Wednesday, 10 November 2010

Premises, premises

This is from Friday 7th November 2008

Note: apparently blogger thinks I am unable to decide for myself when my posts should go out. So in it's wisdom it has decided to post it where it wants to post it. Due to this incompetence, I've had to tell you where it is supposed to be.

Premise logic a previous statement from which another is inferred. An underlying assumption.
Fat acceptance isn't widely recognised and people do not want to know about it, the truth spoils the delusions they want to shore up. What we have instead of fat acceptance versus whatever, is a fat haters monologue split into two. So our part is written by the fat haters and its basically whatever they think is the opposite of what their view.

We are treated (and sometimes treat ourselves) as if we have not grown up in the same society having been formed by the same influences regarding weight eating and so on. We are as saturated with dieting culture and its assumptions as much as anyone else. The difference is, we are trying to get away from it. We are escaping because we have broken ranks with the delusion.

That is an important distinction, we are not necessarily going towards something that we can clearly see, our momentum is away from something else. Our aim is not set in stone, although it is assumed and presumed to be. That impression comes from the nature of fat hating, it is seen as the only rational viable, or possible view. Disagreeing with it, becomes the opposite of it-when a view is drenched in moral goodness, it posits itself against the forces of badness, so FA has that mantle thrust upon it.

That is useful to shore up convention, what FA actually is, isn't. The greater dynamic of people in FA is that of fleeing something- internalized fat hating and all that triggers, supports and deepens it.

This is why many FA views and underlying assumptions come directly from what we are seeking to get away from. It's inevitable, due to the grip it has held over everyone and the lack of consistent powerful opposition. We share with the mainstream views in many instances; dieting fails because its hard-when its hard because its a failure-or weight loss and weight loss dieting are the same-they aren't or people on lower incomes are less active-they do physical jobs and so on. We could be more rigorous in our questioning of them, on general principle, that is even when they don't stand out as wrong, but as a matter of course.

I think some of the problem is our desire to stick with the mainstream, rather than to find our truths, what they mean and where they lead. Sometimes its as if it's enough to just get away from something horrible and that in and of itself creates something better. I've never encountered that mentality before and I feel it's over optimistic, to put it mildly.

No comments:

Post a Comment