Personal Responsibility Exemplars

A reminder, fat people's personal responsibility has been exemplary. Though one would be unwise to take anything said by weight quackists on face value, it's worth repeating. With absolutely nothing, we have been expected to alter our bodies to an extent that falls under the balliwick of the (Western) medical profession, with little to no accurate science, no medical training whilst brainwashed to abuse ourselves without mercy or cease, disregarding, burying our own true feelings, reality, actions and their results.

We repeated dieting over and over, many of us failing pretty much every time, or grinding off weight at great cost in time and effort, only to see it return with no effort in a half or even quarter of the time it took to shed it.

Every time the latter did this, they endeavoured to try again. Every time the former failed, they endeavoured to try again, expecting to succeed all the way, until we learnt. We had an education.

So much responsibility did we take that I find myself randomly identifying with the chronically and genuinely ill, who have to do numerous things to try and stay on an even keel, because of doing so much.

We did all this without being sick. Not that I want to throw sick or disabled people under the bus-some are obviously both, but there's something about having to do stuff to keep you going or alive even, that can compel in ways not having to simply cannot.

We didn't have to do all this, we did it anyway. For the cause.

Any compulsion we had was largely contrived, it's one of the reasons fat people have been so loath to give up on that, it shapes you.

This is not sad, such is the extent of our taking everything on ourselves, I feel we touched something outside the cramped norms pressed on us. It showed us that what is "expected" of us, is deliberately set way below all our capacities. It was in some ways, an outer perimeter of what we're expected to be able to do.

It has ended the doctor/ patient contract as we know it and for that, I think we should celebrate and be thanked by all still held in its thrall.

Denial of Service

"I was denied NHS treatment because my BMI was too high", note there's no term such as "deemed" in between "was" and "too".One of the cases featured in this article is a woman who had gallstones, gallstones. When I hear that term I think, pain. Everyone who's ever told me of their experience of them has emphasised usually right off the bat that they are excruciatingly, painful.

I didn't even know it was possible to have painless ones [it is],

Gallstones don't usually cause any symptoms. But if a gallstone blocks one of the bile ducts, it can cause sudden, severe abdominal pain, known as biliary colic.

This woman was told she couldn't be referred to hospital for further treatment on the grounds of weight.

On one occasion it went on for more than 10 hours," she says. "I was exhausted, but in too much pain to sleep, scared to move in case it made it worse, but wanting to move in order to try and find some relief."

After nine months of this, albeit, intermittently. 

We're reluctant to call this what it is, a refusal of treatment. Doctors are effectively drawing the line at weight. I don't care to get itty-bitty on this. If people think, demanding people diet, is not refusing treatment, then they clearly have no grasp of what being refused treatment means. In all humility, I can do nothing for them.

Personally, as I keep saying, I have no problem with doctors refusing treatment, but unlike others I see this as a two-way negotiation. I want what I feel is needed to make this work for me not the professionals, and that is the tools I need to make a go of actual self-management, plus provision of medical expertise that excludes any 'obesity' or "lifestyle" nonsense.

The standard treatment for gallstones is gallbladder removal – or cholecystectomy – but Karen was told she couldn't be put on the waiting list for surgery until after she'd lost weight and her BMI was below 30. Instead, she was advised to manage her symptoms by eating an extremely low-fat diet – which, she adds, did at least help her to lose weight quickly [choosing from scientifically researched methods and techniques that use her conscious mind to alter her body's function.]

I'm giving you a sense of what is required here. I have no objection whatsoever to managing myself, I've been trying to do it since I was about seven years old. What I have learnt in all that time is self management isn't shit, without tools that actually do what you require. That demands real knowledge, not made up crud like 'obese'.

Obviously, those fat people who are-sick of being their own doctors-can stick with this and fight against "medical fatphobia", fuqdat. I'd just as soon have use of more of my body's own abilities, if you don't mind.

Appreciate Freedom!

One of the reason's fat people keep giving away what they have like it's so much trash, is not taking time to appreciate the opportunities presented by self acceptance.

If I was a slim person, looking at myself as I am now, I might think, my ick needs to be their sick. I might be stuck fast into wanting me to be and feel a litany of 'unhealthy', of personality problems, mental health and social woes, to be downtrodden, know my place and play my role, this role, to feel the full extent of projected inferiority......

As I am, a fat person, looking at myself as that much imagined slim person. I see, a person.

A person.

What freedom!

That's it.

No alienating baggage, no side, no projected mal intent. Just a human being like myself who has their own internal life that I am only party to by that which I can see and sense.

Now, there's no telling about other assumptions, expectations, prejudices, I may conjure up, size though, is not in addition to any of that.

