That's 100% win. Thanks for posting that :)

I have never bought any Lululemon, and now I never will.

That was awesome, thanks for sharing. If you haven't seen it, Stephen Colbert had a fantastic segment on him as well: http://www.colbertnation.com/...e-week---chip-wilson

---

------------------------------------------------------------
The beatings will continue until morale improves

I have never worn lulu product. I have however worked in the belly of the beast - not directly for lulu but in a "3rd party consulting" capacity (they tried to hire me, directly against the no-solicitation clause they had agreed to, right after the engagement... harumph!) at the distribution centre and at their head design offices. All of their staff, knowing my sporty background, asked why I didn't own their product. At that time I just said "your stuff is designed for skinny yoga chickas, which is not me.... it's not real world enough... oh and your price point sucks." (yeah they still tried to hire me after saying that to their COO - ha!)

As a Vancouverite, it is sad to see what was a good local company with a good albeit not-for-me brand goes in the wrong direction. There are a lot of really good people that work for this company. However, anytime a company goes public (having worked for quite a few of them), they inevitably lose sight of their true north, their reason d'etre, their secret sauce. Here's a prime example.

AP

---

------------------------
"How bad could it be?" - SimpleS

Hirarious! thanks for sharing that - my morning coffee just got snorted all over my iPad!

Lululemon has a store in Princeton and I've been enticed inside by all the pretty colors in the window. The clothing is not made for real women who actually work out. And the quality of the clothing does not match the price tag!

Will stick with my Brooks, saucony and north face gear! Which I can always find on sale at the end of the season and it works for my pitiful attempts at yoga too!

Thanks for sharing. I had NO IDEA. Oh man.
Bummer. I have a few things from them and liked those items. My sister got me winter run tights from them for Christmas last year and I liked them. Then run shorts for my birthday this past summer.
I'm not sure I want to support a company like this - now that I'm aware. Thanks for sharing and giving me a clue. Adios Lulu!

That CEO looks creepy also!!

I KNEW that there was a reason that I've always avoided their products.
Vindicated.

I let both my daughters know, one of them said they actually played the Colbert piece in her class. Awesome!
But of course she didn't share w/ me, so thank you for letting me know. I actually have never bought Lululemon, not my style and if it was, it's too pricey, but I do like to know which companies I should let others know to avoid.

Is it wrong that I don't find this appalling?

For sure it was a stupid thing to say from a PR standpoint. But the fact that not all clothes fit all bodies is nothing new to any of us. There are lots of clothes that I love the look of but were just not meant for my body (sweater dress, anyone?).

I'm of average build and own a pair of lululemon pants. I LOVE them. They were a gift from my husband because I was too cheap to buy them but really wanted them. They are not the tight yoga-style pants. Those look horrible on me. I have big thighs - tight pants = not pretty. Also - their short-shorts were not made for my body. I see them, lament that they will look awful on me and move on.

I feel like we are all just too sensitive these days.

I don't know if I would say I find it appalling, but the guy sounds like a classless jerk. I've always thought Lululemon stuff was way overpriced, average quality, and ill-fitting. I'm 5'5" and 115 pounds so I wouldn't consider myself to be in the category that he states isn't meant for Lululemon clothing but nothing I've tried on has ever fit that great. I've tried there stuff on but could never justify paying the prices because I didn't think it was all that nice either. I feel like I can find much cuter, higher quality, better fitting, and better priced clothing at Athleta. I will say that after hearing what the Lululemon CEO said I have no desire to go into their store again, but I don't fault other women who love their stuff and continue to shop there. The beauty of the free market.

This. It was a stupid thing to say, especially from him but it is the truth for many women, and men. I wear the brand as well as others. If it does not fit to my liking, I do not buy. Aside from the sheer fiasco, some do not want to size up or go elsewhere. Just because something looks good on one person does not mean it will look good on every one. A few weeks back I was in a Lululemon store and a female who was clearly pushing a true 18 (not a vain 12) spent a lot of money on an outfit. She was wearing the brand and mentioned she was shopping for herself. It was clear the pieces she had on did not fit but her money spoke.

---

_____________________________________
DISH is how we do it.

  
From the article:
This guy suggested that women whose thighs dare to touch should not wear his clothing . Yes, you read that correctly, this ‘leader’ in the active wear business believes that if his branded pants pill in the thigh area, it is not a production issue, it is a function of the build of the wearer’s body. In Mr. Lululemon’s mind, pilling shows that your thighs touch each other and therefore you should not wear his brand since “it is not meant for everyone”.

I think the problem is that this is a company that makes clothes (in theory) for "athletes" and yet doesn't expect that athletes thighs might touch. Sure, not all clothes look good on all bodies--agreed. Your choice to not wear a sweater dress? +1. Skinny jeans? Nope. Small toe-box stilletos? I'm out. But clothing marketed as "athletic wear"? Yeah, I think I should probably be able to wear that and not have it fail because of my athletic thighs. For a company CEO to state that his clothes aren't defective and imply that instead it is the buyer/athlete who is defective because her thighs touch is messed up.

My thighs touch/rub. Guess where every single pair of my jeans wears out first - in the inner thighs. things that rub will pill. If it happens the first time you wear them that might be a problem, but clothing wears out.

So do mine. Majorly. I have a pair of Sugoi winter running tights that I wear ALOT and have had for almost 10 years now. No pilling.

My jeans wear out like yours do as well. That said, I have found some materials and manufacturers to be better than others.

I hate shopping and all clothes are a crap-shoot IMHO - so I try to just stick to brands with which I have had good success (Sugoi, deSoto - for some products not all, Louis Garneau, New Balance, Adidas) and avoid those I have not (Nike comes to mind in particular). I love the REI and MEC house brand stuff too. :-)

AP

---

------------------------
"How bad could it be?" - SimpleS

good fit
good material
suitably functional
durable

These are the only things that matter in a sports garment (or any garment as far as I'm concerned). Unfortunately the only way to discover what works best is a ton of trial and error -- getting it wrong until you get it right. Most people can't or don't want to invest this kind of time and rely on a brand name to get it right for them.

I'm not offended that the company claims it can't work for all body types -- this is reality for any manufacturer that's working off a limited set of scaled patterns to produce their lines. But his comment about thigh rub does show that this guy is no athlete himself, and doesn't understand his company's self-proclaimed target audience.

