'I'm size 22 and tried Alton Towers' rides to see if I could fit in their seats'

[Benjsh]

We need to stop treating it as a cruel thing. That's the whole point.

What's more cruel? Telling a loved one you're overweight and need to make some serious life changes or doing nothing, burying your head in the sand and potentially causing them to have serious health issues?

I'm definitely not advocating to go tell strangers to lose weight. It should always be friends and family.

 

[WillPS]

Go for a walk

Is that a personal attack? I've lost 32kg in the last 15 months. I went last week for the first time in a few years and I fit on more rides than I expected to given my previous experience. I know how to lose weight and I also know that I can't sustainably lose the amount of weight I ultimately need to in a short period of time, it'll be something that takes at least another year or two.

I would estimate the amount of weight loss due to walking at nearly nought - I would walk for miles even when I was 150kg.

What on earth gives you the right to make a comment like this about somebody you don't know; regardless of whether that's me or anybody else? Utterly toxic and you too ought to be ashamed of yourself for committing such thoughts to record.

 

[tayspru]

Is that a personal attack? I've lost 32kg in the last 15 months. I went last week for the first time in a few years and I fit on more rides than I expected to given my previous experience. I know how to lose weight and I also know that I can't sustainably lose the amount of weight I ultimately need to in a short period of time, it'll be something that takes at least another year or two.

I would estimate the amount of weight loss due to walking at nearly nought - I would walk for miles even when I was 150kg.

What on earth gives you the right to make a comment like this about somebody you don't know; regardless of whether that's me or anybody else? Utterly toxic and you too ought to be ashamed of yourself for committing such thoughts to record.

It was in reference to a different post that called being denied access to a rollercoaster “persecution”, however I have of course edited that to avoid the confusion.

It’s a rubbish position to be in but persecution it is not.

 

[WillPS]

I'm definitely not advocating to go tell strangers to lose weight. It should always be friends and family.

Presume for a minute the author sees this thread. Explain to me how you have not done exactly what you say nobody should do.

 

[Craig]

Can we get back to the actual topic here? There's zero need to be going on about one specific person, when there's plenty of worthwhile discussion to be had about the issue in general rather than needlessly going on about this.

 

[WillPS]

I notice you’ve edited your response after initially posting the first sentence. I have no doubts that there is judgement in other areas, but a theme park is a straight up “you 100% cannot do this activity” - that wouldn’t happen at a cinema, shopping centre, any other number of venues.

You're wrong, it does happen at cinemas, shopping centres and a number of other venues.

 

[tayspru]

You're wrong, it does happen at cinemas, shopping centres and a number of other venues.

I’m having a hard time believing a cinema has said “sorry you can’t come in you’re too big”

With regards to amusement parks, the entire industry is massively focussed on safety. If there was a safer way to allow more people
to ride it would have happened by now. Disney are the best for this in some cases, but their attractions require significantly less restraint than the all out thrill coasters we’re talking about.

 

[WillPS]

I’m having a hard time believing a cinema has said “sorry you can’t come in you’re too big”

Alton Towers don't say that either though, do they?

 

[tayspru]

Alton Towers don't say that either though, do they?

Apart from when you don’t fit on a ride and are therefore refused access to said ride ?

I understand this is an emotive subject but you really are jumping to being facetious rather than stepping back to see that there is a lot more to it than rollercoaster designers (and apparently by your standard, the majority of users on this forum) being “fatphobic”

 

[Skyscraper]

As well as someone having to do the walk of shame, imagine how the ride staff feel having to refuse access to someone. They probably have to be very careful so as not to inadvertently cause offence or embarrass the guest.

On why the big boy seats aren't advertised, it's probably because park want them to be descreet. As the article says, the author managed to get to their seat without anyone noticing it was a bigger seat. Plus the only indication is the double seatbelt, the seats look the same otherwise.

 

[WillPS]

Apart from when you don’t fit on a ride and are therefore refused access to said ride ?

I understand this is an emotive subject but you really are jumping to being facetious rather than stepping back to see that there is a lot more too it than rollercoaster designers (and apparently by your standard, the majority of users on this forum) being “fatphobic”

I'm not accusing rollercoaster designers of anything. Listing the mitigations which can be put in to place (along with examples of where they have already done so to some extent!) is all I have done. On the contrary, if anything.