I'm looking at a slim right now. I see their size and in an instant their clothes, skin tone, hair, poise, posture, even sense a bit of their aura; this person seems quiet, not shy, but reserved. That might be wrong. Or it maybe the way they are when they're on their own.

Size is a pass over, not a cloud of contrived hysteria to overcome.

I don't have to fight myself to stop hating them, to try to stop hating them, to be upset because I thought I was nicer than this.....

None of that. 

Next time you pass a slim someone, take note. Enjoy that feeling of being unburdened by either malice nor resentment. Appreciate it.

If you can't, take note of it when you hear some slim person droning on about your weight, that includes professionals, in case that need be said.

Get On With It

Got to again pay tribute to Catherine Hughes' "I don't need more research to tell me how dangerous it is. I need to know how to cure it." Not the actual title, but the key and salient point. The one the focus should be on. If it was, they'd be none of the culture of pathologising of the human body its, our, existence. It is at the heart of why, what's dubbed "the obesity debate" isn't a debate at all.

When I saw it, I thought it would be presque le deluge. No chance.

More of a cry in the wilderness.

The face presented by the usual, manufactured consent is probesity versus antibesity. Always missing is this central cause of medical science, seeking cure. All this, and fat people's default- let's get on with it mindframe.

This being a rare example of such unambiguous staging.

Those who've convinced themselves we are "irresponsible" forget you cannot intentionally self-starve without conscious action. It's not a pill you pop into your mouth or an injection that briefly screws up your features whilst delivering a dose of doing the job for you.

Your action and your action alone, is in place of pill or jab. Fighting your body's own self-regulation.

Those of us that started young, were formed not only taking this responsibility, but also expecting to succeed. Not to continually fail whilst claiming to be "in recovery" and other such twaddle is nowhere.

Our "journey" had a distinct beginning, middle and conclusion. We continued in expectation of this.

---------------------------------------------

Without a pulsating central drive of medical-"We must solve this." You are left with the irrational, non-functioning awkwardness of-"This is a killer, save your life with a proven failure."

A well-recognised endgame in quack-busting circles.

"The highwayman demands 'your money OR your life,' but quacks demand 'your money AND your life!'" ...The harm done by quackery may be categorized as economic, direct, indirect, psychological and societal.

Indeed.

....impact upon individuals and families can be catastrophic if they fall into the trap of heroically "leaving no stone unturned" in their quest for a remedy in hopeless cases. Some quacks are quite willing to bleed them dry financially.

And bleed them.

Dubious therapies can cause death, serious injury, unnecessary suffering, and disfigurement.

Health bullshit is usually a time-sink, in that its failure doesn't lead to it being called off in favour of seeking functioning alternatives. Despite being in use to see off a real or purported, imminent threat to life, "..abnormal or excessive fat accumulation that presents a risk to health.

Despite breathtaking adherence to the fake 'obesity' construct, this absolute non-sequitur continues to advance. Pointing to this merely leads to the same response as pages and pages worth of the commentary under the above piece,

Obesity is caused by eating too much an exercising too little. There is no search for answers here...I mean no offence, but statistically if one eats large amounts of high-fat food, one is more likely to gain than lose weight....So what you are really looking for is not the causes of obesity (eating too much, not exercising enough or in some rare cases an underlying medical disorder).What you are really after is a way you can eat what you like, do as little as you like and not become dangerously fat slim [sic]. The failure must succeed. [Etc.,]

The old scientific axiom-if reality doesn't match the hypothesis change the hypothesis is replaced by the opposite. If reality doesn't match the hypothesis, change i.e. deny reality.

You can tell there's no debate as this doesn't stand up to even primitive, let alone basic critical scrutiny. It's insistently repeated nonetheless. A sign that people are not operating with a full deck, a state activated on hearing the term 'obesity', a constant refrain.

We don't need to be told that our obesity can lead to myriad further health problems; we need to know about the causes, not the consequences. With that aim in mind, I gave permission for my daughter's blood to be sent to the research team at Addenbrooke's hospital in Cambridge, where the genetic causes of obesity are being examined.  

Ah, all sorties just end up as themes bandied around to salvage eat less move more.

You'll recognise that 8 year later genes is the meme.

Sobriety

If there's one term that sums up the experience of being fat its sobriety. Fatness is sober.

There's no running away, no escape, no holiday from you. No heightened perception, no visual/auditory hallucination, no euphoria, no preternatural calm, no disruption of co-ordination, no nightmares, no bad trips, no supernatural energy, gurning, palsy, maniacal tics, no desire to fight, no dutch courage, no plummeting lows, no tremulous shakes, no paranoia, no river of sweats...........