A more interesting question is how to solve the problem of pilling due to friction -- reinforce the fabric? Use heavier guage fabric? I'm sure the NFL has solved this problem -- it's be interesting to get a good look at what the boys over there are wearing.

I assumed since he was responding to a large number of complaints about the quality of the pants, that it wasn't a normal wear problem.

Like AP and Kiki, I have brands that work well and don't pill, even years into wearing them 3-4x/week running through 5 cold winter months. It has taken some trial and error, but when I find a brand that is consistently good, I'm extremely loyal and I will gladly pay more for quality.

In addition to the items Kiki listed in things she looks for when purchasing, I would add that I definitely consider a company's ethos. I don't want to support a company like Lululemon because they aren't promoting all women or all athletes. With so many companies to choose from who are both making quality goods and working hard to promote women in sports, consider working conditions of employees, their impact on the environment, and even some who give back in other ways (Patagonia), I try to consider the whole picture and purchase accordingly.

I don't find it appalling either. Classless? Yep, you betcha - but the reality is that he's voicing what is true of pretty much any clothing manufacturer.There are several clothing lines that I just can't wear, or styles that I know to stay away from, and I do.

As for Lululemon - I have several of their pieces, and I will most likely buy more. Why? Because the pieces that I already have lasted for years (in the case of some sports bras, I've finally retired 3 of them after more than a decade of use), it's comfortable, and I like how it looks and feels. For ME, the clothing is worth the price if I get over 10 years of use from it - regardless of whether the guy is a jerk.

---

************************
Forward is a pace!
I get to represent Betty Designs for the 2014 season
http://www.bettydesigns.com/

I am in this camp. In the same way Lane Bryant clothes are not for everyone lululemon is not. That does not bother me. What he said was totally tasteless but I really love my running gear from them and will continue to buy. They fit me well and have POCKETS!!!!! that is my pet peeve with other technical gear - no pockets. Do the other manufacturers think I run with a guy who will hold my stuff???

Don't feel bad, they don't put pockets in most of our stuff either.

---

___________________________________
MS: Exercise Science
Your speed matters a lot, sometimes you need to be very fast, where sometimes you need to breakdown your speed.

I didn't find it appalling either. Bad from a PR standpoint certainly. And it is another "you need to look a certain" way message which is problematic.
But
It's like J Crew stuff... made for a certain body type.
It's actually sort of an honest comment. No thigh gap = rubbing of thighs and fabric covering them = friction --> fabric issues.

---

maybe she's born with it, maybe it's chlorine
If you're injured and need some sympathy, PM me and I'm very happy to write back.
disclaimer: PhD not MD

it took the ski industry like 20 years or more to figure out that women actually need pockets - I used to buy men's stuff. so now that I have running gear that fits, is comfortable, has attention to technical detail and POCKETS not letting go

It has been so interesting to see different people's responses to this.

I'm glad to hear people have had some good experiences with the brand. From what I've read now online, it sounds like they used to make some items that were really good, but that they've had an increasing number of complaints about decreased quality of their goods over the last couple of years. They even had to recall 17% of all of their yoga bottoms because of sheerness and fabric quality earlier this year. Since then, they have received additional complaints about two other types of yoga pants for scratchiness and pilling (occurring in a "few wears"). I can't think of a single other brand, let alone an expensive one, that has had such repeated quality issues in their gear, and certainly not two major instances in less than 12 months.

I understand that they don't want overweight people wearing their stuff. They don't even make sizes over a 12. Whatever. That's not what we're talking about here. What we are talking about is clothing that is inferior in quality and the CEO getting on national television after having major product problems and blaming it on women's thighs touching. I can't imagine any clothing company really thinking that the wearer is going to need to have "thigh gap" for the pants to not be defective. And an athletic company?

I don't know what makes some people decide to not want to contribute to a company's bottom line. I would like to think that most consumers have certain values that they think are important and wouldn't want to support companies that don't align with those values. When I vote with my dollars it often isn't about me. It's about the bigger picture. Though I can stand in such a way to make my thighs touch, they usually don't. I have never had a pair of pants wear out in the thighs. My choice about supporting a company isn't just about whether or not the product works for me, it's also about the message the product carries. I would rather not support a company that promotes unrealistic expectations of women's bodies and furthers the culture of thinness above fitness. As an athlete, that's an incredibly important distinction to me. Luckily, I have dozens of good options that cost less, are higher quality and don't line the pockets of a man who reinforces body image issues.

I too was never annoyed or offended by what he said. I've never been a fan of Lululemon anyway, I do own a few things but I don't go crazy.

I did stop by a srore today looking for running tights. A lot of people recommended the Wunder Under style. The sales person tried to steer me away for them for running because they pill (and aren't wind resistan unless made from a certain fabric they didn't have I stock in my size). I looked at him and said "but my thighs don't rub" (not really true). He immediately started explaining why that really didn't matter. I had to laugh because I was just joking but either he was really good thinking on his feet or he had even coached at what to say.

In the end I didn't buy any. I have a $15 compression tights from old navy and $15 fleece tights from Walmart that are awesome for keeping me warm and blocking the wind. I might ask for some Lululemon tights for Christmas but I wnt spent over $100 for them myself.

You're absolutely right about paying attention to the message the company sends -- marketing is such a key part of the picture in today's fashion world. Seventy five years ago a lot more of us would have sewn, and for that reason would have had a basic understanding of fabric and fabrication (not sports garments obv but you know what I mean). Now, since most of us don't, we rely more heavily on brand image to help make buying decisions.

There's a company in the UK (Sweaty Betty) that sells its stuff (yoga, running, etc) with the message 'yeah we all hate exercise but why not look hot while you're doing it!' They're a big brand here, so I guess this terrible message is working for them.

Also, generally, on the pockets thing, if a garment has a pocket, you can be sure that's costed into the original price (a bit of extra fabric and five minutes more sewing time, even more if there's a zip). When retailers start knocking prices down on sale, the costing formula can get skewed, and this is when you can get a real bargain (i.e. go for good fit first, then look for truly superior features like higher lycra content/reflective strips/pockets whatever)

I don't think I was appalled by the original comment. But if you watched the Colbert report thing, I wasn't happy he blamed women getting the birth control pill on the increase in divorces. Or the fact he named Lululemon so the Japanese would have a hard time pronouncing it. For me, it was about several things he said over time. And 'appalled' isn't the correct word. If I know there are two companies that have the same product, and one is lead by a jerk like he seems to be, I'm going to buy from the other. I don't think that's an over-reaction. I think it just makes sense.

