Dr. Sharma Says: Get off Your Knees Fatz

Well, well, well. Here's one for you self hating fatz types especially. Your friend Dr. Sharma is finally admitting that if you do not stop playing 'obese' and divest yourselves of unremitting shame, you'll continue to get what you've already gotten-the sharp end of a very long pole up your posterior end;

the only thing that will change this is when people living with obesity stand up for themselves and get “engaged”....

Got that?

We tried to tell you! Fat people's acquiescence to abusive handling is why we are in the dirt and continue to be, not due to any occasional outbreaks of resistance. If you've spent your life in abject surrender-and that brings you wrath-then surrender is the problem not the solution. No matter the dissonance that provokes in those who can't tell the difference between what feels right-because they're doing as their told-and a more rational take.

The cheeky buzzard even has the nerve to say;

It is evident that the bias, shame, blame, and discrimination that surrounds obesity is so pervasive that very few people living with this disease apparently have the courage to stand up and publicly share their stories and “demand” help and support for dealing with this condition. 

There you go. Fat people have no courage. We are so weak, we can't even stand and pretend to assert the undermined connection with our intrinsic humanness.

Oh rilly? How did that happen pray tell? Following the advice of 'science' that's how. Never being able to accept true outcomes, that's how. The disease-mongering lying that's the 'obesity' cult is how.

'Obesity' has laid waste to even the most no-nonsense large and in charge fatty's self conceptualization, to some degree or another. Does anyone really think people can endure an enforced state of body dysmorphia, panic syndrome induced by insisting we permanently catastrophize to "motivate" ourselves, whilst existing in an often permanently excruciating state of discomfort and shrug it off?

I'd love to see Sharma try that. Actually, no I wouldn't, because I wouldn't wish it on anyone but the truly wicked and I mean that. 

I'll let him into a secret, he couldn't have come out of this any better than us, don't doubt it. He hasn't a clue, because like a lot of his cronies, he's out of touch with fat people's deepest thoughts and feelings.

As much because fat people are too-when it comes to the experience of being fat, as the on-going lack of objective observation.

The only reason for such absurd expectation is fat people's incredible grace. I've said it before, fat people should be studied for the amazing extent to which we have withstood such relentless and ruthless assaults on our character and person, over such a sustained period. Sometimes from a very young age.

Living the 'obese' persona turned me into someone I despised more than the most wicked people who've ever lived-for long stretches. This damaged me, and yet, somehow......resilience. The psychopathologies-cognitive distortions etc., caused by playing 'obese' are sometimes quite noticeable. Some are easily as bad as what is diagnosed as separate neuroses in those who aren't fat.

On some level I almost guffaw at this. We are walking around in plain sight with these, yet many aren't downed by them. And don't expect the 'obesity' crew to know anything. They've so pathologized people-including their odious pity-they can barely tell.

Honestly, they're like a monkey on your back.

Intriguingly, this suggests not that its better not to know [you have a neurosis], but that the burden imposed by portentously focusing on neuroses, can be the last straw for your mind. Rather like playing 'obese' disrupts metabolic function often in the ways fat people are caricatured.

'Obesity' in modern times, though perhaps not always, has got to be one of the most useless that ever passed for what? Scholarship (?) [Oh please, I'm on the floor]. It's supposed to exist to serve fat people. How odd a notion is that?

It's supposed to be driven, unbidden, to acquire knowledge of metabolic anatomy, function in order to uncover new pathways to improve health and well being of those who need it most. It's supposed to be fully engaged with fat people's bodies, how/if they function differently and how to make the most of that.

They'd engage with fat people too, get to know them. You get to know people best by looking after their needs.

Instead, this discipline [snigger] is filled with food fixated zealots, putative social engineers and those who wish to advance the interference of the medical profession in areas many do not want them to be in.

No other has ever trashed its own supposed vehicle for study.  Not people engaged in studying paedophiles, psychopaths, violent criminals. NONE.

Every single one of those fields have humanized their subjects by default due in some part to the outcome of academic rigour. If not some fellow feeling for, or some desire to do some good. Not 'obesity.' Remarkably its recent outpourings have managed to introduce a remorseless dehumanization of those it should want to help.

That muppet Yalom  says he finds it easier to connect with those convicted of heinous crimes more than fat people. He said that with more ease than most 'obesity' wallahs could show to fat people, even when they're sweating to pity fat people. Which is not at all apt.

It is truly monstrous to have a field filled with so much hatred for those its supposed to be caring for. I honestly cannot think of any other where so many involved openly want fat people to suffer, or even to die.

I mean we hear about the fattest all the time in the media and television. Where are the Dr Sharma's, the Karen Hitchcock's, the Yoni Fredhoff's to give the benefit of their objective expertise? Name one field where that would not be the case? These might as well be in hiding.

That is why areas of knowledge about health progress. Experts in any other field would lose their shit if any hack misrepresented their area of expertise in the way the media routinely does to fat people. Private words would be had with the programme makers, broadcasters, newspapers etc., and it wouldn't be nice.

So after decades of silencing you and getting others to enforce this. You're expected to emerge pristine and presumably ready to give suitably simplistic sob story of "living with this disease." As usual, it's somehow always down to the fat public to do the professional's jobs for them.

Because suddenly behaving like a true academic discipline is so far out of sight, they can't imagine it. 

They'll have another conference though.....

Is fat phobia the new homophobia?

Isn't that really what the title's about? Though the subtitle is;

Telling fat people they ought to be thin is about as helpful as telling gay people they should be straight

The point is deeper than any facile comparison between being gay and being fat. It points at the way 'obesity' has become the homophobia for those who would at least pay lip service to disdaining it, those who wouldn't often can't resist adding it to their portfolio of bigotry.

Eating has come to take the place sex takes up for fundamentalist religions. A central facet of existence, eating even more so, is the means to imbue with the dominant themes of who we are and how we should live.

Free will has come to the fore of our collective consciousness, replacing the fatalism of more precarious religious times. We see ourselves as self created through our conscious will, hence we create our weight.

It's not about whether these things are true or not, it's the need for constant repetition of said theme in every possible place. Like pattern on a cloth, we must always be reminded of what is there (that mimics the way truth is always there).

One of things many object to about those who cannot pretend we control our weight in this way, is we seem to be fatalistic, defeatist.

When in fact, all we are saying is, not this way.

That's pretty easy to discern but such is the fevered clamour for repetition of free will, even this is too provocative. 

Religion is concerned with fertility given the natural pre modern medical intervention(s) high infant mortality rate of human beings. Gayness, seen as not contributing to the creation of life became a container of and symbol to represent fears of extinction.

