Unpopular Opinions Thread

[Guest]

Plus the whole impetus of that decision was so Rebecca didn't have to worry about potentially losing the boy.  What does she have to worry about now?  

[ZeroDiscipline]

I thought Mandy Moore was way terrible in her scenes where she was supposed to be a Steelers fan. It was as if no one in that scene had ever watched football before. She should have been coached better, if she is not into football. But I know she used to make an ass of herself rooting for Andy Roddick at tennis matches back when they dated, so sports aren't completely foreign to her.

[MaryPatShelby]

I do not care about William's cat. There.  I said it.

[TVForever]

I like Toby. The first episode, I wanted to punch him in the throat, but he's grown on me. 

[PRgal]

2 hours ago, MaryPatShelby said:

I do not care about William's cat. There.  I said it.

I suppose you don't care for the cat here or there.  You do not care for him ANYWHERE.  #sorrynotsorry #greeneggsandham

[Amethyst]

I like Rebecca and Mandy Moore, but I don't think Moore's performance is anything extraordinary.

[LJonEarth]

I grew up with Mandy Moore as pop artist. Beyond that, she will always be a real live Disney Princess to me. I struggle with her as an actress. The depth just isn't there.

I suppose my unpopular opinion is that Kate's character is the only one I really connect with. Other than that, I'm really struggling with this show. The acting's decent and it's well orchestrated to be a hit. But everything that makes my friends swoon and weep over either bores me because I already assumed the shocking twist or makes my skin crawl from the "emotional anvils" as the original poster called it. I wonder if all of the FX and AMC shows have deadened my emotions.

[ClareWalks]

I do not care about....

....the slightly inconsistent timeline.

....the fact that we haven't seen much about (Kevin and Jack's relationship) (William's cat) (what the deal is with Yvette's picture) (William's cancer treatment) YET. We are only a few episodes in. Not sure why folks want all this information immediately.

Edited November 2, 2016 by ClareWalks

[Lady Calypso]

I get why Rebecca isn't connecting with a lot of people and I also get why people might think Mandy Moore is a weak actress. I have trouble with Rebecca at times too but my UO (maybe?) is that her character really is needed. Setting aside the fact that she's their mother, I think Rebecca provides a lot of more depth and layers with the other kids. Even if Jack was still alive, Rebecca seems to balance out his personality and I think that's important in terms of how she is as a parent. 

Another UO is that I don't really connect with William. I think he's supposed to be a pseudo-Jack now that we know Jack is dead. I'm not sure that I like that William is slowly replacing Jack's place. I know Jack's been dead for who knows how long, but William doesn't quite work for me, especially since we know his time is almost up. The fact that he's connected with Randall and now with Kevin, his upcoming death is only going to provide more heartache for the two of them. 

I think Kevin might be my favourite character. I'm glad I was right about his progression being a slow burn. 

[ClareWalks]

I know a lot of folks hate Miguel because he ends up with Rebecca (although we still don't know what happened there), but I can't be mad at him, at least not without more info. My ex and I broke up (nobody died, though), and I started dating a mutual friend of ours, and we are now married. It makes sense to me that, perhaps in their grief, they became closer friends and eventually became romantic.

[ShadowFacts]

55 minutes ago, ClareWalks said:

I know a lot of folks hate Miguel because he ends up with Rebecca (although we still don't know what happened there), but I can't be mad at him, at least not without more info. My ex and I broke up (nobody died, though), and I started dating a mutual friend of ours, and we are now married. It makes sense to me that, perhaps in their grief, they became closer friends and eventually became romantic.

I am in a similar situation to Rebecca, so it's not weird to me at all obviously, but I actually know of several other examples, so I think it is not uncommon or any reason for discomfort. 

My other unpop op is that I don't mind Yvette.  I like her.  Apparently Jack and Rebecca do, too. 

[mojito]

Quote

Not sure why folks want all this information immediately.

Because some people need everything spelled out all at once and can't just wait for stories to unfold. They need to make snap judgments about characters based on minimal exposure, and then ask questions like, "Am I supposed to think..."  They aren't even comfortable with their own thoughts and interpretations! It's no wonder that TV, movies, and books have become so dumbed down.