...........Just being whatever and whomever you are.

Being fat isn't like drug addiction, it is not like alcoholism, it is not like anorexia either, it's where the body takes you, when its made its calculations. 

Food is not a drug. Food is a source of energy the body that it needs to maintain its existence.  Drugs are not. Starvation is not. Vomiting is not. Only alcohol is. It's the closest one can come to any notion of "food addiction" only because it is also an intoxicant.

Food could only said to be "a drug of choice" in the way that a duvet could become a pony of choice if a person choose to form theirs into a pony like shape and imagined riding it to glory in the Grand National.

In your imagination only. With one like that it's probably best you stay away from actual drugs.  

Those past the arbitrarily declared weight line have been denied a voice by a continuous effort of much trusted researchers and professionals to force them to act out the narrative construct they've conjured up.

This and the denial of actions and rejection of results-on the grounds that the latter did not match their holy hypothesis-has left a void within most fat/ter people where the unfettered sense memories of their experience should be.

That void is currently drawing a multi-pronged effort to fill it by getting people who aren't to see themselves as addicts/ alcoholics/anorexics.

Try to remember, professionals medicalisation along with hysterical pathologisation does not equal our lives. 

To define anything, one must describe it according to its own characteristics and features. As this is not being done with weight-it might accidentally reveal something of use and we can't have that-it is described purely as other things, things it is not.

Weight is the representation of humans as mass. It is not something happening to an ethereal non-material idea of self, such basis is a religious hangover.

Seeking euphoria or having a system that succumbs to proto-anorexia does not define the life or experience of merely fat/ter people. And just as those not taking themselves for small shit, have been free [more or less] to construct their own narratives; drug addict-started for fun/to manage bad feelings/get through bad times, until their system succumbed and boom, they needed drugs to function. Alcoholic-one sip and it was where have you been all my life?/all my friends drank like me until they stopped and I didn't-couldn't etc., etc.,

Have the grace to allow others to relay their own stories, such as they are, disregarding any attempt to switch one set of imposed falsehood for another.

Fat isn't a Time Thing, its a Function Thing

I couldn't for the life of me tell you why I became fat-accepting that question only makes sense within the construct of 'obesity', which I've no time for. People are obsessed with their Holmesian search for the original culprit, it's more projected fiction because I couldn't tell you any why for sure. Nor do I know why that's supposed to matter.

Like 'obesity' construct in general, its largely irrelevant.

I can't even tell you for sure when I became fat. Others assert they cannot grasp why fat people don't notice pound upon pound building like brick upon brick of a wall. I started to think of dieting at 7. I was not what you'd call fat, but I certainly felt like I wasn't thin either. That feeling was relative to my experience of my size up to then.

Was it then? No.

When I was 11, I imposed a rigid diet plan proper-as opposed to "watching what I ate". Was it then? In the sense that I felt in the intervening years I'd reached a point where I had to go total wl diet. So I became fat at 11? So when was the actual moment? Was I fat at 10? Nope.

Somewhere between then and 11, I felt I became fat enough. I crossed a line, when was the moment though, when was the day? Why had I not noticed?

I had, but I was concerned about stunting my growth-seriously. So I concentrated on avoidance. For all I know, that saved me from even greater metabolic mayhem.

I'm not simply extrapolating from my own experience, I doubt becoming fat is a gradual day by day process for many-though those who fatten in adulthood may have a different experience. Either way, its more about the nature of your function. Its the moment when the arrangement of that, the posture of your function gets to a certain configuration.

What is day by day is the time for it to play out, from that moment. At times that process is elongated or condensed, often varying within the same person.

Fat phobia is not Real phobia

This site promoting a phobia cure made me smile. No matter how trivial [or self inflicted] the affliction, slimstream always manages to elevate it to the highest of [self] importance. Everything's about status.

What makes this funny is the continued efforts to deny hunger exists or when they admit it does that hunger is real.

This has an extra tang of amusement for someone who spent years battling with unreal/fake/emotional/addictional or w/e they call it, actually real hunger.

Some i-net idiot summed it up when he exclaimed "No one can be that hungry." Not simply conflating a heightened level of hunger with fatness, but any hunger at all [in a fat person].

This astonished me, because I realised the extent of this-it's not happening to me therefore it is not happening.

If I took that as my stance, I'd hardly accept a gotdurned thing. What makes me accept things that don't appear to be about a whole lot to me, is ultimately not that I can imagine or not imagine it happening to me, but a recognition of the impact it is having on the person concerned.

That's about it.

I don't demand proof/disproof of the evident. I don't insist the person must prove they feel and/or cannot stop feeling something.