Fair enough. I haven't seen the Colbert piece or done that much research into the founder. In the beginning the company had some really good things going for it. The bigger a company gets, the more it seems to stray from its roots.

I do agree with you that in general, people seem a little too politically correct these days.

Just a note to remember, also, that their true target market isn't what we necessarily consider "athletes". Their target (& history) is in yoga, pilates & most recently venturing into the running. The predominant body type in the die-hard yogi & yogi-turned-runner is going to be very thin & lithe, lean & narrow.

Maybe I'm the outlier - I say kudos for doing what he wants with his company & saying whatever he thinks. Now, I totally agree that it was classless & he might have thought just a smidge more before he said it but hey, if it's what he really thinks...then go for it.

I own many lulu products (most purchased on sale) & I definitely don't have the body type they're originally intended for. BUT - I buy the things that do look good on my body & I've put this stuff through some serious torture & it's stood up. I've not had anything pill overly, nothing is shiny unless it's "intended" to be when stretched over my reasonable-sized self (a la wunder unders with a high lycra content).

We also have to understand, to a degree, the huge increase in popularity that the brand has gone through in the past 2-3yrs. That has shot their production requiremens through the roof - you're going to wind up with at least some questionable inventory at some point. I think back to the quality of Old Navy products about 10-12yrs ago vs today. Same can be argued with Gap (even though they're in the same family)...Further, with more people wearing it comes more people that maybe shouldn't be wearing it but are...and those are going to be the ones that cry the loudest.

I just read that the average weight of women over 20 in the US is 166....I'm guessing that the "average" woman isn't in their target demographic anymore.

---

AW

Yeah, I don't think the "average" US woman has ever been their demographic :) I have read that the average US woman is a size 16, so if they stop at 12, she's out.

The Colbert piece posted is really quite good. The guy's an ass.

Sure, he can do whatever he wants with his company. It's up to consumers to decide if they want to support him. Actually, I bet this won't hurt his business and will probably even boost it. There are plenty of women who will take pride in fitting into the Lulu demographic. I know lots of women who think like that--I don't hang out with them, but I know the type.

Everybody makes decisions about what they buy based on a bunch of different inputs. If people hear this stuff and they still want to give this guy their money, they process information differently than I do.

This article is almost 1.5 years old, but fits in nicely with this discussion:
http://www.businessinsider.com/...ululemon-2012-4?op=1

 

Everybody makes decisions about what they buy based on a bunch of different inputs. If people hear this stuff and they still want to give this guy their money, they process information differently than I do.[/quote]


x2

Right there with you. I can't for the life of me figure out why there is such outrage about this. It was a stupid thing to say but it's the truth. Not all pieces of clothing are made for all bodies or body types. If they want to make clothes that cater to women whose thighs don't rub, good for them. It seems like they would be well advised to make pants that fit other sizes and body types as well but that's their business decision to make. I don't expect everything everywhere to fit me.

I don't own any of their stuff and am most likely not their target body type and I didn't find those comments even the least bit offensive.

I think the bottom line is that the CEO is enforcing an unhealthy women image upon women who want to wear their clothes. A thigh Gap is a sign that you are underweight, too thin.

http://www.cbsnews.com/...ng-eating-disorders/


I am a size 4, athletic, slim waist, but my thighs touch. That what happens when you have muscles. How can they be selling athletic clothing -- running, biking, yoga.. all stuff that builds your leg muscles, and expect someone to look like unhealthy anorexic models...with a thigh gap. Talk about reinforcing women's body images issues.

I can just see it now, teenagers walking around harassing other girls who are wearing lululemon because they don't have said thigh gap.

Sorry.. rant over. I think it's appalling, and I used to love my lululemon clothes. I agree not all clothes work for everyone, but don't tell me I need to become anorexic to wear your clothes.

Lululemon isn't made for fat women like Lane Bryant is isn't made for skinny chicks. People need to get over it and stop catering to the obese/fat/overweight which is exactly what society is doing. From a Marketing/PR standpoint his comment was a little brazen but it's the truth.

---

---

"Though she be but little, she is fierce" ~Shakespeare | Powered by HD Coaching | 2014 Wattie Ink Triathlon Team | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter

No, it's not the truth. Lots of women are slim and fit and don't have a thigh gap. His comments were ridiculous, IMO, but they don't offend me at all.

I don't wear LLL, but my girls do for volleyball. They are pricey, but most of their stuff lasts. My oldest daughter has worn a couple of pairs of LLL spandex shorts for volleyball for 6 years now. Their stuff just doesn't fit me well and I don't like a lot of it, but I'm fine with that. If their pants are wearing out or pilling prematurely then they should work on their quality control. The reason why many people pay the high prices is for quality. If the quality isn't there, then people will find alternatives.

I'm a size 6, 5'8 yoga teacher and my thighs rub against each other...it's called muscle and fat (curves). I've had a bird's eye view of their recruitment of (popular) yoga teachers in each community they are present in, and they call them ambassadors. Their job is to promote their products, teach free classes in parks etc., and receive (some) free product. Something always rubbed me wrong, and it wasn't my thighs (ok maybe it was), and I declined all offers. The whole thing felt clique'ish and that's not my gig. Although this may not bother some people, and they like their products just fine (I do have 1 pair of tights that are not see-through and fit great except the slight balling of fabric on my inner thighs...gag!) I think we all make concrete votes with our pocket book. I regularly wear Prana--who promote to athletic and outdoorsy types, and my tights never ball up between my thighs--and at 1/2 the price. I generally don't like to give money to offensive types...It helps to discourage them.

"Catering to the obese/fat/overweight which is exactly what society is doing."

ARE YOU JOKING ME. Society shames fat people. Constantly. Every day. Fat people are devalued, less like to earn promotions, get jobs, and get help from service workers. People deemed "too fat" by arbitrary standards get ridiculed, kicked off planes and publicly humiliated. Fine, maybe you might be a heartless person who thinks "well that's what they deserve," regardless, society does absolutely nothing to cater to fat people. There might be certain brands of clothing who "cater" to fat people, but that's not catering. From your Marketing/PR standpoint I hope you can see that's business. People need clothes. All people.

Let me bring my eyes back from the giant roll they just did to the back of my head, and point out a few things.

1) I'm pretty sure 100% of people pointed out on this thread that thighs rubbing together does NOT NECESSARILY EQUAL fat, obese or overweight.