I don't feel that we need to see William backslide to become more believable. (I say that, and maybe nobody really feels that way, so don't get mad at me.) A few flashbacks to his old ways will do plenty to remind us of who he once was.

What I like most about this show is how slowly the story is told, and I'm beginning to even wonder if the point of view of the camera is always objective, or it's a single character's distorted reflection of the facts.

[Corgi-ears]

I think Miguel is way hotter than Jack.

[jah1986]

I think Mandy Moore is an attractive person but not beautiful.

I don't hate anyone on the show, sometimes one or two characters annoy me but I don't hate anyone...yet.

[Enigma X]

1 hour ago, jah1986 said:

I think Mandy Moore is an attractive person but not beautiful.

And this is why I like that she was chosen. She (and Milo) are average people trying to raise their family.

[Tiger]

I dont think the young Randall actor is very good, and it takes me out of the scenes that he looks absolutely nothing like Brown.

In fact, it annoys me that both the young Randall and young Kevin actors look nothing like Brown and Hartley, respectively.

Im sure its difficult to find a true mini me that can also act ala Bailee Madison/Ginny Goodwin, but at least cast someone who could conceivably grow up to resemble the adult actor.  

Edited November 5, 2016 by Tiger

[sasha206]

On 10/24/2016 at 11:17 PM, MsJamieDornan said:

That's why I am not fond of Kate. She is sooo overweight. It would be great if her weight problem was  a bit more realistic. A large portion of Americans are overweight, myself included, I wish that character were more relatable.

I was really prepared to dislike your comment about not liking her because of her weight, but then I think back on actresses that i have disliked because they are so aneroxically thin looking that it makes me feel like I'm watching a skeleton and it makes me uncomforable.

I think you do raise a good point -- if she was overweight but not morbidly obese, her struggles might indeed be more relatable.  On the other hand, I do find it refreshing that this actress has been given what seems to be a layered role.  Yes, her weight is the storyline for the most part, but she's not reduced to some cartoon character of a role.

The one I feel most sorry for though is the actresses that play her as a young fat girl.  I know they're getting paid, but it hurts me to think the fat young actresses have to deal with their fatness in every episode.  It has to hurt even though that's why they have the role and I'm sure they hope that they'll get other roles in the future.

[sasha206]

On 11/2/2016 at 4:25 PM, ClareWalks said:

I know a lot of folks hate Miguel because he ends up with Rebecca (although we still don't know what happened there), but I can't be mad at him, at least not without more info. My ex and I broke up (nobody died, though), and I started dating a mutual friend of ours, and we are now married. It makes sense to me that, perhaps in their grief, they became closer friends and eventually became romantic.

I think the dislike of Miguel might be based on his first scene where Jack *to me* sounds like he's on the precipice of having an affair because of chaos at home and Miguel's comments about Rebecca make it appear that he's in love with her.  Even though Miguel appears to be talking sense into Jack, it almost seems like there's a lightbulb moment of MIguel that maybe he can swoop in and win Rebecca.

It would not at all surprise me if the seemingly perfect, although stressed young couple, end up in later episodes both stepping out on their partners.  Maybe Jack is first, Rebecca finds out, and ultimately ends up with MIguel before Jack dies?  

Edited November 5, 2016 by sasha206

[sasha206]

On 10/27/2016 at 11:23 PM, tribeca said:

Beth and Randall are too perfect 

I do agree with this.  I enjoy their scenes in general because they are both great actors, but they are too adorable with each other, too still in love.  But I'm sure this is all the setup for future conflicts down the road so the audience is so stunned when their marriage starts showing signs of wear.

[Enigma X]

I get that every family dynamic is different but feel as if the whole having three kids or being one of three kids, while difficult especially for kids in the toddler stages and below, is not as heavy lifting as portrayed. But the show makes it seem as if 2.5 (basically, sometimes three) wasn't the norm. Again, three at once is different when they are all in diapers. I just think some times the show is overselling the "overwhelmed" feeling of a household of three kids. My mom had 12 (and yes that is a whole different ballpark), but by the time the three were 8 I just feel as if the family should have settled enough where three wasn't as big of a deal as they make it be.