No ultimately I accept a consistent representation of experience and a sense that what they feel they're feeling is real.

Even when I don't for a second accept any or some aspect of their interpretation of it. I don't play gotcha and pretend that makes them a liar and can be dismissed whilst I make them up.

And you know what? That's usually enough. Actually listening to real people. And no, forcing people to think in certain ways dictated by you, then quoting that back as their voice isn't that.

The genus of the term fat phobia is not the triggering of REAL FEAR by a cue that isn't reflective of the RESPONSE it is triggering. And no, calling that 'irrational', though not strictly untrue isn't helpful.

A famous actor was talking about the moment he was put onto on skyscraper tall rooftop restaurant, only to find himself suddenly feeling as if he was encased in concrete. Was that "irrational"? Not wholly, though he was safe. The point was a reaction had been triggered and took his body over, without his conscious processing or awareness. He had no sense of fearing heights before this.

It's a mechanical effect, but it is real. 

The source of fat phobia like homophobia comes from xenophobia, aversion to strangers, indeed difference. That is allowed to turn into prejudice, disgust and yes fear. Do you really need to hear how some people increasingly refer to and talk about Muslims for example? Muslims, you know the ones who translated and incorporated the ancient Greek texts into their culture schema, the same ones modern western civilisation is supposed to have grown out of?

Like this genus of phobia, fat phobia is a choice. Its reality is maintained by a continuous effort of will by the person. Some people seem to feel they need enemies to get themselves out of bed in the morning. No wonder this pretence of energy, energy, energy is so popular amongst those who feel dead inside.

It is to give yourself a false feeling that you have reason to attack those who've posed no threat to you. When folk are desperate enough to misbehave without the guts to just do it, they'll perform all sorts of contortions to manage and suppress their conscience.

They know better, but do not wish to do better.

Incidentally,

This ultimately led to unscientific starvation processes and life-threatening surgeries. In particular, the female section of the society started developing chronic and uncompromising eating habits such as anorexia and bulimia.

Note the use of women to back up "unscientific" before any fat feminists get too outraged, that is exactly the tack used to suppress the voices of fat women, by many calling themselves feminists.

Starvation is the only route to weight loss given by those calling themselves scientists. That is why anorexia and bulimia are taking off, as means to achieve starvation and consequent weight loss. That this is deemed science is why fat people took it on without question-we're all used to scientists giving us objective rendering of what is real.

That people could use science merely to establish and perpetrate a false view is something many are simply not ready to contemplate.

"Anti-fatness" is being spread and used by the 'obesity' cult to put its real agenda/s into effect.

And I'm sure fat phobia could be eliminated in five seconds in most people. It simply requires the end of defining fat people as disease. Nor is there such thing as "obeseophobia". That's like saying slutophobia, the phobia is rooted in the construct before it.

The other kind of phobia is real, it is the trigger that is false in the sense that it isn't commensurate with the kind or extent of response. Curing this is a matter of changing the response to that cue. Dismantling fat phobia is about deciding to no longer support it.

Accept bodies come in different sizes and that if you wish to change that, you need to understand the body, not abuse the person. Stop conflating humanness with slimness, which means anything to do with fat people falls outside that in your mind.

Restore being human as the means of deciding humanness. It's that simple, because fat phobia is that contrived.

Your so-called sympathy is not required

Sympathy, sympathy, I've heard that one too many times lately as in "I've no sympathy for fat people." Thanks for that nugget, I can assure you, everyone really gives a shizz.

This particular response to any request for reason in the area of weight has always been real irritating, setting up failure to be a smidgen less than an absolute raving arsehole to fat people as some kind of extravagant act of kindness. Typical nauseating self flattery du fat phobes.

I also dislike it when fat people themselves ask for 'sympathy', using this exact framing, allowing  grotesque impudence to be(come) a 'neutral' stance, whilst acknowledging it as far from by requiring something as elevated as (true) sympathy to mitigate it.

Lucky I'm not a particularly suspicious character, or I'd have to wonder a lot more about that sort of thing. It seems so obvious and so easy to stop once pointed out, even if it isn't so clear beforehand.

No, people do not "deserve sympathy", we all require courtesies and rights. They are not "deserved" they are part of the mechanics of how we wish to run society. That's why we observe them with those who most certainly do not deserve them. Like people who do hateful stuff.

If we deny them fundamental courtesies and rights, we risk undermining them from the rest of us.

'Deserve' is for the birds.

Don't ask for courtesies, take them for yourself. Be courteous to yourself. Respect your energies and your time. Do not waste your heart and nerves setting up fat acceptance as a vehicle to fly in the face of freely chosen hate. Stop pretending people don't choose to participate in fat phobia of their own free will.