2) obese and overweight are medical definitions that the media throws around, without properly citing their source of definition. One definition that is commonly used is BMI. Which of course, as we all know, as athletes, is not the most accurate portrayal of health/fitness. But it is the most common way to define these terms, so everyone should know what they mean. http://www.cdc.gov/...adult_bmi/index.html

3) studies show being overweight (defined by a BMI of 25- 29.9) or obese (defined by a BMI of over 30) does NOT necessarily indicate any kind of health problems. http://www.health.harvard.edu/...obesity-201309246697. in fact, some studies go as far to say that mortality rates are less for those who are overweight versus those who are normal. http://www.digitalnewsrelease.com/?q=jama_3867

4) fat people exercise. it's a shocker, I know. But they do. just because you see a person and deem them "overweight"- how do you know they didn't run three miles that morning and eat a healthy lunch? you don't. so don't judge.

This world would be a better place if people stopped making snap judgements about a person's health, worth, work ethic and abilities based solely on their appearances.

As athletes, we often put ourselves in the moral righteousness seat. Fair enough. Not proud of it, but I've done it too. But, we can be respectful and helpful, or we can judge. I hope you can see the benefits of the former.

My opinion isn't going to change. America is grossly overweight and driving up my healthcare costs. We need to heavily tax fast food and soda like we do cigarettes and alcohol. Stop airing shows like The Biggest Loser, that show disgusts me. Anyway, we won't see eye to eye on this.

---

---

"Though she be but little, she is fierce" ~Shakespeare | Powered by HD Coaching | 2014 Wattie Ink Triathlon Team | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter

I agree with you, except on the Biggest Loser part. Have you ever watched the BL? I think the BL does a great job of showing obese people it is possible to lose weight and literally "get a life". I love me some fat people "getting it", and becoming fit and no longer a potential drain on the health care system. If the BL gets 100 people off their asses and into a gym or serious dieting, its a win for everyone.

I did watch it, for approximately 28 min. I don't really get Americas fascination with the show. I also wonder if there are people who feel they can't do it w/o the show. I'd also love to know what percent of the contestants keep the majority of the weight off. I'll admit I make fun of Color runs, Electric runs, etc...but at the end of the day if they are going to get people off the couch and away from the TV, they are GREAT! I just hope it entices those same people to take it a step further and do a real race even if it's just a 5k and go from there. I know when you're overweight let alone obese running a mile seems impossible, but it can be done. America is just so lazy and we have to start making better food choices. Everywhere I turn I see fat children shoveling fast food into their mouth or drinking soda; it's just so sad and quite frankly tragic.. And we need to stop with the super sizing of meals, it's horrible! No wonder we are the fattest country!

---

---

"Though she be but little, she is fierce" ~Shakespeare | Powered by HD Coaching | 2014 Wattie Ink Triathlon Team | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter

I just wanted to thank you for this post. It is excellent, as are many others in here. Points 3 and 4 are really important to remember :)

But the latest information says that it might not be true you can be fit and fat.

http://healthland.time.com/2013/12/02/you-cant-be-fit-and-fat/


Cites a study by Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute at Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto
I haven't actually read the study, but will be as it is in my scope of study/possible research for my MPH.

That's interesting. Thanks for posting that. I looked up the article, a meta analysis, which reviewed relevant studies and reported:

Data Synthesis: Eight studies (n = 61 386; 3988 events) evaluated participants for all-cause mortality and/or cardiovascular events. Metabolically healthy obese individuals (relative risk [RR], 1.24; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.55) had increased risk for events compared with metabolically healthy normal-weight individuals when only studies with 10 or more years of follow-up were considered. All metabolically unhealthy groups had a similarly elevated risk: normal weight (RR, 3.14; CI, 2.36 to 3.93), overweight (RR, 2.70; CI, 2.08 to 3.30), and obese (RR, 2.65; CI, 2.18 to 3.12).

So, in comparing metabolically healthy patients, this analysis found that obese patients were more likely than normal weight patients to have a cardiac event. It did not, however, find that overweight patients were more likely than normal weight patients to have an event.

Interestingly metabolically unhealthy patients--regardless of BMI category--all had similarly elevated risks. In other words, you can be thin and be at risk for a cardiac event too.

So, I'm inclined to stress that we use established definitions for the conversation. Time magazine can say something like "you can't be fit and fat," but we need to define "fit" and "fat".

You absolutely can be fit and overweight, as determined by BMI. To determine otherwise would require some original research that has yet to be done. Even this meta analysis found no difference between healthy weight individuals and overweight individuals for risk of cardiac events. They had to go out to a normal v. obese comparison.


Now we are definitely pretty far afield from the Lululemon conversation :)

I do think we have an obesity problem in this country. I am very concerned by the number of obese kids I see. I also would have no problem with a fast-food or a soda tax. Bring it. This is really a different issue entirely than having your thighs touch in yoga pants that don't even go up past a size 12.

Pretty sure this is EXACTLY what I said a few posts up.

And I'll stand by my statement there is nothing wrong with lululemon wanting slimmer/athletic people trotting around in their apparel.

Personally, I don't even like Lululemon. I don't need to look that coordinated and put together when I got for a run and sweat like a pig. I wear Nike and Oakley workout clothing. I swear by the fit and longevity of Nike Dri-Fit clothing.

Incidentally, Nike makes clothing for overweight women and men starting at 1x going up.

I come from a family of doctors, and the topic of obesity/overweight is often heavily discussed. Recent studies show a person cannot be both overweight/obese AND healthy.

Why are people so sensitive and defensive when it comes to the feelings of Fat America? If you are obese or severely overweight and you are shoving a Big Mac and super size fries in your mouth, you bet I will look you directly in the eye with pure disgust. If you are going to allow your overweight child with type 2 diabetes to slurp down a coke and eat Oreos, you bet I'm going to think you're not a very good parent.

---

---

"Though she be but little, she is fierce" ~Shakespeare | Powered by HD Coaching | 2014 Wattie Ink Triathlon Team | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter

One possible reason -- rehabilitation is that much harder if people feel excluded/shunned/shamed by individuals in the group they ought to be joining. Athletes especially need to be compassionate -- we're missionaries for a healthy life.

Kyra, yes, I wrote what I did about obesity in children and the fast-food/soda tax specifically to show I agreed with you about that part of your post. I also agree that parents who feed their kids (overweight or not) things like coke and oreos are not making good choices.

