High fashion targets the affluent and upper class which as a whole tends to suffer less from obesity. PDF - Adult Obesity and Socioeconomic Status; More educated, higher income, professionals, etc. are less obese.

Designer fashion easily costs at least $1,000 per item for a simple dress and over $10,000 for more formal wear. For example, Bergdorf Goodman's online store. Thus, one wealthy woman's attire for a night can easily cost as much as a cheap car. To maintain such high price points, the value of the brand's image must be maintained; exclusivity is key. Changing the brand's vision to include obese women would be very likely damaging to the firm and cause it to lose money.

It is more profitable and easier to target a very few affluent people who are willing to spend a lot rather than a large population at a lower price point. An analogy would be like investment banking; work on a few multi-billion dollar deals rather than deal with a couple million customers who only generate a couple dollar each.

Anthony Flew coined a famous fallacy to describe that kind of argument....It's a reflection of the way religious people feel good about themselves for being charitable to their local church without actually donating to charity.

Isn't what you did right there an example of that fallacy; by defining religious giving as not charity when they clearly believe their donations are doing good, however they define 'good'. Whether you believe religious giving is charitable or not does not negate the fact that a person has chosen to give up a share of their economic resource. =P; haha, jk, hope it doesn't come off that I'm arguing with you or anything.

But in general I agree with you, people whether religious or not need to be more proactive in understanding where their money is really going.

but few churches spend more than a third of their donations on actual charity, and of the remainder most don't spend more than a quarter.

That may be true but it's not a reflection of the generosity of a religious vs. a non-religious person. Many charitable organizations run into high overhead and administrative costs as well - 20 worst charities in america.. This author makes some valid arguments regarding why he never donates to (major) charities.

Funny, most religious people think of themselves as belonging to a religion from the time they were born.

I've never heard of that but I don't really talk about religion to anyone so I wouldn't know. However, that seems quite impossible from my perspective as a person can't believe what they don't know. Isn't that what baptism is for in the Christian faith, a declaration that they are a believer (and yes, I understand in Catholicism there is infant baptism, but there are many other denominations where that is not practiced). Another issue I have with studies like these are that many people would identify themselves as say a Christian but have never even read the Bible completely or attend a church service regularly. Can such a person truly profess to be a Christian?

It was the children in non-religious homes most likely to be generous toward a stranger. The longer a child had lived in a religious home, the stingier he was compared to his secular peers.

I'm sure there's a study or article about it out there somewhere, but I'd be more interested in comparing % donations by religious adults against non-religious adults (or possibly some other metric). The issue I have with this study is that I don't consider any child to be "religious"; they haven't had time to digest, understand and reason what (their) religion is and is not.

religious parents were more likely than non-religious ones to consider their children empathetic and sensitive to the plight of others.

What I take away from this article is that religious parents need to be more proactive in setting a good example and not relying on their religious organization to raise good children.

I've never heard of anyone travelling for heartbreak; I'd assume a person in such a situation would not be in the mood. If the intention of your question is to find a place to visit to get over heart-break, my suggestion would be to find a non-traditional tourist destination that will give you a chance to explore (and to travel with a close friend if possible as well) and to see something completely new and unexpected. Some places on my list include:

Reunion Island: Reunion Island Tourism Website, Wikipedia

Seychelles: Seychelles Tourism Website, Wikipedia

Of course, this ignores the issue of cost since no information is given.