What I take objection to is the judgment of anybody who dares to step forward with a lived experience, present or otherwise, and then validating any negative feelings another human being has felt as being righteous because of their own hatred of overweight people; particularly when they use tropes to reinforce these beliefs.

 

[tayspru]

I'm not accusing rollercoaster designers of anything. Listing the mitigations which can be put in to place (along with examples of where they have already done so to some extent!) is all I have done. On the contrary, if anything.

What I take objection to is the judgment of anybody who dares to step forward with a lived experience, present or otherwise, and then validating any negative feelings another human being has felt as being valid because of their own hatred of overweight people; particularly when they use tropes to reinforce these beliefs.

But the practical mitigations are all in place in a huge amount of cases, and as time moves forward they have become standard on new attractions.

Bigger seats across the board and then kids can’t ride at all, any more than one or two rows of “big boy” seats negatively affects capacity and causes confusion for guests.

Test seats is the main point that absolutely should be a standard mitigation but I don’t think it was you who actually suggested that.

It’s not judgemental to say that some people are simply too big for theme parks. There’s rides I don’t fit on because of my size, it’s a shame but that’s life.

 

[Craig]

I've already requested this, yet I've had to remove further posts. Continue discussion about the issue in general without making assumptions about individuals who you do not know. If you have issues with an individual poster, take it to private message as these squabbles are pointless amongst a topic which has some pretty worthwhile discussion.

 

[WillPS]

Test seats is the main point that absolutely should be a standard mitigation but I don’t think it was you who actually suggested that.

Because they're fairly useless. They don't lock or give you an indication of 'notches'. All they indicate is that you can physically sit in the seat (rarely a problem and less likely to leave the guest inclined to try) and bring the restraint over your head.

 

[Benjsh]

I just can't help but feel this 'i don't need to change, it's the industry needs to change' approach is mind boggling.

Most rides have a lot of wiggle room really. If you're a bit overweight you will definitely be able to ride most if not every ride you want to. We are talking about people who are in the obsese category and above here realistically. I simply don't agree at all that any changes need to be made to adhere to these larger guests. The changes needed should be a personal one.

My wife is a nurse in the NHS too and I can tell you that obsesity is a huge huge strain on the system's resources.

 

[Matt N]

OK, I admit in hindsight that “persecution” was a slightly bold use of wording on my part, so I apologise. However, I do feel that experiences like being rejected from a rollercoaster can be very pivotal for people with these struggles and can be incredibly demoralising when done as publicly as “walks of shame” often are. As such, I do feel that the issue could be addressed more sensitively in some cases.

At the same time, however, I don’t think accusations of discrimination solve the issue (in hindsight, I admit that my own “persecution” comment was wrong and overly rash, and I apologise). Sadly, it is a cold, hard truth that not everybody can fit into a ride. I won’t beat around the bush; it is not physically possible for everybody, and every body type, to fit into a rollercoaster seat. If overweight folk are pandered to too much, then smaller people are shut out; look at examples like Icon and Silver Star, where their modified rows have 10-20cm added to the height restriction due to their increased size. If smaller folk are pandered to too much, then larger people are shut out; look at examples like Colossus, where anyone vaguely tall or big in any dimension will typically struggle. I’m not saying that it’s necessarily right or ideal, but it’s unfortunately a fact of life that can’t really be ignored when talking about this issue.

With both sides of the coin in mind, I feel that parks’ approach should focus more on limitation of the amount of people excluded and sensitive treatment of people who can’t than trying to accommodate every single person. I feel that ways of doing this include:

• Ensuring that well advertised test seats, preferably with a clear traffic light system indicating whether you can fit, are available at every ride entrance to ensure that people who don’t fit aren’t queueing unnecessarily and don’t need to experience the embarrassment of a “walk of shame”, instead being able to discreetly discover that they don’t fit or might struggle to fit without wasting any of their time and experiencing public embarrassment.
• Ensuring that modified seating is available in some capacity on all rides for those who need it so that the number of people who are excluded is limited.
• Ensuring that ride seats and restraints accommodate the widest possible demographic, such as by going for lap bars and trains with better legroom rather than OTSRs and limited legroom (where possible, of course).