After a recent fit of exasperation with this wretched mis-use of the term, I realised I don't remember that being a consideration in seeking to uncover the best answers. Did I have this self important need to feel "sympathy"? I noted that I did not.

I feel sympathy for those who find they have faulty wiring that brings repeated episodes of psychosis. What do I think is the best route to a solution for them? Objective study of their condition to find the best way of relieving, treating or blessed be, curing it.

I don't feel sympathy for paedophiles, not even those whose perversion is developmental.  What's my view on the best route to stopping them from hurting others? Objective study of their condition to find the best way of suppressing, or resolving it permanently.

If you believe fat is the devil that needs to be gotten rid of, your sympathy for fat people is not a consideration.

HAES is not the Paradigm Shift

HAES- "health at every size" refers to making wellbeing/ health decisions according to what works and makes sense to you-which is the norm for all humankind. Those choices go according to what best facilitates your ability to function, what suits you best and what is most sustainable for you. HAES came from fat people's own desire to re-assert a normalcy that had been derailed by official interference from medical healthcare influence and society as a whole.

In other words, its (fat) people behaving normally. 

The real paradigm shift happened when fat people were diverted from that cause in order to adopt calorie restriction as a way of life. That wasn't the initial intent, which was temporary. It spread to take over people's lives because its dysfunction and profound inefficacy did not act as a break on its imposition.

No "evidence" was produced to show that this made sense or even what it was supposed to achieve.

The instigator of this counter-intuitive, self harming and futile behaviour was people considered to be scientists and the actual medical profession. Via cultural imposition of discomfort and unease they sought to make good the idea of being as disease.

In other words, the main driver of calorie restriction dieting-which is repulsive to most people was escape at any cost, not a positive embrace of the foul. 

No "evidence" was produced as to show how this improved health or even would succeed in these purported goals. Which were supposedly slimness but look far more like deepening and containing a person in a no-man's land between discomfort and self abuse. What would be the point of seeking to ghettoize people as a class-by weight-in order to liberate them from said ghettoization?

No plan was made of how this was to work out. 

The basis of excusing this behaviour was pathologization of fat people or 'obesity' which posited people as slim with or without the imposition of an adipose suit that is a disease, a dis-ease generating organ etc.,

No proof could be advanced for this as it doesn't accord with anatomy. Declaring slim people as shrunken failed fat people cannot be proven as the premise doesn't hold. The human body is not ideology, its anatomy that's objectively observable.

No evidence advanced for which pathways would turn this kind of stress into health-in those above a certain body mass. No one would expect pathologizing (slim) people, defining them no longer as human but as dis-ease as leading to health benefits. So at least explanations would be required to explain why that changes.....

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. 

None was proffered. 

The reason I have difficulty with haes is, I have little idea why normality is being touted as a paradigm shifting novelty. This continues the learned habit of defining anything that comes from people as case for the defense. When actually, the prosecution has not proven its case.

In case of any undue excitement, its lack of such does not mean either the process of weight and weight itself cannot be a problem. I shouldn't have to mention that though, because its obvious the 'obesity' has little interest in dealing with that. Their case is solely about social engineering and doleing out punishment.

Deliberate intent to contrive unnecessary pathology goes against all the rules of health. Even a snake oil salesman or a quack knows better than that. This could be easy to miss in the case of 'obesity', because we're used to treatments for life threatening conditions, i.e. chemotherapy for cancer being almost as rough as the disease itself.

That is a by-product, a side effect of the treatment not its aim. That's the difference between real disease and 'obesity'- the former is a problem which treatment seeks to relieve whilst the main aim of cure is at the helm. 'Obesity' wallahs own estimation of 'obesity' is its nowhere near disease enough.

Body Promotion

So the British Plus Size Awards have been accused of promoting 'obesity'? From what I can see, they'd be more readily accused of 'promoting' whiteness, yahwn.

What happened to the much proffered notion that 'obesity' is separate from the 'obese' person? I've seen that accusation more than once from other fat commentators, bravely critical of people's self-acceptance. People's unselfconscious assertion of their continued and real existence, fat self recognition/acceptance of one's own fatness. A big fat consciousness.

They state with no little contempt, that we pathetically can't separate "our obesity" from ourselves. What's their response to this accusation that firmly reveals the indivisibility of fatness and person? Can slimness be seperated from a slim person and thinness from a thin person? Why not? Slim is to thin, what chubby is to slim. And chubby is to fat what thinness is to slim.

