Without leaps of logic. Go back and review other examples provided demonstrating an accident vs willful self-harm. Red herring aside, you’re twisting now. Still not interested.
Rates used to be organized and adjusted by risk bands, and obesity did play in. Like life insurance. ACA did away with that by increasing young, healthy rates to offset the obese and elderly. And poor.
It is a leap of logic that you decided to ride a motorcycle? Did you accidentally fall on a moving motorcycle?
Why?
There is no value in that. You are still on the hook to show that your risky behavior should be treated differently than other people’s risky behavior.
Unless you can do that, you are a hypocrite. Pulling money from insurance by doing risky things, while criticizing other for doing the same. Show me that you riding a motorcycle is an acceptable risk, and choosing to eat to much isn’t.
Because they demonstrate how ridiculous your proposition of evenly applying ownership of risk without regard for context is, and expose your logical fallacies in putting the argument on me.
Please make a not at fault accident equate to willfully damaging behavior, without logical leaps, fallacies or context twisting bullshit.
You know what this thread needs? More controversy
Powerlifters are just wanna be Bodybuilders, but lack the willpower to stop eating gummy bears in between sets. Discuss.
3 Likes
Let me play your game for second. With questions.
If I had died because of my accident, would you view it as a suicide?
Are people killed in car wrecks on the way to work committing suicide?
Plane accident victims?
Someone gets murdered while out shopping and….its suicide? They took the risk to go shopping in public where murderers are?
Please help me equate a not at fault accident to willful self-harm.
Dude, I just did.
The fact that you were not at fault doesn’t matter. You choose to use by far the least safe form of popular transportation. Statistically, all things being equal, riding a motorcycle shortens lifespan, increases injury rates, and medical costs. That is willfully damaging behavior if you know this fact, which I believe nearly every rider knows.
Also, you trying to shift the burden to me isn’t correct. You owe me that still.
No, you would have died due to unnecessary risk. That is all.
My whole point in my first response to you is that most things have risk involved. Some much more than other. You are picking things you don’t like as unacceptable. That is fine if you have a good reason that is consistent with your other beliefs. I haven’t heard one yet. Otherwise you are special pleading.
2 Likes
I’m not saying this isn’t true, but wasn’t your first post on here saying how you liked to intimidate newcomers or young people at the gym, or something along those lines? I only remember because it caused a bit of a stink among members in the thread it was posted in, but can you see why people might question your motives?
4 Likes
So if I intentionally ran off the road head first in to a tree it would be the same thing as being forced off and down a ledge by an oncoming truck in both lanes around a curve?
If I get a cut building a chair it’s the same as intentionally cutting up my wrists? A cut is a cut and both behaviors carried inherent risk?
I think I’m starting to get it. Tree leaves are green, my daughters soccer ball is green, they are both grass and should be treated the same. Funny, I haven’t watered her ball yet but I learn something new every day.
While I’m sure this could be a very twisty, long and entertaining conversation I’m not interested in creating a platform for you to attempt justifying what amounts to intentionally dishonest logic at this point.
Off to squat more weight for reps than that one dude snapped his neck with. Later alligator.
I am okay with agreeing to disagree.
I am not okay with you asserting that I’ve used dishonest logic, when I’ve very clearly made my points, and you’ve answered with silly questions, and trying to shift the burden of proof. I get it, it is uncomfortable when someone points out you’re guilty of inconsistent thinking and due to that a hypocrite.
This isn’t what I’ve been saying and you know it.
If you read my posts, you know that I am asking you for justification on why you think it is okay to not cover medical costs due to obesity as it was a choice of the individual to eat too much which intentionally increased their risks, but your medical costs should be covered when you took unnecessary risks intentionally and got injured. Why should I view one different than the other? You have given me nothing.
I feel you are hung up on an idea that obesity is far more dangerous than riding a motorcycle. Perhaps that is why you are using silly examples like trail running. Let’s do some quick math. A quick google search shows that for every 100,000,000 miles on a motorcycle there are roughly 32 deaths. If a lifetime biker who rides for 50 years at a rate of 10,000 miles per year were to calculate their probablility of dying, they would use this equation: probability of death % = ((10,000 * 50 * 32) / 100,000,000) * 100 = 16%. It is significant risk, nothing to scoff at.
For injuries from riding the number skyrocket. 468 injuries per 100,000,000 miles! That same type of math finds a life time rider will on average get injured about 2.3 times in their lifetime of riding.
Riding a motorcycle is a willful decision to do a risky behavior that will statistically shorten your life, increase injury and medical costs.
1 Like
That was like 2 years ago, but no - not newcomers or young people specifically, just the people that clog up the equipment doing meaningless sets with no intention of making progress. People lifting with their ego, or who are there as a social venture, but still hog equipment for exorbitant periods of time.
I’m okay with trying to hasten their exit. Warming up with their working weight when i ask to work in sometimes does that. I still dont wish them ill, i just wish them to hurry the fuck up.
Question my motives? For what, a rant?
I wasnt aware that rants often had motives other than to just… rant…
Obesity is not willful self harm. It’s willful high risk behavior. Some people are obese and don’t have any negative health consequences. Just like some people ride motorcycles and don’t get in accidents.
4 Likes
I disagree. Assuming both the powerlifter and bodybuilder actually compete, the PL is an athlete (a lame one) and the BB is not. If someone identifies as either, but does not compete, they are neither.
That’s my take on the matter.
2 Likes
3 Likes
Are you telling me I’m not an athuleet?
1 Like
This is EXACTLY what this thread needed right now. lol
3 Likes
Classic.
@Andrewgen_Receptors Yeah I think I am, based on the little I know about ya. We could start getting real wild with what sports should be considered sports, and whether or not we should just use the term competitor vs. athlete, but I figured I’d keep it pretty light. Bodybuilding is 100% not a sport though.
3 Likes
Okay, do you consider gymnastics to be a sport then? Both have heinously biased judging standards, PEDs, excess muscle, judgement on form, and a litany of scandals.
Joking, I have nothing against gymnastics - it’s my favorite olympic sport to watch… but only the women’s teams…
Bodybuilding is about as close to a sport as swimwear modeling. No one cares about what bodyparts are real or fake, neither have real tans, the crowd favorite often has nothing to do with what they’re wearing, and none of the outfits leave anything to the imagination.
Oh, and participants in both are likely to have an OnlyFans page.
1 Like
Eventually they do. Do you know an obese 90 year old? The health consequences of obesity will manifest themselves at some point, it’s just that some people see them sooner and more severely than others. That’s different than exposing yourself to risk in the moment. Tightrope walking may cause a quick death because of the likelihood of an accident, but tightrope walking itself doesn’t lead to health problems.
3 Likes
yes
Be sure to include some Asian preparations!
Few things are more comforting than a well made steamed egg