In more developed society's where the creation of life is taken for granted. Our central concern has moved to sustaining one's existence. God has fallen to earth, from the old creator in the sky, to each and everyone of us being a creation of our will.

We are our own creators.

The extent to which calorie restriction/expenditure consumes one's existence-pun intended- means investment in it creates a momentum to centre our way of life around it. This necessarily extends to distorting the way we see ourselves.

It has to replace the norm which has effectively happened, it is normal eating for many, which now seems disordered or greedy, naughty or worst of all, fattening. Certainly the rigid, inflexible, watchful, unsustainable nature of calorie restriction doctrine exacerbates a sense of insecurity by comparison. Even whilst it is creating and promoting its own mayhem.

It comes down to the insistence on this as the route to weight alteration-which must be a product of an unhealthy fixation on free will as it yields not to evidence or reality of any kind. The refusal to accept that our design does not submit to our modish metaphysical fixations, is the driver of fat phobia, just like the refusal to accept that some people simply cannot make themselves heterosexual enabled the revving up and spread of homophobia. 

The two mirror each other to a weird degree, for fat phobes what has replaced religion as the way to validate reality for all of us, science is now being bent into something more akin to religion by fulfilling a similar role, rather than as a beacon of empirical truth.

Firendly fire

I remember a discussion at Harriet's blog. It touched on crusade fallout i.e. an increase in wasting (eating) disorders. A commenter said something rather chilly. He described this unintended overspill as "collateral damage".

It's taken a while to sink in that this primitive feeling is widespread.

There are two sides of the coin to consider when it comes to body image: the social pressure contributing to eating disorders and self esteem issues (especially in the young) versus the constructive aspect of encouraging people to stay fit and healthy. Where do we draw that finest of lines?

Why would "encouraging people to stay fit and healthy" cause them to have any problems whatsoever with their body image? There's a sense of recognition being denied in those words.

The former begets the latter because it's dominant mode attacks body integrity.

Note how the 'obesity' crusade becomes "social pressure." Always shifting blame; mea culpa's only for fatz apparently.

It boils down to what's more important, social politicking or saving those who fall foul of these disorders, many of whom are slim.

The answer thus far is the social inferiority of fat people and its about time we all stated that freely and clearly. That's people who like to but "...we have an 'obesity' epidemic.... something must be done", including many who whitter on about how important the fight against juvenile ED's. Pointing fingers at the rag trade, (role) models and everything else but their own rampant fat phobia.

How many times do children heard  "My goodness why don't they just. stop.eating" shouted at fat people who appear within eye shot? Yet when they actually do more or less that, it's somehow slips the mind.

And if you replace normal eating with an ugly view of food as the enemy plus call disordered eating "healthy", using the cover of 'obesity'. Then you are advancing disorder into those areas; full stop. Super obvious. You cannot reduce calorie manipulation disorders and advance that as the basis of all weight regulation.

Again, despite fat politics or prejudice the central problem here is the pursuing of that route. The means negativity comes out of it. If the approach was not fuelled by malice, it would either not generate that or the evidence of it would cause self correction.

I don't claim the end of the slimming cult will end anorexia et. al. I don't believe that. What it can do is to relieve the pressure, reversing the spread to those who do not have a stronger susceptibility towards AN -and some who do.

As the price of the 'obesity' crusade spreads outward to everyone, (supply your own pun) those on board are seeking to prevent this "friendly fire" whilst keeping the cause intact. They wish to reserve damage solely to fat people of whatever age. 

The trouble with making this all about fat people is it can sometimes obscure the costs to everyone. The lack of care for those who are caught up in the slipstream shows the extent of coldness against fat people is not likely to be contained there.

When good people suspend their usual ethics going heavily and emotionally with their baser urges, they rarely can stop themselves until something disastrous enough happens to those they can still summon up some fellow feeling for, jerking them out of their amoral stupor.

Those who want more treatment for wasting disorders like anorexia, or to halt their spread, but wish to exclude fat people or the issue of crusade ideology are kidding themselves.

They are showing their lack of will to address this, showing where the emphasis of their feelings lay. If compartmentalisation worked, this wouldn't be an issue in the first place.

Watching from the sidelines we are often relegated to feels like an incipient crash between two oncoming vehicles. Just how bad will it get before the cost of 'friendly fire' exhausts the worship of the calorie restriction route?

Sadly, we'll have to wait and see.

Obesus physic

Physics has for some time required a new branch in order to fully contain all the observational data on how energy functions coming from 'obesity'- i.e. fatness in a Latin fright mask - that wisdom must not be lost in the ether of random speculation.

There's the base of  what's known as the 'fat contagion' hypothesis. That's when a fat person close to you is able to provoke your body to start storing more fat. The free floating energy of their presence is converted into stored energy in your body.

This process can be so powerful, that it can have a kind of placebo effect. The mere existence of your friendship, getting in contact via e-mail or phone, or even just thinking of them, as in, "I wonder how my (fat) friend so and so is doing".

All pose dangers of energy conversion for the unwary.

You'll only win if you're a 'fast burner' as your system draws progressively more of this 'free energy' increasing its release leading  to weight loss among your family and social circles.

None of this is scientific, it is based on science.

“Carson gets fatter as his dog gets thinner from diet and exercise”.

The fat transference phenomenon. As we know, energy (in this case fat) can neither be created nor destroyed, it can only change form. In this case, as someone (the non specieist definition, natch) releases fat from their stores in the form of heat, that then turns back into fat in someone eles's body.

The amount probably depends on some process of entropy.

This explains the seeming incongruity of successful weight loss industries along side society's upward weight drift.

I hope those encouraging fatz to lose weight are aware of the risk. More importantly though, this is no excuse for fatz to relent in their efforts to lose weight. If it ends up on someone else, you'll/they'll just have to live with it, dog eat dog is apt here.

We all know that we are surrounded by energy dense foods, what people don't realise is that these are not 100% stable. Although minuscule, some atoms of energy can escape into the air. This is mainly a problem for the susceptible who act as a magnet for them, a bit like this.

Hence the much touted, "I only have to see food to put on weight"etc.,

All this insight must be logged and collated. If studied, for its underlying meaning it could reveal missing secrets of the universe.

Cant, spiked

Sp!ked recently celebrated its tenth anniversary. They should be congratulated for personifying the truth that if you are truly a humanist-with or without religion-the crusade cannot really make sense.

For the uninitiated, spiked are not liked, the founders include self declared Marxists who continue to proclaim themselves such. The reason they are not liked is because in the post fall of Communist leftist shake down, their political settings appear to have shifted out of kilter with what passes for the general left right now, or the other way around, depending on your view.

Questions about their political position come from all sides. However for me their take on a lot of things, whether I've agreed or disagreed have made more sense than many of the more mainstream left.

