Size matters

According to this article in today's Slate, incumbent candidate Joe Corzine [D] in New Jersey's gubernatorial race has turned voters against his competitor Chris Christie* by focusing their attention on the Republican candidate's weight problem.

This might be controversial and I might soon regret posting this but here goes. The article got me to thinking about body weight discrimination and whether or not we can put it in the same class as racism or homophobia. It's a valid question. There's pretty good evidence to suggest that sizeism is just as if not more prevalent than racial profiling. Overall, fat people earn less money, are less likely to stay in school, get married, or receive preventative screenings for cancers largely unrelated to excess weight. Furthermore, there's a compelling argument from those who claim that the mental stress of being fat exacerbates other health problems associated with obesity.

My conclusion? Whatever fat-activists say, I still won't lump weight discrimination with other stigmas. Despite the validity of a lot of the arguments, look at the other side. It's not like racial or religious discrimination or homophobia. In my mind, these prejudces have no legitimate basis in reality. Skin color or sexuality in and of themselves have no impact on a person's ability in any line of work. For example, if you have two accountants who are equivalent in every way excepting that one is gay and the other straight, the gay accountant's sexual preference will in no way affect his ability to file a tax report. Not so with obesity.

Imagine you're an employer with two equally qualified job candidates, one obese (BMI** of 26 or above) and the other with a normal height/weight ratio (BMI between 18-24). The obese guy suffers from sleep apnea, meaning he is more than likely to be tired or even snoozing on the job. He costs more to insure and takes more sick days than his/her healthy weighted counterpart. And even though they're intellectual equals, Skinny Minnie can move quicker and get places faster than Fatty Matty. And, like I said before, there are studies upon studies that confirm the general population's anti-fat sentiment. As awful as it is, someone has to say it; which of the two candidates is more likely to make a comfortable social transition into his new work environment? If we consider that both applicants are total equals and that their personalities are thus equally awesome/sucky, odds are that Average Joe is going to have an easier time working with the team than Big Mike.

In a debate on Friday, our friend Chris Christie, the obese New Jersey gubernatorial candidate said, "In case you haven't noticed, I'm slightly overweight. Apparently this has become a great case for discussion in the state. I don't know what that has to do with being the governor of New Jersey." Based on the stance I just took, I'm going to go ahead and argue that Christie's weight has a lot to do with his capacity to run the state. Think about it: You're the Governor of one of the United States of America. I would venture a guess that your schedule, to put it lightly, is a little hectic. Now throw in an excess of about 150 pounds to the mix, and I'm betting that on a purely physical level, it's gonna up your stress level. And maybe I'm crazy but in that line of work, I'd say that extra stress is going to be the just about last thing you're going to want to worry about.

NOTE: As with all opinion pieces, let me know if you agree with me or, more importantly, if you think I'm totally out of line. I'm open to all ideas and my stance is always up for revision.

* Stupid name? Yeah, I think so too.

** Body mass index. I know this isn't a perfect way to judge obesity but its the most objective frame of reference I could come up with. Let me know if you think of something better.