
Tilbudsguide, uge 45, 2019
And og æg!
Tilbudsguide, uge 44, 2019
Svinemørbrad og mandler!
Tilbudsguide, uge 43, 2019
Havregryn og oksefilet!
Tilbudsguide, uge 42, 2019
Olivenolie, granatæble og mango!
Vi har 69534 registrerede brugere. Nyeste registrede medlem er JosephSoync
Vores medlemmer har i alt skrevet 2050005 indlæg i 100495 emner
1 nye indlæg i dag

















Giraf-Løg skrev:Jeg har vidst anbefalet dette før, men har du prøvet de der SMS lån? Det er vildt smart!
















































Gormez skrev:Hvordan forventer du umiddelbart at bruge RPE?












Gormez skrev:Umiddelbart er jeg ihvert fald enig I at det ikke giver så meget mening med procenter når udstyret er så nyt - men jeg tænker du er nødt til at forholde dig meget kritisk til kvaliteten.
Dine RPE's kan hurtigt blive ret skæve i udstyret pga. tekniske problemer og småfejl. RPE 6 i bænkprestrøjen kan hurtigt blive til 8 hvis man falder lidt sammen i bunden, smider albuerne eller kommer lidt ud af banen etc.
Måske du skal korresponderer lidt med hjordt ifht. hvordan du bedst angriber det - umiddelbart kan RPE godt være en guide, men ud fra egen erfaring og observationer så er det ofte bedre at lade kvaliteten styre kg'ene i udstyret når man er ny. Ellers kan du risikere at øge intensiteten for meget for hurtigt fordi det føles "let", men kvaliteten (dybde etc.) ikke er i orden osv. og som du ved sker der ting og sager når man skal i dybde med dragt og bind, og til bryst i trøjen.
Bare lidt tankestrøg herfra











































Both narratives (one of biomedicine and one of biological evolution) include a sense of deterministic, almost fate-like, perception of the human body; fatness or adiposity is seen an almost inevitable result of evolution and circumstance. Biological reductionism is a common marker for both narratives, and biological evolution is received skeptically within the humanities due to the suggestion of the limits of the plasticity of human capacities and behaviours (Ibid). As with evolutionary biology, the discourse of medicalization results in a normative and pathological view of the body (Ibid.)
The opposing view on obesity may be found in the arts, wherein a paradigm shift is occurring. According to Hillman and Maude, the humanist traditions, too, are going through an epistemological paradigm shift. Historically, the humanities viewed the body as a mere auxiliary to the self, a vehicle or object that houses the mind or the soul (1). However, the paradigm in the humanities is gradually shifting towards an alternative way of thinking about the body, supported by the recent discoveries in science, medicine and philosophy. The humanities are now accepting that the body participates in crucial ways in “thinking, feeling and the shaping of our personalities”, and that the body is “constitutive of what we call the self” (Ibid.)










Unlike established academic disciplines that deal with the body as subject of study (such as disability studies), “Fat studies”, as some scholars are beginning to call it, is still an emerging field in academics, and is therefore yet to establish a vocabulary and terminology of its own. As mentioned, obesity as a concept does not exist purely in one scientific paradigm, but exists in a borderland between biology and interpretive sciences. This creates a need for calling upon a scientific field, which is not limited in its tools of analysis and deconstruction, but is able to contain the entire spectrum of the subject. Thus, this thesis will assume the conceptual framework of Cultural Studies, drawing upon the vocabulary and terminology of this field and subfields to provide for meaningful analysis and discussion. Toby Miller describes the agenda and mode of cultural studies and analysis as taken from “economics, politics, media and communication studies, sociology, literature, education, the law, science and technology studies, anthropology, and history with a particular focus on gender, race, class, and sexuality in everyday life, commingling textual and social theory under the sign of a commitment to progressive social change” (1).










Overhovedet intet at mærke til knæet. Måske skulle der bare et par dages varme/kuldebehandling til at fikse det?











Jmt skrev:Overhovedet intet at mærke til knæet. Måske skulle der bare et par dages varme/kuldebehandling til at fikse det?
wat dusnt kil u makes u stronker
It is within interplay with these concepts – anticipation, pre-conceptions, prejudices and judgements – and the text that meaning is made. Gadamer suggests the recognition of the interpreting readers prejudice is what gives hermeneutics its “thrust” (Regan 295), and the interpreter “working out their own pre-suppositions (fore-having, fore-sight, fore-conception)” should be the ”first, last and constant task when attempting to understand the relevant issues” (Ibid). According to Gadamer, it is my task, as the interpreter of these texts, to work out my own pre-suppositions, as previous experiences give the interpreter a “working hypothesis from which to further develop understanding” (296). Gadamer claims that the search for understanding “requires the interpreter’s awareness of their own bias and preconceptions affecting the habit of projecting a meaning for the text as a whole as soon as initial meaning is grasped […] The main issue of hermeneutics therefore identifies that in order to read a text, the interpreter has to have an understanding of their own expectations” (Ibid).






















Gormez skrev:Din fucking humanist <3




















Goffman proposes the concept of the unblushing male, the prototypical human being who is completely devoid of any deviation, and therefore also devoid of stigma, as a “young married, white, urban, northern, heterosexual Protestant father of college education, fully employed, of good complexion, weight and height and a recent record in sports” (153). The absurdity of this description of the prototypical human being is of course the intended irony proposed by Goffman, as very few actual people will resemble the unblushing male in his entirety, thus implying that we are all deviants of the human prototype in some way or shape. Goffman defines stigmas as “an attribute that makes him different from others in the category of persons available for him to be, and of a less desirable kind – in the extreme, a person who is quite thoroughly bad, or dangerous, or weak. He is thus reduced in our mind from a whole and usual person to a tainted, discounted one” (12), and describes how these stigma symbols, signs that are effective in drawing attention to a debasing identity discrepancy, break up what would otherwise be a coherent overall picture of the self (59).






























Specialet skrev:Some scholars, such as Maud Ellman, even claim that food, or eating, has become a metaphor of sex – the “new” sex – as the “naughty no-no of our day” (Ellmann 60). According to Ellmann, eating, in a world where the aforementioned discourse of pathology is the norm, is lambasted as “dirty, perverted, obscene and diseased” (60). Anthropologist Don Kulick claims that “instead of having sex, these women have food. They eat […] The pornographic act is the display of fat food entering a fat woman’s mouth” (79-80). According to Ellmann, this interpretation of food as a sexual and pornographic sign is “scandalously disinterested in what the phallus has to offer” (61). If eating indeed is a “the new sex” or a “pornographic act”, it is not difficult to interpret Mary Jones’ force-feeding of her daughter as a type of rape.






























Specialet skrev:This scene serves as a juxtaposition between the ideal and the real. The concepts of what is real and what is ideal is one of the dichotomies of philosophy. These concepts are explored by philosopher H. Wildon Carr in his still relevant work “Real and Ideal Relations” (1928): “Self-consciousness reveals us to ourselves in two kinds of relation to our environment: in a real relation and an ideal relation. Real relations bind us to the material world of things, the physical world, ideal relations bind us to the spiritual world of persons […] The distinction between a body which suffers and acts and a mind which knows and understands, between reality or fact and knowledge or truth” (1)










Brugere der læser dette forum: Ingen tilmeldte brugere og 24 gæster