They take on many unpopular stances ironically Patrick Basham himself a former tobacco lobbyist had the nerve recently to question anti smoking campaign tactics. Whether you agree or not its worth bearing in mind that the obesity circus is unseating smoking as outstandingly harmful by virtue of both its peculiar hype and its linking of fat prognosis with that of smoking.

There was a time when I thought that potential bang up would cool the heels of anti obesists, wrong again-almost always when expecting reason to prevail.

Acceptance and promotion of obesity

Even though being fat is supposed to be enough to show you up, that 'strangely' is not enough for certain fat acceptance detractors. No, in the tradition of those who wish to show who's boss, they wish to give it their own term, even though they clearly know that's not what it is called.

We'll leave aside those who cannot get HAES right, which when incessant is making its own little point.

What's fascinating about the response of the ignorant and thoughtlessly self absorbed is more often than not they end up blurting out exactly what their own aims are because they do not consider any other point of view, therefore nothing much else is in their head.

When it comes to their own beliefs, they say what they believe.  When others don't agree, they superimpose what they want to be the opposite of that onto those disagreeing, they do not actually consider other points of view. A sign that they know their own will not stand scrutiny.

The double whammy is that they are both therefore ignorant and not really engaging with any thoughts but their own, therefore they cannot understand but those. Some of the more shall we say, half hearted fat advocates tend to get wound up by being told they are 'promoting obesity'.

But what has struck me from the beginning is that is exactly how I think of the obesity crusade, certainly it doesn't care whether fatness increases or not-they are always predicting it will, until recent rallying. There genuinely is little doubt to me that its not a priority to master switch(es) that make weight go up or down-both would probably extend lives especially the former.

Its more about creating the appearance of this to fit into the system as it is already and serve other agendas namely protecting the medical monopoly from anything that is honest enough to derail it and put more true power of healing in the hands of lay folk.

Something that any profession has an impulse to do, keep the public dependent on them, its just the medico's have more influence than most, for now and they wish to keep it that way. Even if it is becoming increasingly untenable for all concerned and will apparently bankrupt modern health care systems.

Others wish to use it to create a weight based social hierarchy for the purposes of influence and  manipulation, directing the public-in lieu of the vaccum created by retreating religion. Ideally keeping the glory whilst offloading 'blame' (stigma actually) and responsibility to lay people. Even though lay people are too often set up for failure by having to follow their ignorant dictates, ignoring that those who have a condition often know as much, sometimes a lot more about what it means than those who've merely studied it.

There are so many reasons why I came to this conclusion even before I stopped dieting, it's just then it was out of focus as that was concentrated on seeing correct eating as a viable pathway. If it seems strange its because I ignored all my doubts and focused on getting results from my method, rather than bothering with the fact that obesity science as far as I could tell was a total joke with no real interest, by my measure for its own subject.

The acceptance of obesity as a construct is that of the obesity industry, I do not accept that being fat is a disease/eating disorder/sinful state/slag heap product of bad habits etc., nor that is a useful way of approaching or the underlying basis of mis-using the term disease to create an effect-add or take away stigma-rather than for its meaning.

But above all, I do not accept that because someone comes from a certain kind of background that this gives them special rights over anyone else, similar to a role of master and serf. I assess their ideas and if I feel they make sense, fine, if not, then I don't intend to knowingly allow 'rank' to dictate. I do not wish to worship my equals,  I seek comfort in other ways.

I could think of some names for them too-and probably come up with a better and more cogent parody of histopathology to boot and insist they call themselves accordingly, regardless of their assessment.

Luckily for them I was brought up to believe that I am just one person, not the secular replacement for the priesthood or a self appointed dictator of reality especially to those who know better -from a place of ignorance.

I was taught other people exist and they deserve my consideration by that very existence. So those who expect me to call myself anything they state or grounds I consider illegitimate, just look as deluded and irrelevant to me as I would imposing on them.

They need not worry, some people venerate everything they say, feel validated and loved by their every utterance and as long as that is consensual, that is up to them. Deference should no longer be seen as a perk of a medical degree,  now they are associated with such cant and shallow pretence.

I don't accept obesity at all. It should also be remembered that those who tell us to accept our obesity and that the first stage to exiting it is to accept that we have a problem with obesity natch (ye gads, think of the children).

And how many times have we been told that the impetus of the spread of obesity is people not realising that they are overweight/obese.

I leave the promotion to them, it should be obvious that if I don't accept it I'd hardly be interested in promoting it would I?

That is the vocation of those who believe we must pathologisevalidator.

Listen to them and learn.

Don't be made to care

There's a stock admonishment that used to go around back in the day. When a recalcitrant kiddiewink was making an insouciant stand against adult authority culminating with a pouty;

"I don't care"

Said adult was to don their best adult drag, pull themselves up to their full height with chest puffed out and pull off this coup de théâtre:

"Don't care was made to care"
There's an echo of this when I think of the moaning of people who just want/need to discuss obesity in a calm and reasoned atmosphere and their 'despairing' suspicion that 'oversensitivity' from fattiez may not allow them to freely do so.

I'll pause whilst you ROTFLOL.

Its funny (expression not fact)those who are happy to go on about how the greed of fatties, the too much eating too much indolence, too much self indulgence of fatties is the problem. Those whose plan is to hurt fat people into action and hurt them with that action. Do not build such considerations into their scheming.


Too much causes pain, too much letting yourself go corrupts, makes things bad, above all, means you must commensurately starve and so on we are told. Yet surprise surprise, like most pompous and mindless hypocrisy, it doesn't listen or learn from itself at all.


Because that actually goes for the supreme indulgence of hating on fatties. The purpose of which is to injure, upset and shake up. It's an extreme solution, which could only begin to justify itself if it pays off, it hasn't.


The pure extremism of this solution should promote a watchful and honest attitude, above all a full consideration of consequence. Knowing that this solution has a limited time frame to pay off, before nervous burnout sets in. Because we are talking about real human people, and that means they will burnout right?


You can see this didn't occur to the boneheads one iota. Instead drooling incohate rage and loathing has been indulged until it has gone beyond the clownish and comical passing into the sinister and unnerving.

And beyond.

Yet many people somehow resent the onset of burnout and behave as if fat people are denying them their fun social duty. Now the doody has hit the fan much whining has ensued about we must be able to talk about food and eating without it being a world of pain.
People should have cared more about that before and worked this desire into the hate strategy.

I suppose this must be how excess can end up undermining what you so desire. Ahh, another lesson learned

Hypocrisy

After the big dogs have marked out their prey, others are drawn to make use of the this. Fatness functions like that, people find it a convenient place to offload baggage they gathered elsewhere and feel unable to deal with there. A willing can do attitude has marked fat people out as quarry and advantage has been taken to rewrite us according to the torrid fantasies of those who have taken charge.

