Straw Police

The first line says a lot: "There is a difference between coddling and compassion." I've been trying to get this across since I got to the internet fatsphere. Those who pander to the 'obesity' agenda and its idiot mal-logic, unnecessarily reduce the level of their own ideals.

People insist, we must join the mainstream, answer their charges, normally I might agree, but the m/s defined us out of the picture. If I do not acknowledge your humanness by definition, you cannot argue with me because I've been prepared to suspend disbelief to pretend a human being is not sentient in the first place!

Responding to that, ignores this, immediately making you seem soft.

At the time I just came across like fists of fury. It still stands though. Until people like James Fell are given the chance to see exactly what they're saying and what it does or doesn't mean, they'll continue to embarrass themselves but more importantly, hold our minds in their mess.

They insist routinely, fatness is unhealth, fat people are unhealthiness in human form. Leading us straight to zomg let's get the best scientific minds on it like all other unhealth problems-to see off this deadly threat!!!

Have at it science, the floor is yours and I'm sure there's a Noble Prize or two in it, there are some fatties in authority.

The Chicago Tribune, which had published an article by Fell critical of Linda Bacon. I haven't read it, [the Trib insists the e-mail I've been using for years is invalid]. It published this correction, which to be fair, Fell reproduced himself;

… James S. Fell paraphrased nutrition professor Linda Bacon of the City College of San Francisco as saying “that being overweight is healthier.” Bacon did not say that; she said that most epidemiological studies on longevity have shown that overweight people live longest. The column also said that Bacon cited 5 percent as the number of people for whom weight loss would be sustained if they attempted it. She did mention the 5 percent figure in the discussion but did not make that conclusion. A paraphrase suggesting that she believes “burning fat causes inflammation” differed from her statement, which was, “Even during short-term dietary restriction, while people are on a diet, there is increased inflammation in the blood.”

Clear enough for you? He says he's no idea why they did this.There's nothing rough about showing Fell up for exactly what he is. For once, someone decided to apply primitive critical scrutiny to this kind of pretense of debate. I don't blame him for being surprised it wasn't quite the same bullshit as usual. Well done Trib staffer/s whoever you are!

Eeek energy that's been wasted on the Fell's of this world. They are largely irrelevant. All the patience, resilience, discipline, thought, extended to these sinkholes was needed for fat people to break down the barriers of difference between each other. Here's where the fuel needed for "intersectionality" goes/has gone.

The trouble with 'obesity' is if you accept this construct as a valid definition, your brain ends up defaulting to fat people are all the same (pathology). Your brain behaves as if real differences don't exist, it performs the same erasure as it does in others, even if you yourself are fat.

Those who seek to engage on these terms tend to be acting in bad faith (those less so tend to be quiet i.e. the silent majority), insisting the only way is to engage them constricts you into their limited illogical setting.

That ends up distorting a lot of the good sense. Fell is quick to note that "weight loss doesn't work" doesn't really scan [though not for the reasons he claims]. That's true, but the idea that calorie restriction is the same as weight loss comes from your frame Jamezzz.

If you replace "weight loss" with calorie restriction and see the former as the intended outcome, not the process that's supposed to bring it about- you get a clearer picture. It's not so much about whether weight loss is or isn't good for health. The issue is the only means chosen to bring it about not only doesn't deliver, it generates its own problems. That may have been the source of the "inflammation" or inflammatory markers LB mentioned.

If you could manipulate metabolic function so that reversing weight came as a natural consequence of that, just like it normally does everyday, you'd be able to measure the effects either way. Remember all those slim people with mental health problems, who end up stablized and fat/ter?

Metabolic function seems at times like a draw bridge, it doesn't just allow one thing through. And as ever, its context is often individual.

On the other hand, we know having histories of having calorie restriction as an ever present threat plus the energy conservation during calorie restriction can affect the way you feel. Ditto, weight gain as a product of such. There's SAD where your body goes into more of a hibernation mode, its deemed a form of depression. It's context.

What's intriguing about all this is the hostility towards HAES. Listed there as; weight Inclusivity, health Enhancement, respectful Care, eating for well-being, life-Enhancing Movement. Where's the devil's work in that?

“HAES has not done good things in terms of size acceptance. Unfortunately, HAES is like the choir talking to itself. It isn’t about dialogue and discussion, but instead confrontation and anger. That shuts down conversation. It alienates people. And it gives people who feel negative towards HAES to begin with more reasons to feel negative. There is zealotry involved. You’re not furthering your cause. You’re preaching to the converted so everyone can clap their hands, but they were already the hands that were clapping. There are no new hands there.”  ~ Yoni Freedhoff

How exquisite. Never has the crusade spoken politely, never did that make a jot difference to fat people. Watch the BL and virtually every other dieting programme. Now, apparently, we aren't able to match the delicate sensibilities of those who were and still are perfectly happy to abuse us without end.

I tell you fat people are spectacular. When fatz wise up it could really be something. The problem for Fell and his ilk is that they're in favour of fat people seeking to diet and exercise their bodies away [and mostly fail] only.

They feel debunking haes debunks FA, when in reallyy it debunks the healthism they're supposed to represent.

Fat=unhealth and healthy habits=creation of health plus slim=health.

If what are deemed healthy habits can't turn unhealth into health, that means those healthy habits don't create health. If folk don't believe restrictive diets and exercise habits create health, why act otherwise?

I must admit, I've become a tad skeptical about this myself. Even the idea that exercise is good for you, is also the reverse, the more you are able to move without that generating unpleasant feelings, the less likely you are to have had an easier life.

I used to strain to follow a healthist, healthy eating diet-as it was at the time. Whole grains, low-fat, a little lean meat, lots of leafy high-water veg and fruit, then later, less fruit. Low sugar, low-salt..... Now I know what people are going to say.

This is terrible, this is responsible for the @besity crisis, yes thanks I get it.

Please save it for the birds, IDGAD.

I'm done with the rigour which became orthorexia induced hyperphagia nervosa and this circular non-argument about diet, don't you get it, you're just going round and round in circles. Diet isn't the answer to regulating weight.

I called it a twin-track or parallel appetite. I endeavoured to eat my healthy diet and ended up with an appetite leak for what I was avoiding. I had a schzoid appetite.

Despite this, my hunger gradient still rose to highs I never imagined possible. I had episodes when it felt like the power of it was gripping my brain like a fist. 

All this came from attempts at both dietary and calorie restriction.

Though I'd never bought the idea that if I did x, y, that would =health. It was too pat. I'd seen too much as a child of what life does to people and their health to believe that. But I did feel, I'll doing my best to be healthy and this would make me slim.

Even that seemingly reasonable aim went screwball.

Investing fat people with pathology means we are seen as not healthy. Yet, haes is either no good or no one could possibly be fat and be living according to the rules, don't try it, give up, its hopeless, no chance, no way, no how....only dieting or nothing will doooo.....

Where Should HAES Go From Here? Perhaps it should just go away, because it doesn’t appear to be helping.

"Perhaps"? Oh surely, don't be so coy. This is what all FA's detractors want. It's all they've ever wanted from day one and its all you really ever want. It shows how out of touch they are that they think people who have spent years dieting would give up on their says so. I keep saying to fat people, bullying aside, you ultimately made the choice to diet and continue dieting. I know I did. And when I had to stop, I made that decision too. I did not consult any of these critics.

FAT ACCEPTANCE is still here, so I guess their requests aren't doing a lot......