what others are saying here - being fat and smoking aren't similiar. You don't gain weight in the same capacity that you chose to smoke - smoking is a very conscious choice, while growing fat is something that can happen either without you noticing or against your will (due to illness or injury). Also, despite what the media says being fat doesn't physically affect those around you, at least not in the capacity that smoking does.

However, that's not to say smoking can't be done without harm to others. I know plenty of people who only do it in their homes or away from others, even if they're outside. They don't set out to be inconsiderate and preach some sort of 'right'. I also understand that an argument can be formed against fatty solidarity because, obviously, fatties can't confine their bodies to their homes. We carry it with us, and consequently we offend others' asthetic ideal, bump into them on buses, and endanger their lives in small lifts.

None of us can win.


----------



## JMNYC (Jan 7, 2011)

If every smoker would kindly don a helmet with a 25-foot exhaust pipe leading up to the sky, so that their smoke would affect only them, I would have no problem.

I have asthma and smoke of any kind aggravates it. It's not a second-hand-smoke-may-cause-cancer-thing with me. It's a matter of "that shit closes my lungs and, I need my lungs to, like, breathe."

Happiest day of my life was when NYC passed the non-smoking law, and I could finally go out at night to a bar and not come home with my hair and clothes reeking from people's cigs. 

My downstairs neighbors smoke cigs and, despite our fans and air-purifiers and my inhaler, when we go out of town and open our suitcases in the hotel, BAM! The smell of smoke wafts out, and we realize their stinkin' smoke is on OUR clothes.

It's also fun when people come out of the subway and HAVE to light up on the stairs, blowing the smoke on all the people behind them.

Sorry, my friend, I'm not buying this one.


----------



## Webmaster (Jan 7, 2011)

Is it April Fool's Day already? Didn't think so.


----------



## Seth Warren (Jan 7, 2011)

FAelitist said:


> Please don't bring up secondhand smoke, you don't want me to post my entire archive of evidence proving it's falsehood.



You are correct: I don't want twenty tons of bullshit.


----------



## Famouslastwords (Jan 7, 2011)

FAelitist said:


> (Please don't bring up secondhand smoke, you don't want me to post my entire archive of evidence proving it's falsehood.).





Seth Warren said:


> You are correct: I don't want twenty tons of bullshit.



Thought this little tidbit needed requoting.

FWIW, I think my neighbor smokes next door because at night I smell smoke coming THROUGH the wall we share and I CANT BREATHE. I think the practice should outright be banned.


----------



## Dromond (Jan 7, 2011)

No solidarity from me on this issue. I have chronic bronchitis brought on by growing up in a smoking household. Cigarette smoke to this day will trigger an attack. No, there is no similarity whatsoever. Keep those coffin nails away from me.


----------



## EMH1701 (Jan 7, 2011)

I don't care if you smoke in your own home. That is your right to do so under the law and I will support that right as long as it remains legal. I'm libertarian and firmly believe in individual freedom. 

However, freedom works both ways. I personally do not want to be near the smoke, and others should have a right to also remove themselves from the smoke as they see fit.

I also don't buy into the media's BS on fat. It does not affect others. It is anyone's right to become fat if they choose, but most people do not choose to become fat, they simply gain weight based on their genetic code. I'm a firm believer that discrimination against fat people is genetic discrimination, and as much as the government purports to have banned genetic discrimination, those of us who are fat experience it on a regular basis.


----------



## mithrandirjn (Jan 7, 2011)

The big problem here is that I object to the idea of willfully making unhealthy lifestyle choices. I can't really do anything about it legally, and I'm not saying people shouldn't be allowed to do anything unhealthy (I drink enough alcohol for that idea to make me a complete hypocrite if I believed it), but whether people like to think so or not, stuff like smoking and unhealthy gaining DOES affect other people, at least in an economic way due to healthcare costs.

Again, I'm not posting saying unhealthy stuff should be banned or regulated to the point of being banned, and I certainly don't support anti-fat media drivel and BS, but willfully harming one's health on a daily basis is something I can't get on board with.


----------



## LovelyLiz (Jan 8, 2011)

I agree with the distinctions between smoking and fatness that people have already mentioned, but I think there might be a small connection between the two. Perhaps what the OP is getting at is realizing that if we continue to pass legislation and regulate people's behavior regarding smoking in the name of "health", maybe this would pave the way for some similar things to happen in terms of other kinds of choices that more directly impact fat people.