Don't think I'm trying to gain their precious agreement, but I offer this for their consideration.We may be picking up on this rather than expressing an internal cri de coeur. We may actually be listening to other people, unlike they, who are listening to their own, "promotion of slimness" mirroring slimmer fat phobes "promotion of obesity" in order to promote, to themselves, the idea of slimness as some kind of identity, akin to the traditional gent/lady thing. 

Try to remember the 'obesity' isn't and has never been fat people's. It really has little to do with us. The routine unrelenting imposition of it on us, requires us to read it. And we are not as stupid as your acceptance of your own assignment [though you of course dump it on us] leads you to assume, can't you tell that difference?

What is with this idea of promoting 'obesity' anyhow? You have to grasp just how alien and odd the very notion of it is. It so caught me unawares that it took me a while to place it. The best I could do was that it's an inversion of the idea that thin bodies in the media compel "young girls" to starve themselves.

An idea that's always been so utterly unconvincing that my mind discounted it without bothering with it. Like if you insisted: "Scooby Doo's POTUS." Despite moi, the idea has great currency, especially within the usual cod-feminism we're usually exposed to.

Women want to be thin/remain slim for its currency. Whilst there is a context of relatively stark cost-benefit, ultimately, they're not forced by anyone. Indeed, they're supporting the system because they feel they can win at it. White middle/upper class women most of all.

You can see this from the feminist response to fat acceptance. Rather than seeing it as a potential other front to the liberation of female consciousness. They see it as competition, feel jealous along with highly contemptuous. Above all they wish to kill it, without seeming to. They neither give a shit about the effect on fat women, or themselves.

That simply isn't convincingly about pure coercion.

If they were truly feminist and wanted out of this contrived marketplace, they'd feel more like myself. Yes, I realise how that sounds, but lack of eloquence etc., I basically feel, if women want to be thin/slim, let's get involved in the science/research/thought in how to bring that about and find the best possible way. Because we're freaking worth it. And this is about the desire to be slim right?

Ultimately I respect that extent of desire, and I don't care how 'trivial' that does or doesn't sound. It's not in and of itself harmful. And it just so happens that this leads to other things that definitely aren't trivial. It leads to 'nice'.

Women could have been in the forefront of this, propelled by our own desires, rather than majoring in being imprisoned in the shame of not being nice, important seeming person's, to make up for the trivialization of women. The truth is though that women could have and could still escape this, but prefer instead to play the game. Yes, I'm saying it.

That's why they don't care about the effectiveness of what we use to slim down any more than the ahem, patriarchy. 

Those who feel like winners, who feel like they can want to play-to win. And they'd rather win through privilege, position, and contrived scarcity, than find a way for everyone to access what they want, if they want it. If slimness was available at will, it would be something else with them. Otherwise why support class?

So bodies have to carry the can, so "we" don't have to discuss anything remotely uncomfortable. Whilst despising that about ourselves and shouting it at others, in this case fat people and our purportedly unique lack of "personal responsibility."

Which brings me to the way this weird charge is responded to, the now rote-like: "Fat people aren't necessarily unhealthy." "Fat people don't all get that way by sitting and eating x,y,z." You whaaa?

It's like watching two sets of dancers perform their own mutual idiom, one that makes little sense to me.

Bricked In

Larry Evans is losing weight. He started his calorie restriction, exercise regime at 800lbs/362kgs. He's got down to at least 650lbs/254kgs. I wish him and his "team" the absolute best. May they get where they need to get, stay there and be healthy hale and hearty.

One thing I can't stand is the cheerleading chorus who are valorizing his situation and its sub-biggest loser style talk of jouneigh. Someone even claimed this was in some way heroic. Let's make something clear, this kind ofstruggle is the product of deliberate policy - trapping fat people into a the suffocating house arrest of calorie restriction with exercise bulimia- themselves too.

From the start of the 'obesity' crusade, if not before, fat people have been bricked-in to a calorie restriction/virtual starvation diet or die scenario, using contrived but acute discomfort, pain and anguish to hold us in.

Just as surely as a one strike and you're out life-sentence. And similarly, it doesn't give a damn about the costs to those unfortunate enough to be metabolic outliers. In fact, it has no problem seeing them perish if that's a part of what's going on with them.

It should be palpably disgusting that societies for the last 4 or more decades have openly said to fat people, "You're dying and that's okay." Luckily for us, it's not up to what society wants, still, that thought counts. Any nation that thinks people ought to die because of their weight or size is messed up. There's no one thin enough for me to declare their lives worthless and I cannot imagine what would get me to go along with such a notion.

It's the extent of conviction that if fat people just can't escape the relentless pursuit of everyone imposing lifestyle anorexia on us, or if it is too intolerable to be fat we will swap the stigma of fatness for the hunger of anorexia and exercise bulimia, our bodies will succumb and we'll all be okay.