[topanga]

28 minutes ago, Enigma X said:

I get that every family dynamic is different but feel as if the whole having three kids or being one of three kids, while difficult especially for kids in the toddler stages and below, is not as heavy lifting as portrayed. But the show makes it seem as if 2.5 (basically, sometimes three) wasn't the norm. Again, three at once is different when they are all in diapers. I just think some times the show is overselling the "overwhelmed" feeling of a household of three kids. My mom had 12 (and yes that is a whole different ballpark), but by the time the three were 8 I just feel as if the family should have settled enough where three wasn't as big of a deal as they make it be.

Hats off to your mom, first of all! But I think the situation is very different with multiples. Parents of twins have told me that the first year of the babies' lives was the hardest year they (the parents) had ever experienced. At times they didn't think they'd make it. They cried at different times, wouldn't sleep at the same time, wouldn't eat at the same time, woke each other up with their crying, etc. Of course they didn't have to deal with that when the kids were 8, but squabbling siblings can be almost as draining. 

[Enigma X]

40 minutes ago, topanga said:

Hats off to your mom, first of all! But I think the situation is very different with multiples. Parents of twins have told me that the first year of the babies' lives was the hardest year they (the parents) had ever experienced. At times they didn't think they'd make it. They cried at different times, wouldn't sleep at the same time, wouldn't eat at the same time, woke each other up with their crying, etc. Of course they didn't have to deal with that when the kids were 8, but squabbling siblings can be almost as draining. 

Again, I think toddler and below is different. But I don't feel like three bickering 8 year-olds is too different from a bickering 7, 8, and 9 year old.

I get that this overwhelmed feeling is true of the fictional Piersons and that is okay, and I don't think that Rebecca and Jack are bad parents for it. But I just don't find it the norm for the average family of triplets (kids) who are around 8-years old. Toddlers and below yes.

I have multiples in my family and know the first years were hell for their parents. Things did eventually settle down.

[Court]

Mine are 8, 5, and 2. I'm overwhelmed often. Each age just brings a new set of things to figure out 

[JudyObscure]

I just had one colicky baby who cried a lot and didn't  sleep through the night for most of  the first year.  I was so overwhelmed, I can barely remember any of it. Pictures show a big healthy baby and me, pale, hollow eyed, 103 pounds, staring blankly into the camera.  I'm in awe of women who have more than one, or children with serious health problems.

[Aloeonatable]

I had three, all two years apart, so a 4-yr. old, 2-yr. old and a newborn. I was a stay-at-home mom (back in the mid-seventies.) You develop a routine and I guess I was lucky that my children cooperated! It is hard work, but that was my "job" at the time. Now, triplets would be really hard, no question.

[ZeroDiscipline]

I feel like having kids of different ages is a different kind of "hard" than having three 8 year olds all at the same time. I totally agree with the original posters point. But it's all hard, kids are pretty impossible with all the changing and shifting. I have two of them, five years apart, and new issues crop up seemingly every day. Just when you have a routine that works, and you get comfortable with it, something happens and you throw away all the plans.

[ItCouldBeWorse]

39 minutes ago, ZeroDiscipline said:

I feel like having kids of different ages is a different kind of "hard" than having three 8 year olds all at the same time.

When there are multiples, you have the inevitable comparisons and jealousy, made worse by the fact that Randall is clearly more talented than Kevin in areas that are highly prized.  Yes, younger siblings are often unfavorably compared to older siblings who did better academically, but it must be so much harder when the kids are in the same grade, potentially with the same assignments and tests!  Kate is not going to feel the comparison as much, since she is the only girl, but just imagine if one of her brothers had instead been a girl who was not considered heavy.  Even if this sister had been adopted, so that the comparison would in no way have been "fair" (which could be said about Randall and Kevin's respective academic abilities), it would have been extremely harsh, much worse than having a slim mother or slimmer peers.