There are a whole lot of arguments that appear to have been decided, but are clearly unresolved, I thinking about the part we play in our own states of being. The tussle between where our agency and control begins and ends uses fatness to act as an example of what we want to believe, but may seek to avoid in our actual lives.

The argument about fatness being under our direct and conscious control ironically has greater merit among things where it has become less acceptable to make them mainly due to the sanction of authority. These states, being of a more psychosomatic hue lend themselves more readily an appearance of resolution via the kinds of quack 'cures' that are profitable for those who have the influence to bestow validity.

The nub of the argument centres on the realisation that in our totally righteous desperation to rid ourselves of the stigma that prevents the healing process from starting or completing its course, we have in part thrown away part of our agency that we also needed to heal. We have been taught to fuse responsibility and fault with feelings of sin. Being to blame=we are bad, it is not a neutral expression of fact.

For instance we say “it’s not your ‘fault’ that you have x nervous disorder, don’t blame yourself” that’s wholly right, however in this process we’ve overlooked the fact that it is possible, or should be so, to say yes I am playing a part in this, without any burden of shame at all. In other words, fault doesn’t have to equal any shame at all.

If you break a leg, it can be your 'fault' without that meaning you 'deserve' it, its purely a comment on circumstance. After tying ourselves in this knot, distancing ourselves from the part we play in our states of being in order to distance ourselves from the prospect of debilitating shame -partly a legacy of our moral traditions- we then go on to insist these neuroses are illnesses without cure.

Meaning that to go any further towards the source of the trouble would not be possible. This must be a large part of why we've embraced the drug route to solve things like anxiety and neurosis. It models what we want, restoring ourselves cleanly without messy judgement.

In a way, it could be seen that the de-stigmatization process hasn’t gone far enough, it should be extended to cover responsibility, perhaps even more when it comes to things such as neuroses and mood disorders because that which is overburdened is also what carries the shame and also what needs to heal itself-the nervous system.

Having stopped short in this way, we are stuck with this uneasy medium of recognizing our culpability stigmatizes us without doing anything about that. Except fleeing like a trapped animal having to gnaw off its foot to get away from a worse fate. What reactions to fatness has shown me is that many people have an underlying sense that by letting go of the stigma, we are also letting go of some part of the agency we need to deal with our worries.

That missing part of our capacity to act is engaged with by projecting it onto fat people and not so much to work through it, as to repeatedly invoke in a circular and repetitive manner because of the fear of troublesome blame. Nothing is resolved; and fat people-with the same fear of being blamed as everyone else- end up being stigmatized through having this culpability projected on to us, without the usual "it's not your fault", to hide behind.

It's not so much the stigma of being fat, it's that fatness gives permission to stigmatize fully without the self defence of "it's not your fault" to hide behind.

We come to represent a simplistic model of how people want to resolve these matters, without the messy complexity of explanations. We hear constantly that “no-one takes any responsibility anymore” then that quickly zero’s into only fat people we've come to represent the taking of responsibility that everyone thinks we all should but no-one really feels able to, including us.

One of the irksome things about this is that fatness it lends itself least to this kind of responsibility (or lack of it) as cause. But we are in this position not because of its suitability but more because of our willingness to co-operate and engage with the projected view.

Although people keep trying to cast it as such fatness is not in itself a neurosis, it’s more a sign of the body/mind seeing off the threat or possibility of it, than the imbalance itself. More a defence against than one in itself.

If it was a neurosis fat people who are supposed to have lower incomes on average than thin, would be turning up disproportionately in places where poorer people in nervous distress tend to be found, in prison, on the streets, even in some kinds of mental institutions, the latter considering that weight gain, sometimes rather pronounced can be a feature mental health treatment and recovery.

Rather than trying to evade ‘responsibility’ or self blame, we have been perfectly ready to believe that we were at fault, even when that caused pain and anguish, where others might have been a bit more circumspect tending a bit more toward self preservation. It is that willingness that has been ruthlessly taken advantage of.

This truth deeply offends and angers everyone, we are all singing from the same hymn sheet that if people would just take more responsibility-i.e. blame on themselves- they would be better people cure their ‘self-inflicted’ states and problems and the world would be a better place.

By totally shattering this narrative we have caused unspeakable offense, so much that people wish to deny and erase our actual realities so they can superimpose what they desperately want to be true instead. That we have been, unreasoned, rebellious, belligerent, bullying and fought tooth and nail to keep doing everything we were told not to.

Worst still, we have proven that not only does readiness to take blame, own up and shout mea culpa often not heal your woes, it marks you out for the utmost contempt, being taken advantage of too. By the very people who claim it is the decisive factor in self improvement. Far more that it can actually make you look stupid as if you have no defences and little self respect, if you did you’d set boundaries and say so far and no farther. It can and does help you to collude in you being ridden roughshod over.

The real ‘healthy’ behaviour is instant and consistent denial whilst considering any accusation carefully, an insistence on rigorous self defined boundaries, constant and consistent self advocacy, a default MYOB mentality and above all, demands for better and more sympathetic treatment.

Kind of the opposite of what we all seem to want to pretend we believe. The fact of accusing fat people of the latter behaviour is unpleasant, but then, the people who are accusing us are the ones who have tended not to follow our lead quite so much, more especially in recent times. Our behaviour is in a sense out of time all this seems to be so much nostalgia for when people knew their place and were ever so humble.

As many have known who fought the power precisely to free themselves from this kind of lie, that if you are good righteous and behave yourself and do as you are told, you will inherit the earth.

Unless they are talking about dirt.

Hold the pity

It's time to start the pity wagon for us fatties, natch.

Fat people require everyone to commit to a supreme effort of will to invoke some faux pity to join the faux concern; moralising, advice, sternness, or any other of garden variety ham reactions we have to snooze through. Do not deny us the pain of this, because we may not surrender. Don't bother with quaint notions such as courtesy given should be returned.

The general consensus to withdraw common pleasantries from fat people in order to make us feel toot bad about being fat and 'motivate' us to mend our ways with the 'incentive' of being re-assimilating into Club Normal were we will enjoy again all the fringe benefits of pretending the sun shines out of our behinds at the expense of some other designated scapegoats no doubt.

Rather than just stopping all this the thing to do is to superimpose feelings of forbearance on top.

Sounds divine.

Our vehicle for escape from the sin bin is broken and therefore cannot deliver us to the required destination. Luckily right thinking folk claim not to believe this, thereby seeing off any need to stop subjecting us to what a lot of them can hardly tolerate themselves. How fortunate for them!