We shouldn't have to be forced into "punishment" because of the displaced urges of others.  The urge to see a stocism in the face of any level of discomfort, others feel happy to shirk but not to let go of the idea of. Instead of looking to inflict pain on their own selves, they feel entitled to foist this repellent urge on those they feel its in their power and privilege to-fat people.

Hardly impressive.

Like an earthquake where the earth gives way beneath your feet, cue a manic scramble to climb out before it gives way again and you are lost to the world. That is what you are seeing, someone trying to claw their way out of a trap set by others.

It's not simply about size, it's  feeling trapped. It is well known that this can be a decisive factor in suicide. People dancing around the spectacle of this suffocation does not enoble them. Fat people are not inspirational porn.

There is nothing heroic inspiring or uplifting about witnessing the product of this mindwarp. Enjoyment here is, tawdry and shabby.  No-one, let alone a person of 800lbs should have to starve and lift weights purely to lose weight. If people wish to do those things, good luck to them, but it should be a choice for its own sake or other benefits like conditioning, not to expend energy as penitence at the imposition of fanaticism.

Calorie restricting your way to weight loss is a stupid embarrassment. The halo of slimness may be shining in these people's eyes, but your mind knows. Dieters often feel ashamed, guilty and silly. Dieting is stupid, self destructive and above all, utterly absurd. Unless you are honest enough to admit how risible it all is-even if you are going to do it inspite of that.

I say to metabolic researchers, it's long overdue that you get on and find a proper lever to reversing and advancing weight. You must be able to find at least one, there are probably many. Every day people like Larry have to take this route, risking the potential for their body to exhibit a powerful rebound manoeuvre that could leave them worse off than when they started, is a day you've failed.

Whether its people having tumours removed, or those losing their hunger, metabolic courses need to be altered in either direction and that should be obvious.

[And no, I don't see people like Larry as any less "deserving" of this than anyone else and nor should those who have the obviously low threshold for discomfort have anything to say about that.]

"Obesity Denial" Really?

Something I've never been able to take seriously is the incontinent application of terms relating to "denialism," whether referring to the form coined for those who would seek to deny the Holocaust or the delusions of grandeur therapy mess form.

Despite having total control of what is the mainstream narrative on fatness, that's still not enough to satisfy the insatiable hunger for what.............? Fat people's pain, humiliation, stigmatization, pathologization? I really don't know, do you?

Now we can add to this meaningless word generator of "obesity denial", referring to anyone not seeing things in the same loony tunes manner.

I happily refute the idea of people as disease. They obviously aren't and cannot usefully or indeed ethically be construed as such.  And, need I say, though fully on board with the lipogeddon scenario, the AMA's scientific committee-to their very great credit-felt impelled to point out no "disease" has been coined.

In case that's confusing. 'Obesity' wallahs can't define the "disease of obesity" because it doesn't exist, nor does what they're pissy about lend itself to that metaphor.  Either they have to define metabolic deviance or people's weight, they cannot collapse the two togehter. As they don't accept this reality and no one's going to make them, they've ended up just pointing at people and asserting "disease." Few feel to query that. Not because they have any respect for "obesity science" or the medical profession-the way they sue the latter to dirt, creating not a little of the bitterness they're working out on fat people.

Inevitably, this neuromush has been applied to any thoughtful unashamed fat person- as in they are engaging in...... "obesity denialism", dun-dun-duuuuuuhhhhhhr!!!!

This charge intends to shame by association with creationists and more latterly, those skeptical of climate change and/or the nature of.

Leaving aside rejection of the construct 'obesity' has come to brand.

This unspoken but obvious comparison exposes something fundamental about the nature of the delusional constructed view of fatness.

Climate, happens outside us all. 

Theoretically, it is equally observable (or not) by anyone, objectively so. We don't have those advancing climate change experiencing climate change as their physical being, versus those disagreeing not experiencing it as their physical reality.

That isn't the case with being fat. A fat person is experiencing their existence as an on-going physical, spiritual, emotional and intellectual process.

A person who isn't fat, isn't sharing that.

Casting fatness as if it's available to all equally, reveals the creepy extent to which fat people's boundaries have been eviscerated by those who seek to own and direct that. Here's 'obesity' folklore naked with its failure to write fat people as discrete sentient beings. This, not "looks" undermines if not cleaves other people's ability to relate to fat people as real. That definition becomes a mental block.

It also reflects the dream of the power elite working itself out in metadata surveillance controversies currently playing out. The desire is to know everything about you at a glance. Whilst they remain in the shadows.

Those protesting the loudest about privacy, are too often on board with this view of "science" turning others into powerless puppets. Imposing fictional roles of what they're supposed to be and/ or stand for.