 

On 11/7/2016 at 2:54 PM, Enigma X said:

I get that this overwhelmed feeling is true of the fictional Piersons and that is okay, and I don't think that Rebecca and Jack are bad parents for it. But I just don't find it the norm for the average family of triplets (kids) who are around 8-years old. Toddlers and below yes.

I do get what you are saying. It seems like Rebecca never got over the shock of expecting multiples.  Also, Since her cerebellum hurts so much from helping with third grade homework, maybe the daily indignities of parenting don't come super easily to her.  Had she and Jack started out with a single child, she might have decided that one was enough of a disruption for her, and I don't mean that in a negative way.  Here, she didn't have much of a choice (except between 2 and 3, and I'm still not sure why she agreed to take Randall except that I think she was in a waking nightmare state and Jack was so fixated on coming home with three children that she acquiesced) with regard to having multiple children, but to her credit, she seems to be giving it her all.

In real life, I know stay-at-home mothers with 5 or more children who manage with occasional, reasonable complaints, and mothers of 1 or 2 to whom everything is a major deal. (I'm aware that I've left the whole aspect of the respective fathers out of the discussion). Of course, these differences might be the reason why some people have the number of children they do.  Finally, I know a family who had 2 children under the age of 3 whose "3rd child" was triplets!  They had local relatives who helped a lot at the beginning and they ran a tight ship, but you never felt that they were in the least bit overwhelmed.  They were the right family to have the gift of unexpected triplets!

Edited November 10, 2016 by ItCouldBeWorse

[love2lovebadtv]

On 11/2/2016 at 4:25 PM, ClareWalks said:

I know a lot of folks hate Miguel because he ends up with Rebecca (although we still don't know what happened there), but I can't be mad at him, at least not without more info. My ex and I broke up (nobody died, though), and I started dating a mutual friend of ours, and we are now married. It makes sense to me that, perhaps in their grief, they became closer friends and eventually became romantic.

It would have been easier to be ok with it if we weren't shown Miguel with a wedding band making inappropriate comments about Rebecca.  It started out OK but when he commented on her butt, it was in poor taste. 

[Amethyst]

Jack and Rebecca's love story hasn't really interested me since the pilot.  That could be due to Jack being dead so we're not going to see them as a happy older couple.  But romance wise, they're way down the totem pole.  I believe them as happy (mostly) I just don't think about them much.

[Jx223]

I believe that while it's being stated Rebecca did favor Randall more that she loved all the kids equally and hadn't (so far) been shown to overwhelmingly favor Randall. In the flashbacks we've seen I think she had tried to figure out what was going on between Kevin and Randall. She even asked why Kevin was so jealous of Randall in the episode "The Pool". I didn't think she was really trying to take Randall's side in that episode or on last night's one.

It seemed to me like she just wanted her sons to get along and on last night's episode was trying to reach a compromise so that they were both happy. She backed Randall's idea of studying in the kitchen because she wanted BOTH her sons to be happy and to stay together. I didn't view that as her taking Randall's side again/trying to snub Kevin.

I also wonder if she often tended to agree more with Randall because Kevin was more often than not in the wrong in regards to their spats. Kevin had a nasty attitude and treated Randall poorly and I can see Kate siding more with Randall as a result of that. I don't think she was worried so much about "fairness" as making sure that her sons tried to get along and co-exist peacefully. I think she is getting more blame than she deserves for Kevin/Randall's strained relationship.

Also I like Toby.

Edited November 17, 2016 by Jx223

[Brigid]

the morbidly obese woman needs surgery, she is too big to diet

[LydiaMoon1]

Quote

the morbidly obese woman needs surgery, she is too big to diet

Surgery is not always the solution either.  I've known seven people in the last 10 years who have had bariatric surgeries.  One lost weight successfully.  Three regained their weight over time and now are right back where they started.  Three suffered through severe medical complications and repeated hospitalizations following their surgeries that drained their bank accounts and diminished their quality of life.  It's like the pharmaceutical commercial for a diet pill that ran several years back that promised weight loss but came with back pain, bloody urine and a side order of uncontrollable oily stools.  I was like, DAYUM!  I'd rather stay fat.

