If your reading of being fat is an internalization of your community and/or society's lores about fat or fatness, or you consider yourself to be up on the science, until you are describing any aspect of fatness seeking to understand and explain it as accurately as possible above all else, you are not seeking a fat perspective.
Whether you are fat or not.
By seeking to fit fatness into a constraining model of disease, the obesity industry cannot rightly describe itself as objective, therefore cannot honestly portray itself in opposition to lay folks', (such as in FAetc.,) subjectivity, especially as they have even substituted that for their own ignorant and reductive version.
This cannot match the richness of actual experience once it emerges slow and blinking from under the light deprived layers of outer and inner repression.
It doesn't mean that no one but fat people can evince the experience of being fat, not at all, but in order for non fatz to do this they must fulfil a legitimate rendering of the outside perspective, the same in essence as that of a fat person who seeks honest accuracy rather than to craft and validate pre-destined ideology.
The one who is not experiencing a state of being must jettison any agenda to degrade others to aggrandize themselves or to pursue a sense of self identity, even more than those experiencing said state, to engage honestly with what they perceive and observe in others. They must question their own feelings and assumptions as much if not more than the object of their study, if they cannot or do not wish then that disqualifies them from a fat perspective.
They are only of interest in relaying the unfolding story of their own fantasy or ideology of fatness. For instance, it may be interesting to note the concept of having 'fat days'.
I don't say this won't touch upon any truths, maybe numerous ones although they will have to be deciphered carefully according to those biases. The writer Chimamanda Ngozie Adichie described stereotypes as problematic not because they are necessarily untrue, but because they are incomplete.
Unless you can be open to interpreting what you see freely, you can be as useless as if you'd seen nothing. The issue is not observing fat people openly and comparing notes to achieve mutual communication and understanding. It's the dominant motive of a conclusion that doesn't value actual truth, but the construction of it to fit a pre determined model of pathology and disease. That and the desire to make fat people continue to submit to this regardless is all important.
After spending years passively internalizing this model, your mental input becomes a choice between how far you can go with it before it exhausts your capacities or to protect yourself from it and survive it. Either will lead to rejection eventually, it was inevitable that falsehood would eventually be rejected by some for your own actual experience.
The subtlety of this effect can be amazing, I've mentioned the way fat people (and others) can suddenly look at photos, sometimes very familiar ones and 'see' themselves for the first time. Rather than through the lens of fat loathing.
Clearly, I don't expect everyone fat or thin to feel as jaded by falsehood, we can see from observation what a thrilling joy it is for many. I can see, perceive, even sense the rush of pleasure it gives them to continue with constructs which demean others, often themselves.
I'm not even that upset about that more bored by it because, I do pity someone for needing to get pleasure that way, for counting themselves so cheaply, when they are supposed to be winning. When I'm aware of an opportunity to do similar on the whole I find it unnerving to succumb aware that pushing someone down doesn't make you go anywhere but merely makes in look so in comparison to them. It's partly a weird kind of pride, if I cannot raise myself, I cannot lower others to appear to do so, how embarrassing, how desperate!
Subjective, is often defined in opposition to objective as a biased and overly skewered personal vision.
taking place within the mind and modified by individual bias;
"a subjective judgment"
immanent: of a mental act performed entirely within the mind;
"a cognition is an immanent act of mind"
It of course can be, ditto objectivity, it too happens "entirely" inside the mind of someone, the observer. Clearly this vantage point is supposed to make observation objective, but it doesn't necessarily certainly not if overwhelmed by it's own agenda.
Both this and the base ignorance of an agenda formed from the outside to serve itself have made an actual truthful fat experience objective in comparison, even sometimes a partial and biased one.
That is what can happen when you set such a low standard of 'objectivity'.