OKC and Tulsa land in another Top 10 list - Worst cities for women.

[WilliamTell]

With high rates of heart disease, smokers and fast-food joints, these cities landed at the bottom of our list of 100 healthiest cities for women in America.

America's Unhealthiest Cities for Women | Photo Gallery - Yahoo! Shine

[Plutonic Panda]

Yahoo list are not very credible.

[venture]

Yahoo list are not very credible.

If this was a Top 10 Best Cities for Women, people would be all over it and supporting it. More appropriately, this is a SELF Magazine poll that was posted in a section on Yahoo. Does it make a difference? Not really. We still know Oklahoma is one of the fattest and most unhealthy places to live. Welcome to the South.

[dcsooner]

Yahoo list are not very credible.

On this issue they are. Look around

[Cocaine]

Yeah that list makes no sense. At least give me more reasons than smoking and fast food.

[RadicalModerate]

"Worst cities for women" . . . ?
I doubt the veracity of any pole that says the women in OKC or Tulsa are either dogs or hogs. Even a "Yahoo" pole.
It just ain't so . . . Even if Tulsa spelt back'ards is Aslut.

[adaniel]

^
Exactly. On anything that's weighted towards health, Oklahoma will always rank at the bottom. Can't say I'm surprised by this one bit.

[boscorama]

Self Magazine?

[venture]

Self Magazine?

Just stating who the source was. Who knows who they are. :-P

[SoonerDave]

Yet again, we have a poll (if really even that) intended to rationalize a pre-determined result. The ongoing intent is to villify the environment, while holding the individual harmless. This poll should be an insult to women across the state, because it presupposes that they are all too stupid not to succumb to the siren song of junk food and smoking, and are inherently incapable of making the kinds of decisions necessary for a proper balance of life options. It further appears, as I review it, that this isn't even a poll, its an entirely subjective list based on the author's predispositions of what makes something implicitly "unhealthier" for women than men. Just more bad web-based pseudojournalism.

[venture]

Yet again, we have a poll (if really even that) intended to rationalize a pre-determined result. The ongoing intent is to villify the environment, while holding the individual harmless. This poll should be an insult to women across the state, because it presupposes that they are all too stupid not to succumb to the siren song of junk food and smoking, and are inherently incapable of making the kinds of decisions necessary for a proper balance of life options. It further appears, as I review it, that this isn't even a poll, its an entirely subjective list based on the author's predispositions of what makes something implicitly "unhealthier" for women than men. Just more bad web-based pseudojournalism.

I don't disagree but 2 points.

1) We can trash this listing all we want, if it was reversed people would be trumpeting it because people in OKC have some weird list fetish.

2) People stupid enough? Well...I went to Walmart a couple nights ago, and...

[RadicalModerate]

Yet again, we have a poll (if really even that) intended to rationalize a pre-determined result . . . This poll should be an insult to women across the state . . . It further appears, as I review it, that this isn't even a poll, its an entirely subjective list based on the author's predispositions of what makes something implicitly "unhealthier" for women than men. Just more bad web-based pseudojournalism.

This poll IS an insult to women across the state . . . except for those dumb enough to read Self Magazine and/or shop at Walmart who are too stupid, fat, lazy and cheap to realize they are being insulted. If I didn't know better, I'd say that this "poll" was started by some yahoo who is suffering from FallinThunder envy and . . .