[ShadowFacts]

This may not actually be unpopular, but whatever Kate does or doesn't do, she needs to take a look at the why of her overeating.  Maybe they do that at the meetings she goes to, but we haven't seen it much.  Even Toby talked about putting on 95 pounds after his wife cheated and the divorce.  It's not as simple as all that, but the underlying problems will still be there after surgery or dramatic dieting.

[topanga]

On 11/16/2016 at 11:38 PM, Jx223 said:

It seemed to me like she just wanted her sons to get along and on last night's episode was trying to reach a compromise so that they were both happy. She backed Randall's idea of studying in the kitchen because she wanted BOTH her sons to be happy and to stay together. I didn't view that as her taking Randall's side again/trying to snub Kevin.

But Randall staying the room doing his homework wasn't a compromise. Kevin couldn't sleep and had a big game the next day. Rebecca was basically telling the boys that Randall's comfort was more important than Kevin's.

[jhlipton]

1 hour ago, ShadowFacts said:

This may not actually be unpopular, but whatever Kate does or doesn't do, she needs to take a look at the why of her overeating.  

Assumes facts not in evidence.  Too many people see fat people and think "they could lose weight if they just tried hard enough,"  Which is pure BS.  Most people have a weight and moving it is tough and usually not healthy.  (Dieting is one one of the worst things you can do to your body, and barbaric bariatric surgery is worse.)  We've seen that Kate eats healthy and exercises (exercise tends to add weight since muscle weighs more than fat), so I doubt that her weight is from "overeating".

In fact, we saw her at a low point, where she bought a bag of "guilt foods" and ate one chip.  I think that shows that she doesn't overeat.

[topanga]

5 minutes ago, jhlipton said:

Assumes facts not in evidence.  Too many people see fat people and think "they could lose weight if they just tried hard enough,"  Which is pure BS.  Most people have a weight and moving it is tough and usually not healthy.  (Dieting is one one of the worst things you can do to your body, and barbaric bariatric surgery is worse.)  We've seen that Kate eats healthy and exercises (exercise tends to add weight since muscle weighs more than fat), so I doubt that her weight is from "overeating".

In fact, we saw her at a low point, where she bought a bag of "guilt foods" and ate one chip.  I think that shows that she doesn't overeat.

But what about all of the junk food we saw in her fridge during the pilot episode? I don't think Kate eats that way now, but the pilot suggested that she used to eat a lot of processed, unhealthy foot. 

But I agree that too many people assume that it's easy to lose weight. That all it takes is knowledge and a light bulb moment. Often these thoughts come from people who are naturally thin and have no idea about being genetically overweight or having a food addiction. (Not saying that all overweight people have either of these issues. But many of us do). 

[jhlipton]

1 minute ago, topanga said:

But what about all of the junk food we saw in her fridge during the pilot episode? I don't think Kate eats that way now, but the pilot suggested that she used to eat a lot of processed, unhealthy foot. 

But I agree that too many people assume that it's easy to lose weight. That all it takes is knowledge and a light bulb moment. Often these thoughts come from people who are naturally thin and have no idea about being genetically overweight or having a food addiction. (Not saying that all overweight people have either of these issues. But many of us do). 

Both my ex-wife and my current wife are what would be considered "fat" so I have at least a "one-removed" bias in the matter.  

For me, the key thing is that Kate was always fat (her mother putting her on diets didn't help as they cause more weight gain).  That tells me that her weight is not related to her eating, but to her metabolism.
 

[ClareWalks]

Apparently my opinion is unpopular (I get criticized every time I state it), but one does not reach over 300 lb without overeating. It just doesn't happen.

[CleoCaesar]

My unpopular opinion: I don't understand people's endless tears over characters they've known for half a dozen episodes. Or rather: I think people ENJOY watching manipulative cheese and talking about how it made them cry and cry. Same thing with the cinematic/literary trainwreck that was the Fault in Our Stars.

Another opinion: some of the speeches on this show are so painfully artificial and deliberately tearjerky that they belong on a Shonda Rhimes show. (Any time a character says "You don't get to..." and repeats it i get PTSD flashbacks to Grey's Anatomy.) I do like the show overall and think the acting is very good all around, but yeah.

