Glutton Intolerance Rhetorical Analysis

Howard 1
Dawson Howard
Mrs. Williams
College English
28 September 2020
Glutton Intolerance
In response to an argument called “Glutton Intolerance: What If a War on Obesity Only
Makes the Problem Worse?’ written by Daniel Engber on the intolerance of “overweight” and
“obese” individuals, he raises a question asking “What if a war on obesity only makes the
problem worse?” He claims that the anti-fat prejudice and war on obesity will only make these
same problems even worse than they were before. This side of the argument pales in comparison
to the opposing side which includes the health risks and social differences between overweight
individuals, therefore causing this argument to fail.
In this written argument, he claims that the war on obesity will only make these same
problems worse. He is attempting to appeal to all of America in this argument making anyone
who lives in America and sees this issue the intended audience. He states facts about the risks,
work and social factors, and anti-fat prejudice views. The author also gives examples of papers
from places such as Yale’s Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity attempting to appeal to the
reader’s Logos. He also speaks of the struggles of obese and overweight people in today’s
society due to anti-fat prejudice and weight discrimination. He finishes off his argument by
stating that “we should at least reconsider our tendency to blame obesity for the country’s health
crisis” (Engber 690), which in theory means that we should all not blame only obesity for
America’s health crisis.

Howard 2
In this argument, Engber uses papers from places such as Yale’s Rudd Center for Food
Policy & Obesity attempting to appeal to the reader’s sense of logos. According to many studies,
“women who are two standard deviations (or sixty-four pounds) overweight suffer a wage
penalty of 9 percent” (Engber 686), andanother found that “severely obese white women lose out
on one-quarter of their potential income.” (Engber 687). This means that there is proven
evidence that overweight people (especially severely obese white women in this case) make less
than someone that is not overweight or obese, which successfully appeals to the reader’s sense of
logos. The author uses many forms of evidence in his argument over many different points. Not
only does he speak of the economic wage gap between overweight and non-overweight
individuals, he also speaks of the medical discrimination heavier people might face in medical
settings. In multiple surveys it is said that among health care workers, they tend to see
overweight patients as “ugly, lazy, weak-willed, and lacking in motivation to improve their
health” (Engber 687). This causes many obese people to avoid seeing their healthcare
professionals which leads to less screenings for cancers.
Engbern also attempts to use pathos to attempt to appeal at the reader’s emotions and pull
at their heartstrings. He does this by using the discrimination heavier people might face in
medical settings. The survey he uses says things such as “among health-care workers, who tend
to see these obese patients as ugly, lazy, weak-willed, and lacking in motivation to improve their
health. Doctors describe treating fatties as a waste of time, and the staff at teaching hospitals
appear to single them out for derogatory jokes” (Engber 687). This appeals to the reader’s sense
of pathos and even ethos. It’s stated in this way to attempt to make the reader feel sorry or sad
for the overweight individuals in which the health-care professionals hold these prejudices
Howard 3
against and even somewhat appeals to the reader’s sense of ethics because it is seen as morally
wrong to hold prejudices against other people.
While this argument appeals to many of the reader’s senses, it also mentions the issues
with being overweight itself. It is a proven fact that being overweight comes with many risks to
one's health. Also, it is proven that women are especially vulnerable to clinical depression, which
is itself a risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Along with that, being obese leads to increased
risk of many other diseases that can potentially harm the body and/or the brain.
The author, Daniel Engber, claimed in his argument that the war on obesity only makes
the same problems worse, and to stop blaming obesity for the health crisis America has found
itself in at this time. The points he made in his argument appealed to the reader’s sense of logos
and maybe the reader’s sense of ethos and pathos depending on the reader’s thoughts on obesity.
However, this side of the argument pales in comparison to the opposing side which includes the
health risks and social differences between overweight individuals, therefore causing this
argument to fail.
Howard 4
Works Cited
Ruszkiewicz, John J., and Jay Dolmage. How to Write Anything: a Guide and Reference with
Readings. Bedford/St.Martins Macmillan Learning, 2019.

Glutton Intolerance Rhetorical Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Glutton Intolerance Rhetorical Analysis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Glutton Intolerance Rhetorical Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Howard 1

In response to an argument called “Glutton Intolerance: What If a War on Obesity Only

individuals, therefore causing this argument to fail.

America’s health crisis.

professionals which leads to less screenings for cancers.

wrong to hold prejudices against other people.

Readings. Bedford/St.Martins Macmillan Learning, 2019.

You might also like