I also come from a family of doctors, I work in healthcare, and I was a personal trainer for years. Could you give me a link to "one of the recent studies" that shows metabolically healthy patients can't be overweight and healthy? I'm not going to argue about obesity; it's unhealthy.

A statement like, "If you are obese or severely overweight and you are shoving a Big Mac and super size fries in your mouth, you bet I will look you directly in the eye with pure disgust" shows not only a lack of empathy, but also no understanding of the the things that contribute to people being overweight and the role that emotional eating can play in the cycle. "Pure disgust" will rarely be something that ever helps an overweight or obese person make changes to their lifestyle.

Now, you wrote, "And I'll stand by my statement there is nothing wrong with lululemon wanting slimmer/athletic people trotting around in their apparel." I don't think anybody took issue with LLL wanting slimmer people in their clothes. That is a wholly different issue than blaming the failure of your athletic pants on women who's thighs touch. I'm going to requote npda here because I can't say it any clearer, "I'm pretty sure 100% of people pointed out on this thread that thighs rubbing together does NOT NECESSARILY EQUAL fat, obese or overweight.

"Push", Yes, I keenly remember you stating you have family who are doctors in your previous threads. AndI believe you work in some kind of academic research.

Emotional Eating... SIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGH. I'm so tired of excuses and people not taking responsibility. I guess if they are an "emotional eater", they should figure out their issues in therapy or go to Over Eaters Anonymous. I have an Aunt who is obese, she's the only one in my family, everyone else is fit VERY active and an extremely healthy eater. She has REFUSED to seek therapy or get control of her 3x a day fast food habit and gorging herself on desserts/sugar. Yup, even my own family member disgusts me. She whines and whines about being obese (NOT overweight, OBESE), yet she refuses to make an effort to gain control of her obesity. She is the poster child of Fat America.

I'm pretty sure if we made a call to "LLL", and could get the Chip Wilson on the phone he would say what he meant was lululemon clothing wasn't meant for fat/overweight women because their thighs are bulging out of the fabric and touch, that they are squeeeeeeeeezing into clothes that are not designed for them in the first place. He was put on the spot and what came out came out, media decided to take it to the extreme and blow it out of proportion. There was absolutely nothing for him to apologize regarding his below statement. With the media turning this into such a firestorm, this proves as a society we catering to feelings of Fat America. I'm over it.

"Frankly, some women's bodies just don't actually work [for the yoga pants]," Chip Wilson said Tuesday in an interview on Bloomberg TV's "Street Smart" program. "It's more really about the rubbing through the thighs, how much pressure is there over a period of time, how much they use it."

---

---

"Though she be but little, she is fierce" ~Shakespeare | Powered by HD Coaching | 2014 Wattie Ink Triathlon Team | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter

Uhhhh, seriously?
I'm a missionary for MY OWN healthy lifestyle.
I don't remember agreeing to be a global cheerleader for a healthy active lifestyle when I signed the terms and conditions of my USAT membership

---

---

"Though she be but little, she is fierce" ~Shakespeare | Powered by HD Coaching | 2014 Wattie Ink Triathlon Team | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter

I just happened to be reading an article on a recent study "When health outcomes were tracked for long enough, being significantly overweight with a healthy metabolic status was still worse than being of normal weight and with a healthy metabolic status. "Metabolically healthy obese individuals had increased risk for events compared with metabolically healthy normal-weight individuals when only studies with 10 or more years of follow-up were considered," the researchers wrote."

http://www.runnersworld.com/...hy-overweight-a-myth

I stand corrected, thank you. I just find it difficult to grasp that "studies show being overweight (defined by a BMI of 25- 29.9) or obese (defined by a BMI of over 30) does NOT necessarily indicate ANY kind of health problems."

Now a meta-analysis recently published in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine suggests another trigger for adult-onset asthma: being overweight or obese. While weighing more than you should has previously been implicated as a risk factor for the condition, Colorado researchers found that the more a person weighs, the greater the risk for asthma.
http://www.healthnewswebsite.com/...a/asthma_causes.html

*Every time I try to quote you and put this response in the same message I can't separate our responses, so I just deleted the post above, but here is my response:

This is the same article we were discussing earlier. Unfortuantely, the RW author is using the terms significantly overweight and obese interchangeably. "Overweight" and "obese" are two separate categories as defined by BMI, and, more specifically, as defined by the study the article is referencing, and there was NO statistically significant difference between metabollically healthy normal weight and overweight people. There was a difference between metabollically healthy normal weight and obese people. It's a writing error that shouldn't have occurred in an article on this subject.

When I search pub med for the journal cited on that page for "asthma" and "overweight," I can't find it. The Duke "Health News" page you linked just mentions it was another meta-analysis and a Colorado group. If you find the original article, I'd love to take a look.

Sorry, no luck, I am completely out of my lane of expertise and was just trying to add to the conversation. To be honest, I have trouble grasping it just out of personal observation and not a medical education. I also tried to find the reference from this article, because if as little as 5 lbs makes a difference in asthma control I would really want to know.

http://www.webmd.com/...ght-adds-asthma-toll

this was not a new study. I was a META ANALYSIS of other studies. They did not take exercise status into account, which matters way more than just a bunch of numbers. we know that in thin and overweight people exercise is the prevention for EVERY disease state: heart disease, cancer, dementia....

so grain of salt for meta analysis and not taking exercise status into account

Fair enough. Exercise gives me joy in addition to decent health. I'm happy to share that, hence the missionary thing. It works for me, but I guess it's not for everybody.

And that's part of the reason why we have so many sick people who over-burden our medical systems.

Do you have kids? I do, and I know that I am the missionary for their healthy lives. I recently took up a new sport (speed skating) and I started out skating with the kids. I've since graduated to the adult sessions (haha), but I still go skate with the kids and help the coaches out. While they are not my kids, I try to help them in having healthy lives.

You have to model the behaviour you want to see, right? Problems are always solved more effectively when people work together than alone or at odds. Sometimes it not about you.

AP

---

------------------------
"How bad could it be?" - SimpleS

I am constantly reminded of this when all I want to do is sit on the couch & watch tv after work. Do I want my 2 year old son to think that is good? So I go to the extra effort to bundle him up (we live in the cold, frozen north), put him in the sled & take the dog for a walk. And he comes outside when we shovel. I'm kind of anal about it, but luckily my husband supports it.