It's an issue of what kind of society we are, and how we choose to organize ourselves, what we value as a people, etc. Though as part of the fat community ourselves we can easily separate out those two issues (fat and cigarettes), for many others outside the community they just see: unhealthy = unhealthy = unhealthy. And so they may want to continue to legislate health.

And while second hand smoke is super annoying and bothersome to a lot of us, and we use that as legitimate reasons for wanting to regulate it, that's a similar root of the argument about fat people. Non-fat people are mad that they have to pay the penalties in their health care costs for the more numerous health care problems fat people have. They are annoyed that they are affected by our unhealthy lifestyle choices (I know that's a widely unfounded claim, I'm just saying it's their argument).

It's not the same, and I think it's totally possible to be pro-fat and anti-smoking (or vice versa), but both groups of people (smokers and fat people) tend to get lumped together in talks about health care legislation, etc., as people with unhealthy lifestyles who may need to be singled out for special (ie, worse) treatment under new policies.


----------



## 1300 Class (Jan 8, 2011)

No solidarity from me either. 

Whilst in the past when smoking has come up in HP as a topic for discussion, I've been fairly anti-heavy handed bans and draconian laws on the matter. However I believe the two are very different, for largely the reasons already mentioned by some of the sterling posters above.


----------



## EMH1701 (Jan 9, 2011)

mcbeth said:


> And while second hand smoke is super annoying and bothersome to a lot of us, and we use that as legitimate reasons for wanting to regulate it, that's a similar root of the argument about fat people. Non-fat people are mad that they have to pay the penalties in their health care costs for the more numerous health care problems fat people have. They are annoyed that they are affected by our unhealthy lifestyle choices (I know that's a widely unfounded claim, I'm just saying it's their argument).



What about those who don't go to the doctor because they don't want a weight lecture? They're not spending money on anything, and they're not costing anyone else anything, either.

I didn't go to the doctor for years because I worked as a temp and would've had to pay out of pocket for a yearly physical that said I was heatlhy but still had to be skinny. (I've been fat since I was about 10 and my mother put me on my first diet, although my body tends to even out at around 200 pounds when I'm not paying attention to what I'm eating, give or take a few.) I finally got a permanent job last year and had a physical in October, and all my numbers were good. Except, of course, my weight.

I figured out how many calories I was eating when I was doing Weight Watchers (before they changed the Points system) and it was 1300 for the minimum. IIRC 1200 was the point at which my body would have gone into starvation state and conserved calories and I would have gained weight anyway.

No wonder diets fail. You have to make yourself absolutely miserable for months, or years, on end in order to acheive an unrealistic BMI. And I think the statistic is like 10% of people can keep it off without regaining. Why the government and medical system encourages people to diet at all is beyond me. They should be doing HAES instead.


----------



## FAelitist (Jan 9, 2011)

Penguin, you're from australia. Australia has a nationwide indoor smoking ban. Are you so intolerant that people smoking outside offends you as well?
Angel, not one death has ever been proven even semi-conclusively to be caused by secondhand smoke. All figures have been meaningless projections done by anti-smoking special interests groups or organizations with huge conflicts of interest. I do accept the health risks associated with _my smoking, perhaps I did not clearly state that in my post
It's not possible to be "allergic" to tobacco smoke, though of course it is more irritating to some than others.
Children of smokers have a reduced rate of asthma, and the extreme rise in asthma rates has for the most part been attributed to the overuse of antibiotics and vaccinations in western nations.
As far as secondhand smoke goes, the only instances where ANY measurable increased health risks have been observed been in spouses of smokers married for 40+years. Even the increases have been insignificant; 20% increased risk of lung cancer(bringing the chance for a non smoker to get the disease from 7:1,000,000 to 8.4:1,000,000). Further, lung cancer rates have been increasing in the past 25 years despite smoking rates falling and less places allowing smoking. For the vast majority of non-smokers who contract lung cancer, the cause is a genetic predisposition or pollution.
Anywhom, yes, for many being around smoke is an annoyance, but it has about as much impact on your health(being around it) as the jackasses who blast crappy music out of their cars. I was hoping perhaps that the people of this site would be a little less judgemental seeing as many have experienced the same type of judgement as us smokers. People glaring menacingly at a fat person eating something other than a salad is essentially the same as glaring at someone smoking-if you don't see the similarity I suggest you open your eyes.
JMNYC says: "If every smoker would kindly don a helmet with a 25-foot exhaust pipe leading up to the sky, so that their smoke would affect only them, I would have no problem" 
-If every fat person would kindly don a truck tarp so that no one else would have to look at their disgusting bodies I would have no problem. see the hypocrisy?