[ShadowFacts]

1 hour ago, jhlipton said:

Assumes facts not in evidence.  Too many people see fat people and think "they could lose weight if they just tried hard enough,"  Which is pure BS.  Most people have a weight and moving it is tough and usually not healthy.  (Dieting is one one of the worst things you can do to your body, and barbaric bariatric surgery is worse.)  We've seen that Kate eats healthy and exercises (exercise tends to add weight since muscle weighs more than fat), so I doubt that her weight is from "overeating".

In fact, we saw her at a low point, where she bought a bag of "guilt foods" and ate one chip.  I think that shows that she doesn't overeat.

Yeah, she's overeating.  The rest of it, I did not state, I don't at all think you can try hard enough and succeed, etc.  I've been there, I know there are triggers, there are genetic components, there are lots and lots of factors.  And you have to think all of these things through, which is all I said that I hope they show. 

[jhlipton]

57 minutes ago, ShadowFacts said:

Yeah, she's overeating.  The rest of it, I did not state, I don't at all think you can try hard enough and succeed, etc.  I've been there, I know there are triggers, there are genetic components, there are lots and lots of factors.  And you have to think all of these things through, which is all I said that I hope they show. 

I don't think I quoted you, but I agree.  It's possible she was "overeating" (what does that mean, anyway? It's always struck me as "you're eating more or differently than I think you should!") but there are tons of reasons for a person to be the weight they are.

[ClareWalks]

57 minutes ago, ShadowFacts said:

Yeah, she's overeating.  The rest of it, I did not state, I don't at all think you can try hard enough and succeed, etc.  I've been there, I know there are triggers, there are genetic components, there are lots and lots of factors.  And you have to think all of these things through, which is all I said that I hope they show. 

Yep for sure! 

One more related unpopular opinion: I know a lot of folks want to think there is no eating component to being obese, that you're either genetically going to be obese or you're not, and there's nothing you can really do about it. But I find that idea incredibly depressing. Isn't it better if something like that is at least a little bit within our control? For most people, with a proper diet and exercise regimen they can maintain a weight that is healthy for them (meaning, not enough stored body fat to cause additional stand-alone health concerns). I find it empowering to know that. It is/can be a complex issue but usually the "solution" is not as complicated as we want to believe.

Although just to relate it to the show here, I don't know what they want us to think about Kate's situation. They show her at meetings, but she's always just rolling her eyes in the background and I have no idea what she even WANTS to get out of the camaraderie. The show is not presenting her weight loss journey as anything but a straight-forward "diet ridiculously, work out, and don't lose anything, wow, I'm so frustrated, isn't this relatable?" snooze-fest that we've seen a billion times.

4 minutes ago, jhlipton said:

It's possible she was "overeating" (what does that mean, anyway? It's always struck me as "you're eating more or differently than I think you should!")

When I say "overeating" I just mean "eating more calories than necessary for one's individual metabolism." Some folks have a slow metabolism so they store fat even though they aren't eating a ton, but it's still "overeating." And people can overeat totally healthy foods if the total calories are higher than they need. Ah, the joys of weight loss, super fun! And just in time for Thanksgiving! ;)

[chocolatine]

Kate was most definitely an overeater / lacked impulse control at the beginning of the show. There was a lot of unhealthy food in her fridge and pantry, and she had to write herself several notes so that she wouldn't eat her birthday cake before the party. She could still be overweight if she had lifelong healthy eating and exercising habits, but she would be a lot less overweight.

[jhlipton]

36 minutes ago, ClareWalks said:

Yep for sure! 

One more related unpopular opinion: I know a lot of folks want to think there is no eating component to being obese, that you're either genetically going to be obese or you're not, and there's nothing you can really do about it. But I find that idea incredibly depressing.

Why, though?  For my, it's like skin  color or gender identity.  Sure, you can try to change those, but it's really just going to make you more miserable than saying "I am beautiful as who I am!"  There is nothing wrong, and everything right, about wanting to be healthy, but part of being healthy means being aware of when so-called "experts" are doing more harm than good.