BTW - I love that you are speed skating!! We have a club here & an outdoor rink (oval). I've always wanted to try it. Maybe when my son is older we can try it together.

If course I'm an advocate for my nieces and I would be if I had my own kids. My entire family is athletic. My mom who is in her 60's travels to Dubai for 2.5 weeks returns home and the next day goes on a 5 mile hike in the mountains. Their dogs get a minimum 2 mile hike, everyday. My nieces are involved in so many sports. My sister was and still is a competitive swimmer and her husband actively plays tennis. Where did my sister and I get this behavior - our parents and they are passing it along to the girls. BUT this is family, it is not my responsibility to teach the rest of the world. These people, Fat America need to want to do it on their own and many of them are too lazy to make the effort. Trust me I applaud the ones who do!!:-) You are the type of parent we need more of. I'm always thrilled when I see parents get their children involved in 5k's, triathlons, etc. I tried to get my family do to a 5k while I did a half mary on Thanksgiving, when they found out they needed to wake up at 5:30am, they said NO THANKS! I was pretty bummed.

---

---

"Though she be but little, she is fierce" ~Shakespeare | Powered by HD Coaching | 2014 Wattie Ink Triathlon Team | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter

Maybe they had no healthy role models. Maybe it's not just being lazy - they might actually not have the skill set required to be healthy. Obviously they have to make the choices to lose weight, but if it is overwhelming or cost prohibitive or going against the "norm" it might seem to be an insurmountable goal.

Saying "I want to be rich" is a lot easier than figuring out all the little steps over time that will get you there.

You make a VERY good point. There are a lot of people who have never seen people in their day to day lives eat well, exercise, take care of their health. I work with ~600 people, and I always try to be accessible and non-intimidating about the subject. I do get folks approaching me with questions.... all sorts of questions... "I want to start riding my bike to work, like you and so-and-so, how do I find a good bike?" and "what does 'fructose' or 'HFCS' mean?"

I managed to get our Health&safety and HR folks to do a wellness week - it was awesome, we had a nutritionist come in and talk with people, we had a stress expert, a "how to use the gym at work" expert... all sorts of stuff. Even our social committee started changing the junk out of our vending machine for healthier options.

Many people I work with would never even think about these things if they hadn't been exposed to them in a non-threatening environment.

AP

---

------------------------
"How bad could it be?" - SimpleS

You're both right and kudos to both of you for your efforts and modeling.

Back to the frankly shocking statement the lululemon guy said... I remember age 11 doing callenetics video exercises where it showed her legs with a long spiel about this is what perfect legs should look like. I looked down and wondered why i didn't have a thigh gap.

age 39 i found out from a physio that i don't have a thigh gap because i have slightly knock knees.

I can be skinny or very overweight and not have a thigh gap

I've done yoga for many years, skied a lot in my 20's and ran several races inc 3 half marathons - now i'm doing a tri season and want to do a 70.3.

I'm not visual, so i'm not super athletic (I'm kinaesthetic) and still makes me angry that i can just be called wrong like that.

Maybe they had no healthy role models. Maybe it's not just being lazy - they might actually not have the skill set required to be healthy. Obviously they have to make the choices to lose weight, but if it is overwhelming or cost prohibitive or going against the "norm" it might seem to be an insurmountable goal.

Saying "I want to be rich" is a lot easier than figuring out all the little steps over time that will get you there

this sort of thinking is what is wrong with the majority of society today. people take the easy way and push out the resonsiblity for their lives onto others by coming up with list of excuses.

it aint that hard but it takes a bit of work...

Grrrr - Don't take what I say out of context. It is totally up to the people to make healthy changes. I'm just saying that those of us who come from a place of privilege make take for granted how "easy" it is to lose weight.

If you have grown up in a family without anyone modeling fitness or healthy eating, you have quite a bit to overcome. Everything is ultimately about personal responsibility, but there are very real 'barriers to entry' to health and fitness in Western culture: time, money, childcare, safe environment, appropriate shoes/clothes, cultural acceptability. People who are already maxed out trying to meet Maslow's more basic needs are sometimes trying to just exist day-to-day.

Certainly, one way for society to deal with people struggling with their weight is to heap on the scorn and disgust, but why? I don't understand why anyone would want to be deliberatley cruel like that. What does that do? Does it help solve or fix the problem?

EXACTLY!! Apparently, it is now MY responsibility to help people with absolutely no self-control so they don't feel shunned by society and can wear lululemon yoga pants. Why is it people don't like to take responsibility for their actions?!?!? Because I make good decisions about my health and support lulu's statement, I'm the one who's wrong here...I swear to god, more often than not, Americans are ass-backward in their thinking. I love how we are making excuses for the fat to stay fat, that is rich. If this isn't catering to the overweight and obese then I don't know what is!

---

---

"Though she be but little, she is fierce" ~Shakespeare | Powered by HD Coaching | 2014 Wattie Ink Triathlon Team | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter

I'm calling BS on this! Are you kidding me, it takes money to exercise, since when?????????????? There's a sidewalk right outside their front door!! Baby steps..your post reads like they need to join Equinox and wear $200 running shoes.You don't need to spend ANY money to make a positive change in your health. You talk about personal responsibility then you make excuses for these people!!!!!!!!

---

---

"Though she be but little, she is fierce" ~Shakespeare | Powered by HD Coaching | 2014 Wattie Ink Triathlon Team | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter

If you have grown up in a family without anyone modeling fitness or healthy eating, you have quite a bit to overcome. Everything is ultimately about personal responsibility, but there are very real 'barriers to entry' to health and fitness in Western culture: time, money, childcare, safe environment, appropriate shoes/clothes, cultural acceptability. People who are already maxed out trying to meet Maslow's more basic needs are sometimes trying to just exist day-to-day.

Certainly, one way for society to deal with people struggling with their weight is to heap on the scorn and disgust, but why? I don't understand why anyone would want to be deliberatley cruel like that. What does that do? Does it help solve or fix the problem?

eat less?!?!...it doesn’t matter where you came from or if you were privileged...eat less aint that hard, no?

A sidewalk outside of who's door? Yours or theirs? Is it safe to walk out there? What time of day is it when they can exercise? Who's going to watch their three young kids? Is that person tired because they've already worked two shift jobs that day?

Yes, eating less is an answer. It's a very simple answer.

Yes, eating less is an answer. It's a very simple answer.