Just one more point and I'll stop. Several of you have mentioned your distaste for the media's anti-fat messages, a few of you saying how they exaggerate the reality. Is it really that unlikely that the same is/has been done with smoking? 
But hey, keep on keeping on_


----------



## FAelitist (Jan 9, 2011)

Oh, and thankyou mcbeth, that's precisely the point I was trying to make earlier. There are already parallels; in new york for instance higher taxes have been placed on sodas and several junk foods-the first thing to occur in the modern war on smoking was higher taxes on tobacco products. here's the first link I found when I typed in "Obesity denormalization".
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10322


----------



## penguin (Jan 9, 2011)

FAelitist said:


> Penguin, you're from australia. Australia has a nationwide indoor smoking ban. Are you so intolerant that people smoking outside.



That people smoking outside what?


----------



## thatgirl08 (Jan 9, 2011)

Maybe I'm the only one butttt I don't give a shit about your pro-smoking agenda.. you've gotten a resounding no from the community so.. there's your answer. Not interested.


----------



## littlefairywren (Jan 9, 2011)

FAelitist said:


> Penguin, you're from australia. Australia has a nationwide indoor smoking ban. Are you so intolerant that people smoking outside offends you as well?
> Angel, not one death has ever been proven even semi-conclusively to be caused by secondhand smoke. All figures have been meaningless projections done by anti-smoking special interests groups or organizations with huge conflicts of interest. I do accept the health risks associated with _my smoking, perhaps I did not clearly state that in my post
> It's not possible to be "allergic" to tobacco smoke, though of course it is more irritating to some than others.
> Children of smokers have a reduced rate of asthma, and the extreme rise in asthma rates has for the most part been attributed to the overuse of antibiotics and vaccinations in western nations.
> ...


_

The only similarity there are the morons who are glaring at the fat person or the smoker, but that is where it ends. You are obviously quite firmly set in your stance, so I am not going to bother trying to shift your opinion. 

But I am one of those people who is extremely sensitive to secondhand smoke, and I am also an asthmatic. So for me it can lead to a nasty attack, and if I spend extended time around family, most of whom are smokers, I can also end up with a bronchial infection....more than an annoyance I would say. I don't begrudge anyone the right to smoke, and nor should you question how second hand smoke can have impact on others around you. I think this thread is proof enough of that._


----------



## CastingPearls (Jan 9, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> Maybe I'm the only one butttt I don't give a shit about your pro-smoking agenda.. you've gotten a resounding no from the community so.. there's your answer. Not interested.


No, you're not the only one.


----------



## furious styles (Jan 9, 2011)

i am a smoker but this shit is straight up ridiculous. wrong tree.


----------



## FAelitist (Jan 9, 2011)

littlefairywren said:


> The only similarity there are the morons who are glaring at the fat person or the smoker, but that is where it ends. You are obviously quite firmly set in your stance, so I am not going to bother trying to shift your opinion.
> 
> But I am one of those people who is extremely sensitive to secondhand smoke, and I am also an asthmatic. So for me it can lead to a nasty attack, and if I spend extended time around family, most of whom are smokers, I can also end up with a bronchial infection....more than an annoyance I would say. I don't begrudge anyone the right to smoke, and nor should you question how second hand smoke can have impact on others around you. I think this thread is proof enough of that.



I understand, and I probably came on far too strong to where my original intention(to foster a bit of tolerance) turned into a huge clash. It's definately a give-and-take kind of issue and I get that. In the end I just hope people in general can grow more accepting of others, but for the meantime I'll stick to working on myself, lol.


----------



## Dromond (Jan 9, 2011)

There is no clash, we reject your premise with a resounding finality. The only "clash" is you got an answer you didn't like and became defensive.


----------



## superodalisque (Jan 11, 2011)

good try but i don't think this will work because fat people and smokers are such diverse groups. i can't see fat people approving of smoking en masse and i also don't see smokers doing the same for fat folk. i'm also not sure you can really make the exact same health parallels since smoking has been studied much longer and much more effectively than fat has been.


----------



## kioewen (Jan 12, 2011)

Dromond said:


> There is no clash, we reject your premise with a resounding finality.



Absolutely. x10

The O.P.'s proposition is ludicrous and frankly offensive.