That the difference between climate and being/not being wasn't immediately spotted by at least those who have some awareness of what fat acceptance is about, is a sign of how completely comfortable we all are with the idea that fat people are neither conscious nor autonomous.

That we could possibly be informed any by our own experience of being. This is the kind of thing I'd point to when people regurgitate such sj platitudes as "We don't have to change society does." Are you sure you don't want to change this? Because I'd say its desirable, in fact necessary.

No one deserves that to happen more than those who really thought could replace human consciousness with a puppet version and get away with it forever. That's what I call motivation.

How about it fat people?

Embodiment Switch

Reblog, with edits!

The 'obesity' construct and the demand to be slim forces a fat person to disassociate and become somewhat detached from your own body-i.e. it's not real, it's temporary. And bond with a [slim] version of it that doesn't exist as the real one. We know this.

Following instructions from outside yourself-because your own thoughts are making you fat or what a men's diet club forum calls "fat logic"- a consequence of this unnatural situation is the internal balance of being grounded in yourself goes off.

The general norm is to set standards of behaviour and reaction rooted in the way you are generally treated and expect to be treated. That helps to set an internal standard by which we judge how others ought to be treated. What they should have to put up with. 'Obesity' alters that. Our internal standard becomes the treatment fat people accept for themselves. We couldn't possibly use that as a standard to judge others by.

Removed from a fat context-it would disturb, become sinister and unhinged, often psychopathic in tone. You get used to it, yet you know it. In abstract, it doesn't necessarily seem bad. It would though to judge slim people that way and would to me if I were to judge slim people by that standard too. So we know it is.

We instinctively get used to applying expectations born of how slim people are treated to judge situations and people. This becomes the automatic human standard, one we apply to ourselves too, and yet not.

I suppose the distinction is a little like the way you treat visitors as opposed to the way you treat your family.  I used to say a lot when I first got into FA that fat people have no double consciousness. WRONG. This is sort of one, though its nothing like as profound as that of a Black person or even a female double consciousness. It's more a mental switch than a consciousness.The fact that I overlooked it though, shows how ingrained and unnoticed it is.

The problem comes when we stop participating in the 'obesity' cult. Stop rejecting our own bodies and selves as somehow temporary or unreal. Not immediately but gradually, nature begins to reassert itself as we become (re-)grounded in ourselves. Our minds start to normalize, judgement grounded in our own experience and the standards we've inevitably adapted to.

This causes immediate problems. Cries of not grasping how slim people can have body issues etc., arise. That's not the case. It's more some of these problems which previously loomed as large to us as to them, begin to need a microscope. Because the place of judging them has shifted from an internalized form of their own, to a further distance away from there

Working out acceptable expectations can get interesting. We carry on using to the human [slim] standard, but some of our necessarily blasé attitudes born of facing the most outrageous nastiness can start to bleed into that.

I have this problem big time.

Going back and forth between the chasm that is how we have to think of slim people and how we have to think of ourselves becomes more and more, meaningless, boring, even irritating. It's a standard no longer nourished inside you as it was. And let's face it society has this divide too, in frustratingly plain sight. Which is causing its own issues. I've always wondered why people think shitting on a large minority of the population isn't a threat to democracy, in the sense that people get used to that treatment undermining the ability to perceive infractions.

I know that I can grasp far more of injustice perpetrated on others, than I could before. That is a big shock and I wonder if it's part of the suspicion the left has about fat people as a group.

This pre-post mental aspect of re-embodiment, has always caused a divide amongst fat people, especially the self hating kind, but also amongst many who do get it. It occurrence, degree and how one incorporates its strands are unpredictable and don't match ones commitment to self-assertion.

To those people as much as slim people, it can seem like fat people are being angry or even vengeful. Alas, it rarely occurs that fat people might have a reason for feeling anything that deviates from the 'obese' script that isn't malevolent. It's as if there's as much of a script for fat people's unexpected actions as there are for what's expected of us, i.e. imperfect eating and exercising.

I think the definition of people as disease pathology creates that. Priming minds to expect wrong doing. So the well is often immediately poisoned with these expectations, in lieu of more just explanations. How to explain these things? It never occurred for one second that this would happen, until it did to me.

Fatness is like an Orphan

What would be great is if fat people could be defined by themselves, on their own terms. Ditto fatness being defined on its terms.

Whether it's fatuous phobes who insist on comparing being fat with smoking, drinking, drugging or some fat activists who crib civil rights movements or 'obesity', folklore, rather than look at fat people and talk about them.

Fatness needs to stop being like an abandoned object always projected on. This needs to be for all of us.