I know it is extremely hard to believe that this simple answer is the solution to the problem. I am not a bit sarcastic here....

People love complex solutions because they can create tons of excuses because they cannot cope with complex...think about it

Uhhhh, stereotype much,"Push". I didn't realize all overweight people were poor, had several kids and lived in the ghetto. Again, you're making excuses for them, if they want it, rich or poor they will do it...it takes baby steps, not a phd in chemistry.

---

---

"Though she be but little, she is fierce" ~Shakespeare | Powered by HD Coaching | 2014 Wattie Ink Triathlon Team | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter

Talk about keeping it simple, this guys story about being broke and losing 250 lbs is really something, all of his food came from the dollar store and his exercise was simply walking. "at the time, he was broke. Aviance, who was then pursuing music and clothing design on the side, had recently been laid off work. “I was unemployed and couldn’t afford a gym membership or fancy diets,” says Aviance. “I realized that walking was the easiest exercise I could do and it cost nothing. So I grabbed my dance music and tennis shoes, and started walking.”
http://health.yahoo.net/...et-could-it-work-you

Kyra, I'm not stereotyping, but I have been responding to comments by Edbikebabe and AP. My comments are consistent with the shift in subject matter. We have been discussing people who have never seen healthy behaviors modeled and don't know what "fructose" in HCFS means. This was not a jump I made.

EBB: "Maybe they had no healthy role models. Maybe it's not just being lazy - they might actually not have the skill set required to be healthy. Obviously they have to make the choices to lose weight, but if it is overwhelming or cost prohibitive or going against the "norm" it might seem to be an insurmountable goal."

AP: "There are a lot of people who have never seen people in their day to day lives eat well, exercise, take care of their health. I work with ~600 people, and I always try to be accessible and non-intimidating about the subject. I do get folks approaching me with questions.... all sorts of questions... "I want to start riding my bike to work, like you and so-and-so, how do I find a good bike?" and "what does 'fructose' or 'HFCS' mean?"

I know not all overweight people are poor, but there are a disproportionately high number of uneducated, poor obese people.

http://frac.org/...lnerable-to-obesity/
http://www.cdc.gov/...igher_education.html
http://www.cdc.gov/.../databriefs/db50.htm

Physiologically, eating less and moving more is the answer. So why doesn't it happen? Why isn't it that easy? Because psychologically and sociologically it is not that simple. We could argue all day about whether or not it should be that simple, but the reality is it just isn't.

I think this issue a lot- I work out hard and I eat healthfully and it drives me absolutely crazy to see people seem to completely neglect and destroy their bodies, then expect someone else to foot the bill.

I started to change my thinking a bit in grad school when we reviewed the ACE (Adverse Childhood Experiences) study. This was a fairly groundbreaking study that began when a researcher/provider at Kaiser Permanente began noticing a strong relationship between childhood abuse (especially sexual) and obesity in women. In particular, he noticed that as soon as these women began to lose some weight they became extremely uncomfortable and essentially sabotaged their weight loss programs. The subconscious need to feel hidden or cloaked as a result of having been abused manifested as significant and rapid weight gain.

I have to remind myself (and my sisters, who are teeny little wisps of people and tend to be a bit judgmental) that there truly are very complicated reasons for weight gain. I think that promoting exercise and healthy diets are critical for weight and health management, but I also think that if we don't address the underlying mental health issues, not to mention the endemic abuse, neglect, poverty, and lack of access to services, then we're really not going to make much progress.

I'm putting a link to the original ACE article below. There have been many subsequent related studies.



http://www.ajpmonline.org/...8/fulltext#section19


As far as Lululemon, I’m sort of ambivalent. I don’t really like the brand image these days and it’s too cold where I live to run in anything but Sugoi sub-zero tights, but my favorite articles from LLL are a cami-style sportsbra that has replaced my hated underwires, and their lace thongs. These are the most comfortable undies I’ve every worn. Since no one ever sees the labels I don’t feel too much cognitive dissonance :-)


--L

Being open and receptive to the opportunity to help is a responsibility I think we all share. As human beings. It is our responsibility to be opportunistic to help when help is wanted, needed, and most of all gratefully appreciated.

Many people in poor health have no idea how to fix it, or that they even have poor health. But once they are receptive to change, when they *know* they have to change, and are ready to do so, it is for the greater good if the community supports them in whatever manner practical.

If someone asks for help, why would you not offer what you reasonably could? If someone was having a heart attack and stopped breathing//having a pulse, would you not start CPR? Just because that unhealthy person hasn't yet had that heart attack doesn't negate the need for help when it is asked for...

Most people that want true change just want support and encouragement. And that costs NOTHING.

AP

---

------------------------
"How bad could it be?" - SimpleS

I'd like to know who out of you guys havent struggled with being significantly overweight and would like to give me, who is, unfair judgements when they clearly have not walked in my shoes.

I've lost 28-45 lbs about 8 times, have bulimic years, have schizophrenia, have Aspergers, gave up smoking 7.5 years ago, have a mum and sister who smoke, a mother who reached 14 stone or nearly 220lbs 100kg well roughly anyway.
Am on weight gaining meds for life, have done yoga teacher training, skied for a few seasons, worked as a field labourer, ran 3 half marathons and several shorter races etc etc and now am training multi sport.
I'm 25 lbs overweight and not happy about it. I've been this weight for 7 years now apart from a severe restricting diet where I was normal weight for a few days.
This story of the guy losing 250 lbs is inspiring.
I hate being this weight.
I'm not grotesquely out of proportion but spend my life feeling like a huge hideous pig monster who doesn't even look human shaped.
Sorry - self righteous rant

Yes. Thank you for that link. Great post.

"Most people that want true change just want support and encouragement. And that costs NOTHING."

Yes, very true.

I have also found that giving support and encouragement is very rewarding and motivating for the giver. I have a couple of friends right now really working on weight loss--women who have been obese most of their childhood and all of their adult lives--and it feels great to be able to help them in whatever way I can. Being with someone when they finish their first 5k and are amazed and thrilled with their accomplishment has felt better to me than any of my own 5k races.

I am so glad you posted this. It is anything but self-righteous :)

It is honest and is a very good window into the challenges that some face. Thank you for being willing to share it with the group and be a part of this discussion.