----------



## Melian (Jan 12, 2011)

So where's this shit-ton of evidence that second hand smoke isn't a health risk? 

I would absolutely love to see your references


----------



## luscious_lulu (Jan 12, 2011)

I call bullshit.


----------



## PamelaLois (Jan 12, 2011)

I also have to reject the OP's proposition, and also find it ludicrous and offensive. I got in constant battles with my parents about their smoking and my weight. I would tell them that my being fat in the same room with them was not the same as them smoking in the same room as me. My fat did not float through the air and make their lungs close up, clothes smell and give them heart disease or lung cancer, while their smoke-filled house made me sick. To this day, 17 years since I have lived in my house, my mother has never been here because she refuses to smoke outside. She doesn't get it, never will and I have a feeling the OP wouldn't understand either. 

I would also like to see his "shit-load" of evidence, and would be thrilled to hack it to shreds


----------



## lovelocs (Jan 13, 2011)

maybe if smoking had made me fat...





...nahhh.


----------



## 1300 Class (Jan 13, 2011)

> maybe if smoking had made me fat...


Haven't you heard, Fat Causes Fatness, Say Experts.:happy:


----------



## gobettiepurple (Jan 13, 2011)

PamelaLois said:


> My fat did not float through the air



lol . . . sorry, I couldnt get past this line, it was too funny! 

what if it could though . . . hehehehe


----------



## Dromond (Jan 13, 2011)

gobettiepurple said:


> lol . . . sorry, I couldnt get past this line, it was too funny!
> 
> what if it could though . . . hehehehe



Hmmm. A fatty remake of the Blob. Call it "Adipose Rex!"


----------



## gobettiepurple (Jan 13, 2011)

Dromond said:


> Hmmm. A fatty remake of the Blob. Call it "Adipose Rex!"



get out of my head! hahahaha!


----------



## PamelaLois (Jan 13, 2011)

gobettiepurple said:


> get out of my head! hahahaha!



I used to be able to just go upstairs to get away from the invading fat, but now it can fly through the air and float up stairs.......


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 14, 2011)

FAelitist said:


> Penguin, you're from australia. Australia has a nationwide indoor smoking ban. *Are you so intolerant that people smoking outside offends you as well?*Angel, not one death has ever been proven even semi-conclusively to be caused by secondhand smoke. All figures have been meaningless projections done by anti-smoking special interests groups or organizations with huge conflicts of interest. I do accept the health risks associated with _my smoking, perhaps I did not clearly state that in my post
> It's not possible to be "allergic" to tobacco smoke, though of course it is more irritating to some than others.
> Children of smokers have a reduced rate of asthma, and the extreme rise in asthma rates has for the most part been attributed to the overuse of antibiotics and vaccinations in western nations.
> As far as secondhand smoke goes, the only instances where ANY measurable increased health risks have been observed been in spouses of smokers married for 40+years. Even the increases have been insignificant; 20% increased risk of lung cancer(bringing the chance for a non smoker to get the disease from 7:1,000,000 to 8.4:1,000,000). Further, lung cancer rates have been increasing in the past 25 years despite smoking rates falling and less places allowing smoking. For the vast majority of non-smokers who contract lung cancer, the cause is a genetic predisposition or pollution.
> ...


_

I happen to be, yes. I have my issues with size acceptance as well but with smoking, I simply don't like it. I don't like it and I don't want to be involved. The idea that the dangers are exaggerated or non existant don't matter. I don't like the smell, the smoke, being a singer it's irritating to my throat and I don't want it near me or on me. I don't think that's too much to ask. I don't like the smell of shit either and I would not support any measure that allows people to drop their drawers and take a shit near me or my family at will. Now a designated smoking area, hey now! That's another matter. I would strongly support something that allows for this. I have nothing personal against smokers and feel they should be able to choose this if they like. Those who don't want to be exposed can stay away if the areas are clearly marked. I think the demand for a smoking area is a legitimate one.

Fat is different. You will not get watery eyes, burning throat and nasal passages, tiny tears in the vocal chords, and asthma flare up or allergic reaction simply by standing next to someone who's fat. Any adverse reaction to someone who is fat is simply a hate based thing unless the fat person is harming you in some way. There may be an argument that there should be designated spaces that accommodate fat people in our society if one is going to get real chirpy about providing one for smokers but the two are not the same at all in my view._


----------



## snuggletiger (Jan 14, 2011)

I don't mind you're right to smoke. But don't confuse the right to smoke with the right to give me cancer.


