No, that's malpractice. But we are still the ones getting lectured for not just accepting that regular malpractice in lieu of actual healthcare.

Nope. I've had a whole series of fat-shaming medical professional in Seattle and on the Eastside, including the fertility expert who told me that my weight would probably lead to me miscarrying (the difference between me and a HAWA person is a couple of percentage points, not putting me even close to "probably").

So…

You are confusing cause and effect. Fat people don't start out by not going to the doctor (and therefore leaving the doctor with too few opportunities to talk to them about their weight). We start out like everyone else: thinking doctors are consumate professionals interested in helping us stay healthy.

And it's NOT…

"Eat less and exercise more" is generally the only "physician assistance" most of us get.

And let's not equate smoking with eating, okay? Smoking is easier to quit because your body doesn't need cigarettes to survive. It's easier not to have the first one than not to have the second, right?

But we have to eat food to…

I would also look into Health at Every Size (HAES—http://www.haescommunity.org/about.php). Keep the focus on the actual health of the patient, not on their size. For example, I have been told flat out by multiple doctors that they can tell just by looking at my 280 pounds that I'm diabetic. I'm not. Not even…

Actually, Temperance, this isn't all that unusual. Obesity is far more common among lower socioeconomic groups who eat what they can afford (little fresh produce, lots of high-fat ground beef, processed foods and LOTS of carbs). It's expensive to eat healthy, especially if you live somewhere where the cost of food…

So what if they can't lose weight (this is true in some cases)? Are they denied surgery? If so, why? I mean, if the only difference is a few more percentage points of risk, and the obese patient knows those risks going in, don't they have the right to necessary surgery (I assume that we're only talking about necessary…

Wow, you nailed the one problem just by seeing the trailer. Denisof (who has the most experience with Shakespeare) doesn't do well with the language, I think because he's trying to be authentic to how it would have been pronounced in Shakespeare's time (which makes him stick out like a sore thumb).

Hero and Claudio's story is very much a product of its time. However, Whedon handles it far better than most directors...definitely better than Branagh AND the wonderful Tennant/Tate version.

Ignore the trailers and see it. Whedon does some truly interesting things with the story that even people like, us who teach this stuff, have never seen before.

Yeah, that was my first thought: how does anyone think, with all the banter twixt B&B AND Dogberry and Verges, that this is anything but a hilarious play to begin with?

Whedon did a great job, but it's not like he made a tragedy funny.