Indivisible

The current school of thought droning on about how people have never been so divided tend not to bother with no disagreement but one or other parties insist there is/are.

Ad hominem-literally, to the man or person.

Everybody signed on to slim down or become slimmer under their own steam. Nobody disagreed. The disagreement came when the results of a particularly singular method were deemed biologically (and politically) incorrect.

 This is the major sticking point, not simply quarrelling with biology, but blocking the proper use of biological function.

Currently George Monbiot "We’re in a new age of obesity. How did it happen? You’d be surprised" et al are saying;

.......food companies have invested heavily in designing products that use sugar to bypass our natural appetite control mechanisms, and in packaging and promoting these products to break down what remains of our defences, including through the use of subliminal scents. They employ an army of food scientists and psychologists to trick us into eating more than we need, while their advertisers use the latest findings in neuroscience to overcome our resistance.

Meaning, we have the capacity to strengthen our natural appetite control mechanisms, build up our defences against them being breached, can use psychology to trick ourselves into eating less than we need, and to use the latest neuroscience findings to triumph in leaving our resistance untroubled.

By reversing the effects purportedly achieved by Industrial Food.

The great thing about using the same mechanics to reverse his assertions is this will either uphold them or not. Which is science's usual starting point. Be sure and mention this to your medic or otherwise healthcare professional, sundry fat phobes and such.

Metabolism can be manipulated using non-drug means and Industrial Food knows all about it, according to George Monbiot. Call him.

He also mentions using "subliminal scents" to alter metabolic settings. I myself have said use of light (and probably darkness, separately and in concert) should be tried as a means to alter metabolic function via the eyes, brain and ergo neuro-endocrine glands.

Starvation and drugs are not simply too crude to do this in the right way, they are irrelevant and they poison the body as collateral damage. Plus surgery, is just violent assault. 

Roxane Gay recently reminded us of how far back this rage against the body goes with the case of Sancho I (935-966),

Sancho would....have to travel to Cordova to undergo the slimming treatment; First of all, the physician shut Sancho up in a room, where he lay on a bed with his feet and hands tied. He only left his captivity to take long walks during which he was pulled with ropes by slaves, while leaning on an assistant. When the exercise was over, Sancho was obliged to take endless steam baths.... To prevent food intake, Hasday ordered that Sancho's mouth be sewn up, with only a small opening being left so that with the aid of a straw he could sip liquids (“Hebrew herbs”), which gave him continuous diarrhea. It appears that Sancho was only fed fluids throughout his stay at Cordova, receiving daily seven infusions combining salt water, orange-flower water, water boiled with vegetables, and fruit. These very probably contained theriac, a drug consisting of a variable number of ingredients, sometimes more than 70, including opium. 

Starvation, forced labour and drugs and even some mutilation, albeit reversible, unlike the kind currently being promoted by the likes of Monbiot.

Why do 'obesity' peddlers insist on framing this as a whodunnit? How about they try whogivesafuq?

I saw a photo of myself only a few weeks ago, as a preteen already diet veteran. You would have had trouble picking me out of the photo, on the grounds of body mass. I don't know why slim people never listen to what they project onto us, as if this by definition excludes them, "Normalisation of Plus Size etc.,". If not being able to notice size fattened, Monbiot himself would be a target of his own cultism.

And if dieting had worked, I would never have been one myself. That's how it happened George. I feel like Kano, I lived it.

Cults tend to degenerate into doom laden paranoia. Self correction comes hard to them. Their articles of faith do not engage critical faculties. Round and round and round circling the same themes, tightening all the time, until there's a massive shoot out with the FBI or some such.

Sorry old bean, some of us got off that merry-go-round a long time ago.

A little Bit More 'Obesity' Agnosticism

Holy Guacamole!

Courtesy of estimable Linda Bacon, I just caught up with this,

Some might say that given obesity rates, we should give these obesity researchers the benefit of the doubt and let them collect more data. But here’s the thing: obesity researchers don’t deserve our trust. And despite decades of measuring and billions of dollars of funding, obesity research has not reduced obesity rates.