----------



## gobettiepurple (Jan 14, 2011)

PamelaLois said:


> I used to be able to just go upstairs to get away from the invading fat, but now it can fly through the air and float up stairs.......



I probably shouldn't commandeer this thread, but could you imagine a horror flick, akin to the blob, but where the antagonist, presumably fat, can float . . . talk about invasion by land, sea and now air!


----------



## LordQuas (Jan 21, 2011)

Im sorry but I have a hard time taking someone seriously who claims that there is evidence that second hand smoke isnt unhealthy


----------



## grubnboy (Jan 21, 2011)

not to offend anyone but it always strikes me as funny how people complain about second hand smoke, but think nothing of the massive amounts of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions from cars they're exposed to every day. 


just wanted to point out that the world around you is full of sights, sounds, and smells that are good and bad. without the stink of the city, one wouldn't appreciate the freshness of the country side. 

if you're a non smoker, it's cool, but when you see us standing out on the sidewalk having a smoke, remember we've been pushed all the way out there to appease others, we're not going any further.


----------



## penguin (Jan 21, 2011)

grubnboy said:


> not to offend anyone but it always strikes me as funny how people complain about second hand smoke, but think nothing of the massive amounts of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions from cars they're exposed to every day.



Yeah. People never think of that. Ever. If only they'd invent some sort of car that was like, _better_ for the environment or something. Or if more people would carpool or take public transport or ride bikes or something instead...but nah, that'll never happen.



grubnboy said:


> if you're a non smoker, it's cool, but when you see us standing out on the sidewalk having a smoke, remember we've been pushed all the way out there to appease others, we're not going any further.



Poor diddums.


----------



## Dromond (Jan 21, 2011)

grubnboy said:


> not to offend anyone but it always strikes me as funny how people complain about second hand smoke, but think nothing of the massive amounts of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions from cars they're exposed to every day.



I think Penguin covered this one just fine.



grubnboy said:


> just wanted to point out that the world around you is full of sights, sounds, and smells that are good and bad. without the stink of the city, one wouldn't appreciate the freshness of the country side.



Whatever did people do before stinky cities? I guess they just didn't appreciate being able to breathe without coughing and gagging.



grubnboy said:


> if you're a non smoker, it's cool, but when you see us standing out on the sidewalk having a smoke, remember we've been pushed all the way out there to appease others, we're not going any further.



I wouldn't want to legislate away your ability to commit slow motion suicide, but that doesn't mean I will be grateful to smell your pollution or be polite about having to endure it.


----------



## joswitch (Jan 21, 2011)

grubnboy said:


> not to offend anyone but it always strikes me as funny how people complain about second hand smoke, *but think nothing of the massive amounts of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions from cars they're exposed to every day.*



^Wrong. For instance, I avoid living in the centre of big cities for just that reason.



> just wanted to point out that the world around you is full of sights, sounds, and smells that are good and bad. without the stink of the city, one wouldn't appreciate the freshness of the country side.


^BS. I don't need to smell a turd first, in order to appreciate a rose. Smell is not 1/0 sense.


> if you're a non smoker, it's cool, but when you see us standing out on the sidewalk having a smoke, remember we've been pushed all the way out there to appease others, we're not going any further.



So? For 4 or 5 years *I* had to sit /stand outside summer and winter (in the UK) cos if I spent more than about an hour in a smoky atmosphere I would get sinusitis / bronchitis, guaranteed. Now it's your turn. Cry me a river, smoker!


----------



## grubnboy (Jan 24, 2011)

might be that way in the UK but in the States we've had to smoke outside for quite some time now. 

don't get me wrong now, i'm not saying that everyone should have to put up with everyone else's crap. but it's a given that somethings are just that way. 

like when you're riding the bus and some jerk is eating a bag of those god awful smelling fritos (not the regular ones). 

you can't legislate away people's rights. if you don't like the smell of booze and smoke you don't go into a bar. because that's usually gonna be boozey and smokey. i don't get a job and expect to be able to smoke while i'm at work, save on breaks when you go outside or whatever, because that would be a dumb thing to expect. 

it's a little like crying about starving kids in another country when you've got starving kids here. yeah it's bad and awful, but there's other things to fix first. 

i'm all for electric cars (although just because the car is emissions free doesn't mean the juice that powers it was). i'm all for cleaning up the cities and doing away with the pollution and stink. 

the point i'm making is that people smoking is a small portion of all that, but those people are attacked about it because it's a more readily visible form, with a readily visible cause. 

really it's no different than bashing a fat person.