  

I am so glad you posted this. It is anything but self-righteous :)


I felt quite righteous posting it anyway...
I spend my time contrary to how I sounded, very underwhelmed with myself. Got to 16 miles... Was a marathon hopeful... But may not be built for running (slightly knock kneed).
My aim is a 70.3 in 2015 or even 2016. I'll be 40/41...
I've already managed, in just a few weeks of multisport, to become a faster runner than I ever was and I'm probably fitter than I've been since my 20's. I've been able to run a bit longer, and normalised for longer but at much lower speeds and I physically couldn't go even one 10mm before.
Now hopeful for a sub-30 5k!

Update: Chip Wilson has resigned from Lululemon's board of directors

I think, tho, that people's thighs touching have NOTHING to do with if you're obese/overweight, as implied by lululemon.
The question isn't that they don't want to cater to fat people, it's that his statement encourages these unrealisitic female body images of the super model who is grossly underweight and whose thighs do not touch... and who definitely would not be doing sports in their clothing. It isn't natural for a female's thights not to touch if she is a healthy weight and doesn't have a deformity that makes her legs bow.

My thighs touch, and I was just told by the doctor that I need to put on a couple pounds because my BMI is on the lowest end of normal nearly underweight. Why do my thighs touch? Because I am a runner, biker, formal hockey player, not because I am in any way shape or form overweight.

Just wanted to let you know, Push, I cheered every time I read your posts.

Especially to the angry, irrational rants from a certain poster.

Bravo.

I think we've established that, according to recent research (and the REAL research, not the sensationalist journalism that misquotes it) that metabolically healthy is a condition that is not necessarily dictated by BMI.

We also know that BMI, as a general tool, is helpful, but on the individual level, it is often grossly wrong. (N=1; In my collegiate swimming days I was on the border between "overweight" and "normal" BMI with a 16% body fat composition, and rippling, rippling muscle).

EVEN IF THIS RESEARCH IS WRONG (which I don't think it is, but go with me here), and even if some of the worst accusations that have been made here are true (all obese people are unhealthy, and all obese people stuff their faces with big macs, and all obese people are lazy and unmotivated). You know what? Fat-shaming doesn't work. Fat shaming doesn't make people "Turn healthy".
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0070048


So, to the fat-shaming on here- just stop. JUST STOP. You don't have to "apologize" for anyone, or "make excuses" but your mere attitude is making the problem worse. Just STOP. If you don't want to be nice to people because you deem them unhealthy, then just don't say or do anything at all.


What if EVERYONE around you constantly ridiculed you because you weren't good at math. Would you suddenly want to become good at math? Probably not.


There are plenty of thin, athletic people who are assholes. And there are plenty of overweight people who are wonderful, kind people. (and plenty of overweight assholes too). The point is, weight shouldn't devalue a person.


Peace, I'm out.

I know, I'm such an irrational meany. Heaven forbid anyone have a strong opinion that differs from yours.
Oh and her name is Elesa.
May PEACE be with YOU & Happy Holidays!!!

---

---

"Though she be but little, she is fierce" ~Shakespeare | Powered by HD Coaching | 2014 Wattie Ink Triathlon Team | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter

Thanks for your kind words and for another great post :)

Will you just give it a rest already? It's not about you.

AP

---

------------------------
"How bad could it be?" - SimpleS

And it's also not about opinions. It's about the science of health (and science should be devoid of 'opinions') and treating human beings with kindness. Even if they're wearing Lulu- I joke. :)

Thank you

---

------------------------
"How bad could it be?" - SimpleS

I am a man. I have never bought lululemon products. I am 6' and weigh 170 at about 7% body fat.
My thighs rub. My shorts pill. It's my body's fault.

I've never even heard of "un-pillable" shorts. Why would I be surprised that lululemon doesn't make them?
Chip Wilson sorely underestimated the number of overly sensitive and vindictive people in this world.

FFS. Why is it being "overly-sensitive and vindictive." Why isn't it just making a decision about where I want to spend my money? The product sucks (17% recall and multiple fails this year) and the CEO tries to blame that on customers. Tell me, SH, what do you consider when making purchases?

I'm never going to buy lululemon. You aren't either. My thighs rub and I'm not a woman. You want a better product. There is no over sensitivity or vindictiveness in that.

However, organizing groups that seek to distort what this man said in an effort to ruin Chip's and lululemon's reputation and business -- that's over sensitivity and vindictiveness. Over sensitive because, yes, you have to have some serious body/mind/spirit issues to get from point a, what this man really said, to point b, what the writer of that blog was claiming. And vindictive because ,yes, you gotta have a mean streak to try and get someone canned just because your brain is good at the mental gymnastics involved in always perceiving a slight.

("You" and "your" is generic here. I'm talking about the people that drummed all this up.)

thank you. thank you. thank you. thank you.

---

---

"Though she be but little, she is fierce" ~Shakespeare | Powered by HD Coaching | 2014 Wattie Ink Triathlon Team | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter

Translation:

"It doesn't bother/affect me, so obviously everyone reacting differently than me is over sensitive."

This thread examined several statements made by Chip Wilson, in attempt to assess his overall character, as well as several business practices Lululemon has enacted over the years, and discussed the company, its mission, its target buyer, the quality of clothing, as well as what it's like to shop at the stores. Many pros and cons were presented and discussed, (well, before the fat-shaming and health science discussion). Just like that "vindictive" blogger who went from point A to point B, you did as well, without reading the whole thread. You can worship the ground Chip walks on for all I care, but read the whole damn thread before you mansplain to us how "over sensitive" people are.

Why exactly are you posting here?

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

Lululemon announced their quarterly results and said their annual forecast was being adjusted downward. They attributed this in part to the debacle with the see-through yoga tights, and also to the PR debacle with Wilson's comments about the clothing not being designed for certain size women. In fact, the CEO Christine Day is being replaced (was announced in June), and Chip Wilson is stepping down as chairman (just announced).

So perhaps they got the message that you shouldn't really alienate your customers?

BrokenSpoke

My thighs rub?

 

LOL

Mens are welcome too :-)

---

maybe she's born with it, maybe it's chlorine
If you're injured and need some sympathy, PM me and I'm very happy to write back.
disclaimer: PhD not MD

Thanks for posting, NPR did a piece about them last week, suggesting some of the same things your article touches on. As the founder of a woman's cycling group we need to support all woman ... and we come in all shapes, sizes and ages! I have never prescribed to this company never quite knew why, but now it's becoming clear as the media starts to expose some of their truths.