You may wonder, how is sympathy giving to others what they give to you? Answer; apply lower standards to yourself than you do to them. That way you can behave worse and still act all noble dispensing pity upon the benighted. And whenever you feel like raising your standard a tad, you can claim a great moral victory.

Cue mucho gratitude from smiling yet tearful fatties, oh the pathos!

Oh you shouldn't [seriously; you should not].

Don't think anything of the courtesy shown toward you, no really, don't.

Bodies normalized through existence

Just seen this through Bri. It's a consistent theme, because models are felt to be too skinny, yadda yah, the fashion industry must not yield to the 'danger' of showing fat(ter) ones or whatever.

I'm not sure why, seeing as fat people are responsible for their own fatness, and it is already a prevalent state, it's hard to believe people wish to open another stream of pretence that says that people are promoted into fatness by seeing fat bodies.

They must be lying about our lack of attractivenes. Maybe it is felt that we are all so brain dead that we will eat poo if it was 'promoted' at us. But then, this is from people who've fallen for the promoted opinings of the obesity industries. So maybe it's not as insulting as at first glance.

Not everyone agrees with this analysis of models=eating disorders/body issues. Anymore than say, glamorous professional athletes cause girls to try and slim down.

I prefer the direct and more obvious trigger of the social stigma against fatness, and the parental and societal approval of this, The entreaties directed at fat people to "just stop eating" and you'll be thin, is not a dog whistle to listening daughters. With that basis, already fearful of the social death that fatness feels like, sometimes even more so than actual death, are subject to the horror of normal female development that comes with puberty.

What's in their heads is the 'advice' they've heard so often from those they trust and believe in to guide them through this world.

I'd be willing to bet if people stopped saying that alone, there would be a small measurable difference in the level of eating disorders.

However as we know, being confronted with one's own behaviour can be very upsetting and hurtful to the feelings, especially if your strength lies in the underlying view that only pure goodness can possibly flow from your endeavours. It is unacceptable for nice people to be held to account for any of their actions except in a profoundly supportive atmosphere with an open ended invitation to come to terms with it in their own sweet time.

Directly implicating someone in their own actions is for other lower forms of life, who are basically corrupt anyway, so it's good for them. A culprit must be found!

Step forward the rag trade and models. Sound and fury can be directed there.

There is no doubt that images of super-skinny models strutting down the fashion runways promote unhealthy dietary and lifestyle habits. My emphasis.

Yep that's right, nothing to do with the medical and health establishment and the charterisation of 'obesity' as death sentence and the deliberate campaign to release selective 'facts' to unleash sockpuppets to 'peer pressure' fatties weight into submission.

The fashion trade makes a far better target and a great way to maintain desired prejudice intact, whilst appearing to deal with the consequences of that prejudice, which makes you feel less mean. Because you aren't a mean person, certainly, it's not your idea of yourself.

Keeping hating intact is more important than it's effects on our children. Though this blaming of others shows the uneasiness about cause. In the same way people don't care about using fat children to stigmatize a new generation, they feel similarly about eating disorders fall out.

I'm not sure exactly why. We want to believe family love especially that between a parent and child is unconditional, things are far more complex that we can face.

We've all heard the phrase 'brother fought brother' in times of war, the same family on opposite sides. The truth is, our survival or sense of it, crosses family lines, and that is something that fat people need to remember when we wonder how our families and friends can shaft us on weight.

Most of all we need to survive and our ideas and ideals form the basis of that survival.

Maybe this kind of thing forms the basis of why we can sometimes place our views above the interests of our children. I'm sure it is conscious although it has a thoughtless deliberatness about it and it's hard not to find it deeply unsavoury. That we fancy ourselves so intelligent yet choose to do no better than this.

Ironically, or not, the same thing makes the complainer here, Tammy Lovett and her ilk likely to continue to blow their fuse. If there was a genuine way to alter weight up or down, people would be able to do it without endangering their health. The corruptness of diet fail lends itself to the politics of social distinction.

Equality for all, at the same time, would break the system and kill us all as we dissolve into pure anarchy etc.,

And as there isn't anything to stop this entirely predictable trend, people will continue to become fat and remain so. Despite all attempts at intervention, it is an overall and underlying worldwide trend; that's the overriding 'normalizing' factor here. Not frock makers.

At the same time, it is vital that in our attempts to re-balance the scales, we don’t rush to the opposite extreme and normalise overweight and obesity as legitimate lifestyle choices.

I must admit it's sometimes a struggle to credit the seeming inability of certain people to recognise the opinions fat people themselves have and why that doesn't seem to factor in all this. My body 'normalized itself, I finally recognized that.

The failure of weight loss strategies mean it is far more likely views like this will become de-normalized and de-legitimized because you can only buck reality for so long. I hope people will not continue to embarrass themselves by pretending to be shocked.

Hah! Even the notoriously unreal world of fashion is better able to cope with reality, than authority and those who parrot it's ideology.

But then, they didn't discover and insist on the calorie restriction 'cure all', so it isn't their fail

Crisis Hooks

Lara at Fatchicksrule reminded me of this cartoon by Ampersand. Inspired by this, I've decided to compile my top ten themes of the obeszoid crisis, AKA the first ten fourteen things that come to mind today.

My top ten fourteen hooks that sell the obeszoid crisis, in no particular order:

1-Fears about the freedom of people we don't like;

* So many of our problems stem from (other) people who are too liberated from the burden of (pointless) guilt, the authorities must find a route to usher in a new age of shame for them.

2-Compassion fatigue;

* We've tried enough things to assist the less fortunate/ marginalized we're exhausted and/or threatened, it's time for a brave new era of blame.

3-Fears that it will all run out;

* Somebody has got to represent our collective guilt and shame for our wastefulness. We've got to sacrifice somebody to assuage the gods, so they don't punish us the rest of us for it.

4- Unwitting diet adherence facilitators;

* Yes, if you can make yourself/ your life as shit as possible, that'll help me with my diet, thanks. And for fat self hating losers too.

5-Displaced sense of injustice;

* Somebody accessible has to stand as proxy for all the more inaccessible sinners who get away with it. We are owed catharsis.

6- Assisting progress for the unready;

* It's easier to let go of racism, classism, sexism et al, if we have another -ism to replace it with.

7- Seeing off the threat of social anarchy;

* If nobody feels debilitating self loathing how are people of merit going to stay at the top.

8 - A fauxgressive indulgence;

* Fat phobia is a better fairer class of prejudice because an obeszoid can be any age, race or gender -it's prejudice for a diverse age.
9- Assisting the medical monopoly to maintain it's hold whilst reducing it's workload profs;

* Blaming fatties is an excellent way to re-introduce the public to the old primitive superstition that illness is their fault that way they get most of the responsibility for their health and we get the power.