----------



## Dromond (Jan 24, 2011)

grubnboy said:


> *snipped*
> 
> really it's no different than bashing a fat person.



In your opinion. An opinion I do not share, for reasons stated eloquently in previous posts.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 24, 2011)

The building I work in has been smoke free for years now. There used to be an unspoken system where people smoked in the back of the building under a huge alcove area. The building even supplied ashtrays out there. Within the last few years due to complaints, the building has put in a 20 ft policy where you can't smoke within 20 feet of the building. The only problem with that is that this is a densely populated metropolis and almost ALL the buildings have a policy like that. No matter where you go you are within 20 feet of some verboten territory and I don't think that's fair either. I would support an effort for some kind of compromise where there are designated smoking areas for people to go. Put up a sign "Smoking Area" and keep ashtrays there. People who want to exit or enter in that portion of the building should do so with the understanding that people are allowed to smoke there without being harassed. This is what I was referring to in my earlier message about supporting a smoking area. It seems a fair practice to me.


----------



## penguin (Jan 24, 2011)

grubnboy said:


> you can't legislate away people's rights.



Your "right" to smoke stops when it conflicts with my right to breathe.

And besides, yes, they can. Do you know who bitches about not being able to smoke in public places? Smokers. Do you know who enjoys the lack of smoke there? Everyone else. 

Smoking isn't a right.



grubnboy said:


> the point i'm making is that people smoking is a small portion of all that, but those people are attacked about it because it's a more readily visible form, with a readily visible cause.



No, people are against smoking because of the health risks, to the smoker and those around them. I know I hate smelling like an ashtray. It's not a sexy scent. Yet that's how non-smokers are forced to smell like if they go somewhere smokers happen to be.



grubnboy said:


> really it's no different than bashing a fat person.



Oy.


----------



## Fat Brian (Jan 24, 2011)

While I hate smoking, I despise even seeing a person smoke, I'm very careful about who and how smoking should be regulated. Today's smoke police are tomorrows fat police. The mindset that pushes for extreme anti-smoking laws is the same one that bans Happy Meals and french fries. We fat people have to be careful that we don't throw the baby out with the bath water on this issue. If we allow pressure groups to apply the "health at any cost" mantra to smoking they'll come after "unhealthy" foods next, they already are. I'm sure there are people who hate to see me eat a cheeseburger just as much as I hate to see them smoke, and to them its just as much of a public health crisis.


----------



## LovelyLiz (Jan 24, 2011)

Fat Brian said:


> While I hate smoking, I despise even seeing a person smoke, *I'm very careful about who and how smoking should be regulated. Today's smoke police are tomorrows fat police.* The mindset that pushes for extreme anti-smoking laws is the same one that bans Happy Meals and french fries. We fat people have to be careful that we don't throw the baby out with the bath water on this issue. If we allow pressure groups to apply the "health at any cost" mantra to smoking they'll come after "unhealthy" foods next, they already are. I'm sure there are people who hate to see me eat a cheeseburger just as much as I hate to see them smoke, and to them its just as much of a public health crisis.



Precisely.


----------



## grubnboy (Jan 26, 2011)

i love the hypocracy some people here display. 

let me guess, you don't want me to tell you what you can and can't do with your body, but you'll freely tell me what i can and can't do with mine. 

nice. it's attitude like that, makes me not care one bit about non-smokers. don't like it, tough shit.


----------



## luscious_lulu (Jan 26, 2011)

grubnboy said:


> i love the hypocracy some people here display.
> 
> let me guess, you don't want me to tell you what you can and can't do with your body, but you'll freely tell me what i can and can't do with mine.
> 
> nice. it's attitude like that, makes me not care one bit about non-smokers. don't like it, tough shit.



You are so off the mark here. You can smoke all you want. No seriously, you can. Just not in a place where your secOnd hand smoke can be inhaled by me & affect MY body. 

No matter where I eat, you are not going to physically affected by my actions.


----------



## Dromond (Jan 26, 2011)

grubnboy said:


> i love the hypocracy some people here display.
> 
> let me guess, you don't want me to tell you what you can and can't do with your body, but you'll freely tell me what i can and can't do with mine.
> 
> nice. it's attitude like that, makes me not care one bit about non-smokers. don't like it, tough shit.



You have the freedom to go straight to hell, if that is your wish. However, you don't get the freedom to take me with you. Keep your carcinogens out of my face.


----------