If these researchers want to come anywhere near our children, they need to come with more than a 50-year track record of failure.

Lols. Round of applause for Kasey Edwards.

Yes, she's restricting her fact-based dismissal to "when it comes to handing out practical advice on nutrition........" But it's a start. It should give activists a sense that slim people aren't so special needs that they have to be pandered to endlessly.

It would seem there is a limit to how much 'obesity researchers' can interfere with childrens' esteem and sense of themselves. They don't have open house.

Decades ago I assumed children would stop this cult in its tracks. One of the more shocking things in all this has been the utter disregard and even direct targeting of children as a route to getting away with things they couldn't get away with, with adults.

If anyone wanted to know how low these drug and mutilation peddlers are it should have been that, but, hey, some times we learn hard.

One of my main motivations for getting involved in the fatsphere was a deep sense that I didn't want another generation of children to grow up in the barren wasteland of negative propaganda with no adults really seeming to speak up to defend them from this.

So it's heartening to think peak 'obesity' could be on the horizon, even if only a prospect, and only in the case of children. I'll take that. I have always said, let's agree to leave children out of this. 'Obesity' shills won't though, they know that you can unseat people's connection with their own experience only in childhood.

They truly are some of the most dishonourable people I've ever encountered. It's not that they're evil, they're just empty. You can often hear them echooooooo.

The above highlight of the utter irrelevance and failure of this noise, ought to be the first sentence anyone mentions when speaking of 'obesity'. The fifty years useless/irrelevant/ineffectual/repetitious 'obesity' industry/science/research/public health whatever, wishes to tell us more of the same old shit its been telling us all that time and promises for ever more-with their ceaseless projections of their continued pointlessness.

The findings suggest that the proportion of individuals in the population defined as overweight will decline slowly in the next 20 years. However, the proportion of the population considered obese will increase substantially and could represent as much as 45% of the entire population by 2035. The proportion of morbidly obese will also increase considerably. These trends are likely to impact the actual costs of health care considerably.

Yes, because you can absolutely guarantee that 'obesity science' will produce nothing of any earthly use, despite the current touting of gastric evisceration.  That's because "public health" bullshitters know 'obesity' is a construct and a biological non-entity.

More 'obesity' agnosticism is only just. 

Sated

This "Insatiable" trailer ruckus gives us an opportunity to look at  'obesity' really is about.

....the main character, Patty, is ....Debby Ryan wearing a fat suit.
In the trailer, an overweight Ryan (wearing a prosthetic fat suit)

That split between a (slim) person inside a fat suit is the 'obesity' construct. The entreaty heard across the globe-'obesity' is bad for you, requires a "you" that is separate from 'obesity'. The "you" is a slim person "living in a fat body".

It's non-anatomical take on a fat(ter) person's body, through the eyes of someone that isn't, but is trying to conceptualise it, from the outside.

Before we were familiar with the notion of our bodies as an arrangement of self-regenerating parts. The brainfart of imagining a person ensconced in fat, rather than a body that is simply bigger means there is a lack of separation found in Munchausen's-by-Proxy, when a carer uses someone else to be the vehicle for them to falsify illness.

Think Eminem's lines about being made to believe he was sick when he wasn't in "Cleaning out my closet".

'Obesity' is the stigma-not stigmatised as promoters of it are currently trying to pretend to salvage their dead conceit. That which is forbidden is taboo. Being substituted means you don't appear.

Incidentally, prosthesis; "an artificial device that replaces a missing body part".

The target is sci-fi but real people have become fodder for drugs and mutilation, to the extent that an NAFLD crisis is cheerfully being predicted-for when even more aggressive drug pushing is in play.  How coy of them not to mention the liver and kidney failure that accompanies being treated as a drug silo.

All blamed on 'obesity' of course, a biological non-entity.

The drive to define people as slim person in fat suit is not hatred of fat people, it's never losing the reflected image of slimness, eerily like the myth of "Narcissus". A fat person coming into view interrupts that reflected/reflection of slimness. That must be kept intact at all times, unlike fat bodies.