Quote

Isn't it better if something like that is at least a little bit within our control? For most people, with a proper diet and exercise regimen they can maintain a weight that is healthy for them (meaning, not enough stored body fat to cause additional stand-alone health concerns). 

And that means keeping up-to-date on what the real "health concerns" are

[ClareWalks]

9 minutes ago, jhlipton said:

Why, though?  For my, it's like skin  color or gender identity.  Sure, you can try to change those, but it's really just going to make you more miserable than saying "I am beautiful as who I am!"  There is nothing wrong, and everything right, about wanting to be healthy, but part of being healthy means being aware of when so-called "experts" are doing more harm than good.

Skin color and gender identity are not the same as morbid obesity. But I'm not telling anyone to change anything, if someone is happy then more power to them!

[JudyObscure]

6 hours ago, ClareWalks said:

For most people, with a proper diet and exercise regimen they can maintain a weight that is healthy for them (meaning, not enough stored body fat to cause additional stand-alone health concerns). I find it empowering to know that. It is/can be a complex issue but usually the "solution" is not as complicated as we want to believe.

I think that, for most people with a proper diet and exercise they can reach a weight that is healthy for them, but maintain it?  Only about 3% do.  One Harvard doctor who has spent his life studying the problem said that it was like swimming under water, you can do it for awhile, it even seems easy at first, but the moment comes when you just can't anymore.  Your body's needs (whether for air or calories) suddenly overwhelm any argument from the brain and you pop your head above water, or binge.

[ClareWalks]

2 minutes ago, JudyObscure said:

I think that, for most people with a proper diet and exercise they can reach a weight that is healthy for them, but maintain it?  Only about 3% do.  One Harvard doctor who has spent his life studying the problem said that it was like swimming under water, you can do it for awhile, it even seems easy at first, but the moment comes when you just can't anymore.  Your body's needs (whether for air or calories) suddenly overwhelm any argument from the brain and you pop your head above water, or binge.

There is a theory that every body has a set weight that it "wants to be" and that people inevitably kind of hover around that weight. I wouldn't be surprised if that was true. It is very difficult to maintain a goal weight particularly if the number is kind of arbitrary.

[CleoCaesar]

8 hours ago, jhlipton said:

It's possible she was "overeating" (what does that mean, anyway? It's always struck me as "you're eating more or differently than I think you should!")

There's nothing subjective about overeating. It's just defined as eating more calories than you need to maintain your weight. If you consistently overeat, you will gain weight.

Quote

but there are tons of reasons for a person to be the weight they are.

Not really. It really comes down to calories in < calories  out = weight loss. Anyone who tries to tell you that there are myriad reasons is usually trying to sell you something.

[ShadowFacts]

9 hours ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

And if you didn't lose that 30 lbs. on the first diet and regain it the following year putting you at square one from two years ago, would you have instead gained weight in both years and now be 20 lbs. heavier than 2 years ago?   If so, then the loss/regain cycle is ultimately helpful, not just in learning but in your weight itself.  I feel it's like a pendulum swing settling into a smaller arc each time because I learn more each time.  

It can be what you describe, but unfortunately for significant numbers of people, it isn't.  I think that's where some psychological insights are key, or at least enhancements to what is attempted/learned.  Avoiding triggers, changing habits, recognizing emotions, redirecting thoughts, finding non-food ways to reward oneself, all of that.  The nuts and bolts of what to eat, how much, when, how much to exercise--it's drudgery and we probably have better odds of long-term success if we're more focused on ways to feel good, or else it's too crazy-making.  Plus, all these generalizations, including my own, are never applicable to everyone.

[panthergirl13]

My UO is that I don't like the Kate character because the actress is terrible. She takes me right out of the show, which I otherwise like just fine (wanted to love it, but we're not there). Also, it would be much more groundbreaking to hire a morbidly obese actor and have the storyline NOT be about weight. People would be waiting and waiting for the food thing to come up and it just never would. Sometimes "Pass the gravy" is just "Pass the gravy".

(Also, any Steelers fan from Pittsburgh that I've ever known pronounces it "Stillers". Amirite?)