10-Patsy for ever rising medical costs;

* Is there a better way to divert attention from those who are really milking the medical model dry and delay threat of change.

11- Accessing a feminist beauty myth called "health".

* Slimness suggests androgyny fatness is physical ostentation either too femme /butch fatties are making a point with their bodies. Feminist BM is about women looking like they're ready to fight the patriarchy in the streets, at any moment. It's our duty to be fit enough (looking). Who heard of a fat Amazon?

12- Science bluffing for dummies;

* Mentioning calories in calories out is mansplaining and therefore deeply scientific.

13- A vehicle for improving for social conditions;

* Fat people are just a means to an end, they should relax and not take it all so personally.

14- Fears of encroachment;

* Fat people are taking up more than their designated space, that means I'm missing out on my allotted entitlement.

15-Religiousity for the irrelgious

* We had God and sin and heaven and all that. Now we have food and weight and the perfect diet of everlasting life. Amen.

No inspiration to spare for fattiez

I know little about the programme mentioned which is OK by me because my comment is about the laughable misapplication of the word inspiration. Apparently this usage refers to the idea that others should be constantly reminding fat peeps they are fat and this is part of 'getting us healthy'. Blerrugh. Fat youth must be subject to this message even when trying to seek relief in mind numbing entertainment.

Fat people being 'inspired' is us knowing our place in the order of things, submissive and accepting of our demoted status. Being second to the kind of people who pretend it's their duty to exhort you to get health, who are ashamed of just hating as freely as they want to, is an unfeasibly low standard as one can manage whilst still having a couple of functioning brain cells to rub together. No wonder believing in it too often boxes you into a kind of depression. It's not how inferior you are supposed to be in absolute terms, but who you are supposed to be inferior in comparison with. I'm intellectually inferior to Einstein and less brave than Yaa Asantewaa that's not a downer because those are high standards indeed. No it's being second class to bovine scraps of mediocrity that's lifeforce sapping.

Having this foisted upon your youthful mind and yielding to it, is an assault on your brain which does it's own comparison and asks: "Second to that this? After I showing my goods-such as keeping you alive, thinking brilliant thoughts etc., this is what I have to work with?" Then it goes on a work to rule in protest and bingo you've got a form of 'depression'. And who can blame, how would you feel?

Anyone who falls for the idea that removing their self esteem from the essence of themselves and shifting it to the weight of themselves and thinks this is a win-because it looks good in comparison to the hate directed at fatties-is being made an arse of and is definitely not being respected one little bit. They need to inspire themselves out of their stupor. Quick smart.

I still find it hard to believe that this useful idiocy is being parlayed into a 'missionary amongst the savages' (hate) face saving exercise. Nice try but no big fat cigar. Haters are refusing to sense that those working their strings have absolutely no reason to respect them anymore than they respect fatties, why would they? We are all just the public to them who they can divide and rule. Using one side for peer pressure against the other shows we are two sides of the same coin fighting each other whilst we both get turned over, even if that tends to happen to some more than others. You only have to look at the way that so many lifelong thin people almost destroy themselves merely out of fear of becoming fat to know that we are all being sucked into the mire.

If you don't have sense enough to realise that and to their credit some do, then you'd best save your inspiration for yourself, down the line you may find you need it more than us.

Hate maketh the mark

Reading this *warning contains usual obesity tripe. I was nevertheless struck by an unusual kind of admission from the fatphobe meatpuppet contingent;

For all that it is a modern plague, as well as a ticking time-bomb, a drain on the health service and a chastening metaphor for western greed, a lot of people would miss obesity.

Well even vomit usually has some nice carrotey bits in it.

It could have been better, I once admired Ms Bennett but she appears to have petered out along the way, sadly. This indicates how everything is there to elucidate an interesting get out of hate card for committed fat phobes, that doesn't require any compassion. ZOMG, we are being suckered now, not just the fatties.

You may have missed that bit because it's not referred to directly, it is the usual fat people as human shield. We PBF's (poor, benighted, fatties) are being exploited; made so miserable that we are fleeced by those who market ineffective and punitive "cures" for fatness, oh yes.

But so are haters and worse still rather than either deciding to stop to the hate, because it's too expensive they prefer to keep paying so they can justify sticking fat people with the bill! Suggesting of course that everyone knows at some level we aren't costing enough to match orthodoxies about our supposed costliness.

There is no point in critiquing the spending of National Health Service funds, paid for by direct taxation, being funnelled directly to some diet pirate- an ex merchant banker no less, (the term linked to means-someone who is prone to pleasuring themselves, excessively) but I'm digressing- because just reading it as is does a job I can't improve on right now.

It is still shocking how easy it is to get money for old rope, moth eaten useless rope at that. When all is said and done, this money could have been so much better spent, it actually hurts that it has come to this with the collusion and enabler that is the desire to hate. Making thin people exempt from this removes what little incentive the burden of the costs of hate could be, leaving them free to hate as they see fit. Giving direct incentive for them to hate harder and harder and for the authorities to continue to wind them up.

The thought, chills.

Usually it is caring too much that is associated with laying yourself open to life threatening suckerdom. This is a salutary lesson in hatred picking everyone's pocket.

What a lot of people don't get about the underlying disappointment of people's investment in this fat phobia, is not just how much it hurts, but that people wish to continue with -isms to the extent of replacing them with new opportunities, like this current age of lipophobia.

I wonder if it's possible to do an index of just how much waste is caused by our many hatreds.

One route, many forms

Despite appearances, there is only one real basis of deliberately induced weight loss and that is by manipulating calories. By this I mean trying to reduce calorie intake-whether that increases or decreases the amount eaten and increase in expenditure of calories, increasing activity and things like increasing muscle mass in order to try and raise basal metabolic rate (the energy you use merely existing!).

And whether it's weight loss diets, exercise, gastric bypass or other weight loss surgeries, pills, the aim is the same, to starve and/or purge to induce weight loss. And that has become more important than weight loss because of what energy manipulation has come to equal. Control. The idea of control trumps weight loss, in a way reminiscent of the way a sense of control comes to trump dieting for anorexics.

All the current weight loss strategies are an attempt to work this hypothesis, it is the only real basis of weight loss. This is a distinct ideology of intervention as it does not compare with those who are naturally (metabolically)thin. The basis of the obesity crisis is for the purpose of substantiating that ideology, rather than making fat people thin. Which is entirely secondary.

Rather like a devout believer, say a Christian goes to a developing country lacking infrastructure to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS and refuses to promote condoms/safer sex practices as this doesn't accord with their beliefs, instead they promote only abstinence.

It is possible to say, that this person is compassion, dedicated, someone prepared to use their energies to help others, however, what is the most important thing about their approach (for them), reducing the spread of the disease, or their beliefs?