That’s just my view, though; I could be completely wrong.

 

[WillPS]

I just can't help but feel this 'i don't need to change, it's the industry needs to change' approach is mind boggling.

Who's saying that?

If you're a bit overweight you will definitely be able to ride most if not every ride you want to.

Those with larger shoulders would beg to differ.

My wife is a nurse in the NHS too and I can tell you that obsesity is a huge huge strain on the system's resources.

What's that got to do with the price of cheese?

 

[BigShadowtinytree]

I found the article interesting. Obviously it’s always safety first, but I’d imagine if you’re a larger person, it helps if the ride ops are friendly and kind about it. Like the op on 13 in the article helped put the author at ease and the one on nemesis discretely pointed her to the row with the bigger seats. I’d imagine that goes a long way to minimising embarrassment. “Sorry but we cannot secure you safely on the ride due to your size/frame” is much nicer than “you’re too fat to ride, get out of the station and stop eating so many burgers”. I’d imagine it’s embarrassing regardless but little things can help not spoil someone’s entire day.

Losing weight is hard, there’s more to it than simply eating less and doing more exercise, on paper yes that works. But there’s a whole mental/psychological component to it as well for a lot of people. People can be addicted to food through trauma, it can be a comfort thing, they might have an eating disorder. It can be very complex and personal for the individual. I’d imagine people telling them they’re fat and they need to lose weight isn’t helpful when there’s other underlying factors they are battling. It’s tricky because we all need to eat to survive, and if you have issues with food you can’t just cut it out completely and avoid it like you can if you have a drinking problem or something. Everyone deserves basic respect regardless of their size.

 

[Matt N]

Losing weight is hard, there’s more to it than simply eating less and doing more exercise, on paper yes that works. But there’s a whole mental/psychological component to it as well for a lot of people. People can be addicted to food through trauma, it can be a comfort thing, they might have an eating disorder. It can be very complex and personal for the individual. I’d imagine people telling them they’re fat and they need to lose weight isn’t helpful when there’s other underlying factors they are battling. It’s tricky because we all need to eat to survive, and if you have issues with food you can’t just cut it out completely and avoid it like you can if you have a drinking problem or something. Everyone deserves basic respect regardless of their size.

I couldn’t agree more; any kind of change in weight is a far more nuanced issue than simply eating differently and changing how much exercise you do.

As I’ve said in some of my previous posts, it is very easy to tell someone to do something, but much harder for them to actually do it. Some people find gaining and losing weight very hard and very mentally straining, and in some cases, they can’t physically do it.

For this reason, I do think that the issue should be handled sensitively, and could be handled more sensitively by parks than it currently is in some cases.

However, the unfortunate truth is that rides cannot accommodate for every single body type, and pandering to one body type excludes another, so parks simply need to limit how many people they exclude than try to accommodate everyone, in my view. I maintain that having test seats, modified seating and widely accommodating restraints is all that parks could really do.

 

[Craig]

Because they're fairly useless. They don't lock or give you an indication of 'notches'. All they indicate is that you can physically sit in the seat (rarely a problem and less likely to leave the guest inclined to try) and bring the restraint over your head.

I wouldn't say they're all useless. Some will either lock and have a lever to release them afterwards or have the LEDs to indicate whether you're able to ride or you can ride but have to use the "big boy" seats. It'd be great to have more "ride accurate" locking mechanisms featured on them. However, in this day and age the issue is that once you start featuring actual locking mechanisms on test seats, a staff member is pretty much required to operate it, they often can't just be left to self operation. That in the current climate of barely being able to staff rides at times is a difficult thing to achieve.

I will say test seats are often a bit "public". Some may find sitting in a test seat at the entrance in full view of masses of people entering to be just as embarrassing as queueing and sitting on the ride itself, so they just chance it on the actual ride instead. Of course if you hide it a bit, you may get less people using it anyway, so there's no real solution to that problem.

Who's saying that?

There's a lot said about the "big is beautiful" movement in the press. And I fully agree that being overweight shouldn't be defined as being ugly, far far from it. However, it shouldn't mask the fact that you do carry a much higher risk of health problems and be used as something to prevent that discussion taking place, which in some places I've seen happen. The two topics are not one and the same, but I've often seen that be the case.