Motivation (Part 3): What Motivates Kirstie Alley?

So what motivates Kirstie Alley (or any of us for that matter)? Will we ever be able to answer this?

Let's try to apply the theory that we have exposed in Parts 1 and 2. I have to make some assumptions based on what I know about her life. Most people of even a moderate degree of success fulfill their Level One needs. Let's presuppose that she has done this. The Level Two need of Safety and Soundness is probably being filled as well. I do not know of other medical issues she may have but I am assuming, since she is still large, that her weight issues are not tied to them. With this in mind, Diet and Physical Fitness (DPF) are probably not on Level Two for her. So let's also presuppose Level Two is fulfilled at this point in her life. The question becomes, 'where does Kirstie put DPF in her hierarchy?' Some people put their DPF in the Social Needs bucket...particularly those in the Media. Their social circles place a high value on how they look. Additionally, affinity needs get fulfilled with intimate relationships and, unfortunately, many intimate relationships start and are maintained based on appearance. So, in that case, DPF becomes critical. Friends and Family also typically play a role in Level Three.

So, it is quite apparent that Ms. Alley is not taking care of DPF. It is either a Level Three need that she is not fulfilling OR she has put it on Level Four and only thinks of it when it becomes an Esteem Need issue. If she has a lot of support and affinity in spite of being very large, she may have put the DPF priority at the top of her pyramid and is simply not addressing it. She then would be in the position of only addressing her DPF when it becomes something that she feels is inhibiting her career. If it is sitting at Level Four, it is in a place where many things can derail it as a priority, in particular, Level Three things.

There is one other possible answer to this though. She went through a divorce in 1997 to her ex-husband Parker Stevenson. That may have triggered her weight loss issues culminating in the 2005 appearance on Oprah. For many who simply let their weight and personal appearance get out of hand, when they lose affinity/love and feel like they need to find love again, they move DPF from a Level Four to a Level Three, but only TEMPORARILY. When they get their DPF under control and regain some affinity ties, they move DPF back to Level Four. I believe, based on Kirstie's pattern, that this is what she did. In all fairness to Kirstie, I am using her (somewhat unfairly since I do not even know her) as an example and my evaluation is based on much supposition.

I think that the majority of yo-yo dieting happens this way. Instead of putting DPF somewhere in our personal needs hierarchy and making its placement permanent, we move it around to suit our temporary wishes and then it gets bumped by other things.

What is my recommendation to Kirstie about her weight? It is the same advice I would give, and will give, to any of you that want to go on the Optifast (or any other) diet.

Start with a personal assessment of what the diet actually means to you. Where does this diet fit on your personal hierarchy needs chart? The lower (lower meaning a most basic need and a high priority) it is on your chart, the higher probability of success you will have with it. What in your life will trump your dieting efforts? Will it be trumped by work?...by family?...by social life? Is it going to take a permanent place on your needs chart or is it temporary because it is serving a temporary purpose?

If you need to lose a serious amount of weight, you need to assess its value to you. Losing the weight is difficult. There will be a lot of obstacles to derail that goal. There is something even more difficult after you complete the diet and that is KEEPING THE WEIGHT OFF. That is the real battle. That is where the Personal Needs Hierarchy Pyramid for you becomes critical. You need to put your DPF in a permanent place. You need to assess this in your life because extreme dieting and yo-yo rebounding can actually be more unhealthy than never losing the weight in the first place.

Is there a value you can tie to your weight loss that makes you permanently move it to a lower and more important base level of your needs? If physical safety is not one of those things, how about the monetary cost of being fat?

I recently took a look at our family's financial situation and decided I needed to upgrade my life insurance. Without getting into my personal finances in a public forum, let me say one thing. A life insurance policy with the same payback and term provisions for me as a fat, high cholesterol person would have been $150 more PER MONTH than the same policy for me under my current 205 lb frame with low cholesterol. Additionally, because I have not had the weight off for at least a year, they ADDED HALF THE WEIGHT BACK when calculating my new policy. If I had lost the weight 2 years ago, my policy right now would be $50 per month less. So in real terms, being fat, per just my life insurance policy alone, would cost me an additional $200 per month. That is $2400 more per year and $48,000 over a twenty year policy. That is a tangible cost that you can use to put the value of DPF into the low level, high priority area's of your Personal Needs Hierarchy Pyramid.

Doing these things will separate for you whether or not the diet is a goal for your life, or whether it is a "wish to be thin."

This kind of look takes a lot of hard work and commitment.

My thanks to Kirstie Alley for involuntarily providing the inspiration for these past 3 blog posts! Not everyone needs to show perfect success in order to be inspiring. I have poked fun at her (honestly, I make fun of myself a lot too) but truly wish the best for her.

Next: Sticking With IT!!