If they would rather cease their efforts than promote safer sex education, etc, then you would have to conclude that whilst it may or may not be important for them to reduce the spread of disease, their beliefs are actually most important, even more important than people's lives.

They would probably object to this by stating that abstinence works, if followed as advised.

This seems to me to be the way it is with the whole anti obesity campaign. Regardless of what people think about the dangers or consequences of obesity may or may not be, supporting the underlying ideology that we can regulate weight through the calorie control mechanism, is more important than anything.

This aspect reveals the part of the hold that anorexia can gain over a person's mind, in this example, it's the mind of society in general.

It shows how potent the desire for control of self is in our modern societies, this has made even the appearance of control important enough to protect at whatever cost.

This is one of the dilemmas of fat acceptance, by buying into the conflation of weight loss, an entirely natural part of the processes of the body with weight loss dieting an artificial and failed attempt at altering the course of the metabolism, we let society off the hook for it's behaviour.

Taking again, the example of HIV/AIDS, activists in this field may raise funds for research, raise awareness of things that actually have some effect.

And although there are campaigns on this score funded by voluntary organisations and government agencies, there is never any question that the answer is to be found in more research into the condition. Equally so, with other conditions that are also sexually transmitted even though they have a long history of intermingling with sexual stigmas.

Those who claim to be against obesity should have their behaviours and attitudes questioned by comparison to these kinds of examples of activism against a chosen condition- whether one thinks the disease model is appropriate for fatness or not. Because it's not merely the fact that we are in disagreement that is the problem, it is the behaviour of those engaged in the war against obesity that is that is truly indefensible. Even when taken on it's own terms, that is of the desire to prevent and or reverse fatness.

Fat people's humanness is the only taboo

No one's ever been afraid to call people fat, only declining to call them obese instead and deliver yet another one of their tedious death threats. This piece of tripe has caused much offence, due to the idiot who wrote it, (oh, there I said it)'s racist insensitivity. I couldn't feel a jot of offence at such racial buffoonery. Racism is accorded way too much dignity still, it is stupid. 

The writer also thinks citing the Bataan Death March.....;

The Japanese immediately began to march some 76,000 prisoners (12,000 Americans, the remainder Filipinos) northward into captivity along a route of death. When three American officers escaped a year later, the world learned of the unspeakable atrocities suffered along the 60-mile journey that became known as the Bataan Death March.

.........is an apt way to bring the trusty saber of truth to those she projects fear of the 'F' word onto.

Vicki Iovine, was prompted by the nightline discussion 'Is it ok to be fat?', proposes the idea that fat is like nigger. Then spends the rest of her pisspoor article undermining that and failing to notice. Because she's as silly as she accuses Marianne of being, along with MeMe Roth, 50-50's about right for her. 

They're taking a vox populi, to see if fat people are still taking it lying down. The real enquiry is testing if it's still okay to be a fat hater.

"People used to be afraid to be fat, now they're afraid to say fat," iow having been used the the acquiescence of fatties, folks are now somewhat unnerved by the beginnings of a fightback. Not to the extent of bothering to find out what fat people are saying though. Instead relying on their opinion of what fat people think. Which is that we're terrified of being told we're fat. Because we don't know, or we'd cease...........to be.........................fat.

The dozy bint thinks Kevin Smith calls himself fat because he's 'comedic' not because he knows what he is.  His obvious and well publicised rage fury and anger, becomes embarrassment, because Ms. I thinks that's what it should be and she's writing the script of what fat people think, as haters think is their birthright.

She is well out of step and with a mind buried deep in that curiously deadened mindset fat hating mugs you with. She even does that thing only the most worthless haters do, endless punning and use of fat related word, 'girth' and seeking his pound of flesh blah, blah (was that ever funny?) Fat people were never allowed to say no before without being accused of having had a grease spot on their shoulder.

It would be a chip but we've eaten it, boom! boom!

I remember when this used to be everywhere it just got so boring. Except to the sadder ones.

There is no failure, only feedback

Liver disease scientists look for ways to remedy liver conditions.

Lung disease scientists look for ways to remedy lung conditions.

Obesity scientists look for ..................... what exactly?

How many ways, fatness is a boo boo? How much fatties really should be quaking? How to perpetuate obesity science for the benefit of those employed by it?

Not the last one, that would be cynical. People like that are in it for the good of humankind.

Either way, the 'purpose' of obesity research doesn't seem to match the others, does it?

You don't have a dog and bark yourself as we say over here. Scientists are the dogs by the way.
If any of them wish to 'cure' fatness no one's stopping them. There has never been a point at which I've doubted for one second that the human body can shed weight as easily as it can gain it.
When you look at what the body can do and does, the way it forms and grows, all to a plan. it doesn't begin to be plausible on any level that a body that can gain weight, cannot lose it. For each and every force there is an equal and countervailing one.

That doesn't tell us whether its an opposite route to the original one or by some other pathway/s entirely. Just because you perceive one way, doesn't mean you can understand the other merely by reversing it. Brainy people know that better than any of us.

In fact, such is the response to induced weight loss by the body, it throws doubt on whether the route of weight gain itself is exactly as we think. It makes you wonder, is dieting the opposite of the way the body gains weight gain at all? Surely it would work better and be less painful if it was? I mean, think how painful weight gain is for most people most of the time; then think of dieting.

We are talking a chasmic difference.
How many gain weight in the Morgan Spurlock way, using his conscious and deliberate feeder diet? Beforehand, Spurlock had spent years on what was (for him) a highly restricted diet. Not wholly according to his own desires according to him, but to fit with his partner who is vegan. He planned his eating beforehand, based on dictates other than internal ones. To find out what would happen. Apparently he felt like really bad. It just so happens weight loss dieters don't feel to good either when they override their needs and requirements too.

No shit Spurlock.

Oh come on, it had to be done.

I wouldn't like to speculate. Moi? What I do know is if you try something and expect it to work and it doesn't. You find out why and use that information to take you toward what does.

If you are not doing that, if you behave like someone a in such a state of shock who can only repeat endlessly, it must be right, it just must be.

You tend to be seen as out of your gourd.

As the man said, the definition of madness is to do the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result. If you are presenting what doesn't amount to much as that which amounts to what you want, you are presenting nothing by making it look like it is something. That's the point where you show you've accepted failure.

So when people talk of 'giving up' and 'failure', the only failure here, is the refusal to accept the truth, as it is and move on to finding a legitimate way to connect with that. Instead you keep the cycle of failure in motion. Nobody who's tried a diet, or attempted to try or who's tried 'healthy eating' and couldn't hack it, is a failure. Not at all.