Antipathy is both reaction and facilitator of force. What it doesn't explain is insisting on a means that cannot deliver such a universality of reflection. And appearing enraged by this, even whilst continuing to rigidly enforce this.

Refusing to accept the failure of CRIWL seems to have given people a sense of weight hierarchy, making what would have been fleeting, feel permanent, and somehow right. These fee fees have overtaken and subsumed all else.

We're so accustomed to being this welded to your size-indeed the assault on fatness is always based on the notion that recognising your size with above equanimity preserves it- "Normalization of Plus Size and the Danger of Unseen Overweight and Obesity in England"-we don't realise that its probably abnormal to be this attached, psychologically speaking.

Fat people's response-holding little allegiance to their size, which seemed like a weakness, is what a proper sense of perspective looks like. It's not that you aren't permitted to notice your size or even to want to preserve or alter it. It's the fetishization of particular size as representing a whole set of inherent value(s) without which you know longer feel like or recognise yourself.

If you are unhappy or dissatisfied about your size, that shouldn't have any affect on how you fundamentally value or view yourself. You should be focused solely on how the body works and how to change it efficiently. Not on propping up a brutal and failed method, by mutilating and/or drugging. 

Even if others take issue, it shouldn't have that much of a hold over your idea of self. Any desire to be able to alter weight, merely demands an understanding of the mechanics of the body.

Activists like Sofie Hagen have managed to cotton on to what 'obesity' is, but think they can bump the slim+ fat suit out of the way and step into its place. 

Let fat people play the role of fat people. .....it’s much nicer to look at a thin person in a fat suit – it gives the illusion that fatness is a thing that we can just take off, removing the awfulness that is before your eyes. 

That's 'obesity' cultism to a tee, make fat people play a person in a fat suit. Robbing fat people of their own idea of self. If something is there not to see you, but to maintain contact with a fractured volatile (weight-based) self, then stepping in front of that will merely obscure that view, you won't be looked at any more than now. That suit may look unconvincing to us, but I'll bet that's closer to the composite in people's heads.

It's not sight but thought that is the issue. The only way to change that is to refuse to play the slim + any more, disregard and block it at every turn. Whether that's pointing out that 'obesity' has nothing to do with you and you won't have it used on your medical records et al, always batting it back and defining yourself as a person.

This is in the hands of fat people, not slim. They've shown you their hand. They're prepared to do anything they can get away with to preserve you forced to play slim + and the insistence that you must build your life around calorie restriction.

No matter how they brand change or window dress, pretend to be sympathetic, fight "obesity stigma" and so on, that will never change until you wear them out trying to press it on you.

If we all do that, what can they do? Civil disobedience should be our default.

Fat actors should play what they are, people Becky Williams in Empire or even, "Sierra Burgess is a Loser". The premise of the latter one has its issues, but it appears to be about a person. The trailer even features a response I can't remember being highlighted when someone comes at you with ire that should knock you over, only to respond in a calm even distracted manner. 

Whoever wrote that seems to be observing someone closely enough to spot that. Whether good or bad that's the most important thing writers need to grasp with any people. Leave your stereotypes, jettison 'obesity' its bollocks and has nothing to do with real people.

Observe people, truly observe, you will be surprised and inspired. If you wrote from there, you would blow everyone away.

Fat people are bullied, unbullied and even bullies, but all fat people look at themselves through this lens-until they stop, against the grain, including their own. This would not be happening if this was simple bullying. The rage shown in the trailer for Insatiable is about that, not being fat. It comes from being subject to what you know is unjust treatment and the frustration of not knowing how to stop it.

Fat people don't want revenge, their own lens the same as its other people's, they feel what is being said is fair comment. They wish to resolve their "faux pas" as swiftly as possible. The pain is similarly acute, but its of feeling that you are falling short morally or ethically.

That's another difference full of possibilities for those keen and clever enough to observe it. 

Not being able to look through oneself as a whole being, creates a basic dissonance at the root of one's sense of self that 'sensitizes' making other things stick that otherwise wouldn't.