Saturday, 19 October 2013

Personal Responsibility II

This idiot's obviously referring to the AMA's recent mind numbing decision, so why didn't he say that? It's just has to be the "fault" of fat people. Even though its obviously the fault of his own profession. That tangle is courtesy of the absence of criticism of fat phobia. Slim privilege doesn't like to confront itself, even when it is disgusted by itself.

Producing the weird phenomena of people who disagree defining mood disorder as disease, refusing to state that openly. Yet critiquing it all the same, by projecting it onto fat people. Weirder still, you've got people who do agree with defining mood disorders/neuroses as disease also dismantling that trope in fat people. Suggesting that they're agreement with is purely predicated on the amount of sympathy they feel for a person.

To put it in their favoured allegory, if two people broke their leg, they'd put the one they liked in plaster and tell the one they didn't to take "personal responsibility".

The suggestion here is of fatness = mental problem + eating because of said mental problem. As mental problem is supposed to equal something you can't just get rid of-its a chemical imbalance/"disease like cancer".

You get a totally different attitude to the same thing. Though fat people are supposed to have two parts, mental and its physical marker. By some magic, two are supposed to be more soluble than having just one mental part. These people have become bootstrappers. They would bitterly decry this as the ultimate in stigma.  They're forced into this ludicrous position, that goes against their grain, due to their refusal to acknowledge the truth about calorie restriction.

 I've said this so many times, it beggars belief. Well, it should.

This is all set in the refusal to study fatness and/or fat people honestly. Instead, it's forced into categories that already exist for other purposes.

It does not fit any of them. Nothing truly fits a category until properly define it on its own terms. Then you can see where it fits, overlaps or neither. Because fatness, weight doesn't fit, it ends up being a suggestion of all things and none.

A further nonsense is it's been defined as 'disease' for ages. That never came from studying fatness objectively, but from deciding it was all bad. It never bothered with underlying process, until most people were on board with it as disease and could see it only in those terms. Unlike other abuses of the word, it was used precisely to stigmatize and de normalize being fat. To suppress it, by forcing people to diet.

People compare it to things like alcoholism, but that's not a person. Ditto smoking, drug taking. Seeing bodies as excess calories, still cannot do it. Its really the absence of sustained or rigorous critique that allows that.

On the one hand, you have "obesity researchers" and medical professionals claiming people are disease, others raging against excess calories being seen as anything but conscious volition. But, instead of having it out with each other, both sides keep addressing their arguments to fat people. Not to persuade or charm, but as if we're the ones making the arguments they're objecting to, without addressing the source. This is unusual.

Parts of their arguments fall over each other. Fat is sick, but not disease- because that could slip it into the 'behavioural disease/addiction' category, which would mean the onus of doing something would go where it usually is, on those who get paid for that.  For some reason, they seem to think that's over the top.

I'm not sure there's much point in saying fat people should consider pointing this out, especially to those who apply different rules to themselves. Anyone who talks this version of "personal responsibility" should live by it.

We also ought to make clear that fatness doesn't fit any of these categories. Not disease, addiction, neurosis, mental/behavioural disorder. It is metabolic, it is lead by the body. Yes, other things can be too, no doubt, however weight is more so, we can see this by the low efficacy of calorie restriction. It just doesn't make sense that this would be so if fatness was all in the mind. 

I said earlier that looking at the mental state of fat people is an unknown quantity. Many of us have experienced changes mental and physical through letting go of the 'obese' mentality. I always felt if everyone received good life counselling, we'd increase the health of the population, manifold.

So yeah, if you pick out a randomn group of people and improve their mental health, you'll probably do that. I doubt you'll make them all routinely slim, effects may vary and may be minimal to most.

As usual, no trials have been done, that's the way to find out. That's typical assertion without foundation.

If society wants those of us who wish to divest ourselves totally of negativity it has put on us to find this out, then it will have to be open about that.

I used to criticize FA by saying if we fat people haven't told people how we feel, how will they know what we think? Equally, if fat haters want us to take "personal responsibility" i.e. beyond where they've left it. They'll have to have the guts to out their privilege and tell fat people that directly. They'll have to say, "You have to do better than this." Or how do they expect most to know?

 Not only do many of them not have the guts. They don't wish to lose that protection and they're under no pressure. Though they may drop themselves in it out of sheer stupidity. Their trap has been built by ego. Defining fat people as inherently inferior is the kicker here, it means they cannot tell us to better their standard, without that being a painful psychological blow.
All for keeping up worthless fantasies.

Anyone claiming fat haters personify human intellect, personal responsibility and a superior sense of consequence, should consider this.

No comments:

Post a Comment