Shocked by fat fetishization

Thanks to Bri, I've come across this odd piece that reveals yet again that when fatness is not defined or informed by fat people or rational observation of us, it's all about those who are defining it.

Their preoccupations, their fetishes. Their creepy untrammelled unconscious that they usually keep repressed, maybe they don't even know it's there. Maybe it's even created by the decision to yield to fat phobia itself. Liberation of that subterranean hinterland is rarely pretty. But when this kind of crap is aimed at childhood, or those barely out of it, you wonder why these people don't remember themselves a bit more.

Their unprompted unconscious is showing a lot more than we want to see. Whether it's paedo appraisal of every aspect of a children and youngsters physiques, usually by women, presumably feeling they can get away with this sort of nonsense due to the apocryphal pretense that we can hardly be interested in the barely legal and stuff like that.

I actually feel that it is fat hate spreading to various areas of the mind, on the power of it's own momentum and the nature of sexual desire itself that promotes this effect and it's voyeuristic compulsions.

It's funny, she did seem to feel a little bit dirty about it too, describing herself as glad that the object of her affections hadn't notice her gawk eyed lasciviousness of the youngster she was observing, rather than a sudden awareness of the power this unexpected re-route had over her.

It gives a whole new meaning to the expression, "fat porn", which is supposed to be those weight loss programmes on TV, clearly those people don't get out much.

She actually manages to inveigle the reader as a co conspirator with her "attention to detail". I feel like I'm seeing a part of her I didn't really want to see like if she just posted a picture of her naughty bits.

First the drooling set up;

She was sitting with her back to me as I entered the ice cream place with my kids. She was very big – most likely not just medically overweight, but obese.

I think it's because she tells us three times in succession, what a big girl she is, that it reads like the set up to soft porn.

As she was waiting to buy her own crackscream, she surreptitiously glanced at her, again.

The author tells us how young and nubile this young lady was. About her fast mouth and her extra large cone in one hand. Oh, stop it! 'Feverishly texting', because how often do the youth text at more than a older person's snail's pace?

Then we start getting towards the money shot;

'She looked almost drugged – drugged with sugar I guess.'

Oh, by no means Mz Thing, it's you who sounds drugged and hypnotized. I bet when you managed to tear your eyes away they made a noise like breaking suction.
In the tradition of this kind of thing she has to flog a stereotype, she tells us of the orgasmic level of pleasure us fattez get from eatin'. Facility with hands also gets a special mention.

It was obvious that the eating and texting were giving her intense pleasure, soothing her.

Oh, rilly?

Well do me a favour love, buy an ice cream and pleasure yourself, see how long it takes you not to be able to eat then tell us that orgasm is compatible with eating.

It's a little unnerving if young fat people, especially if made shier by their fatness, could be subject not simply to disapproval, but the projection of this dubious kind of gaze, but I suppose that this kind of thing maybe inevitable. That doesn't make it any less edifying.I kept wondering why people keep mentioning their sex organs when it comes to any discussions around fatness.

It's always the excuse that it was the other person, never you. You were just "innocently" minding your own beeswax.

Unfortunately our intrepid authorette remembers back to this little episode as a cautionary tale, when thinking of fat acceptance. (your guess is as good as mine).

If you're feeling a bit queasy at that thought, you are not alone.

And if anyone knows the secret of getting a textingicecreameatingorgasm.
Feel free to share.

Big fat lies

There I was minding my own beeswax then I happened upon this. I don't even agree with all of it, yet no sanity watchers points required, even the comments are somewhat muted. As the writer Hannah Sutter shows it is entirely possible to discuss the area of weight, diet et al in a perfectly civil manner.

Undoubtedly this is something to do with the fact that she directs her disappointment at the government and politicians, rather than the sainted medical profession.

Outliers

One the things that has most convinced me of how unserious obesity science is about getting fat people slim, is the lack of interest in the outliers of its own field of study.

Thing about them is, they are the ones most likely to mainfest the condition anyone is studying, usually things are observed in them and traced back to those with lesser symptoms of the matter at hand.

Obviously all stages are observed, but usually outliers take up an inordinate amount of time, often at the expense of those lesser affected. Which has sometimes been a cause for complaint.


They are bound though to attract disproportionate interest to those really fascinated and wanting to achieve mastery.

So why is the field of obesity science so disinterested in the fattest people?

Often the compassion which drives genuine vocation is increased when one sees people with the greatest challenge, if you ignore them, what message does that send about your desire to relieve suffering or even to challenge your intellect?

Obesity science has always felt a mickey mouse area with no relevance to actual people.  I can barely think of anything I've learned from it that I've incorporated into my life. Although I'm sure there must be some people who want to achieve something, they don't seem that bothered about the impression given by most of those involved.

It doesn't seem to be getting in their way which is a surprise.

They have the chance to be household names and to find out something peole really want, so why isn't it attracting the ruthlessly brilliant to take a hold of it and really turn it into a compelling subject?

The whole thing is more concerned with those who are not fat than those who are at the top of the scale and that's what is so odd, getting into science for social control, to use its' influence to order people about rather than to cure what we are told by many is a disease.

Why no sense of urgency about reversing it? All the hype to what purpose? To just perpetuate your field so you can carry on regardless?

Science for people not interested in science, so they can play at it perhaps affect what seems a liberal bias into scientific thinking? I think we should be told.

No fat health dream

An article by a guy called David Frum illustrates so well how desperate some are to see ending fatness as the solution to health inflation. The frame fits the usual patsies;

And many are uncomfortably aware that self-destructive behavior is most often found among the poor and among minorities: Black women are more than three times as likely as white women to be severely obese.

Yeah, how could they behave fat, abusing themselves with racism and classism like that, not even having the decency to use their magic to clean up the mess. That magic stuff which makes society's whipping boys able to lap it up and not show any signs. Unlike those accorded more room to manoeuvre who still manage to come down with all sorts, some at their own hands too, no doubt.

Before assuming health outcomes are solely down to a favoured fixation and it's supposed endgame, one should make sure treatment, when received isn't an issue.

Black people may take less out of the system to deal with their issues, in terms of drug use anyway. That could could be implicated in putting timber on anyone prone to it. Before jumping to conclusions, I suggest people look into things like that and comparative consequence.

Which points up something else. Fatness is such an easy target, especially false equivalence. Children not wearing seat belts is hardly comparable to fighting a primary instinct of your life force. This assumption of free standing fatness, without context or positive intent for it-by the body, fails to take into account that when you try to deal with real things through suppression, you can just drive that energy elsewhere.

One could say the decline in smoking as good as that is has removed an obstacle to weight gain. I'm not advocating smoking. Just noting that stopping smoking doesn't necessarily stop the reasons for smoking.

Pretending there aren't reasons doesn't do that either. Take note this time.