Fear and Loathing

Fat generates fear and loathing, and it's not about looks or the supposed Darwinian reverence for beauty, heath et al. "Obese mannequins are selling women a dangerous lie". It's a (true) burden we must all endure, trying to work out what the hell ob cultists are going on about at any one time. We are told we must "treat" ourselves with exercise.

Your GP can advise you about losing weight safely by eating a healthy, balanced diet and regular physical activity.

Presumably one might wear stuff created for such exertions promoted as the primary weapons of war. You have to remember the 'obesity' construct and its cult, including its continued promotion of CRIWL-calorie restriction induced weight loss, requires the suspension of critical (and moral) faculties. This leads people to display something akin to trance logic,

An altered mental state in which a person’s normal capacity for critical analysis is suspended, and an increased level of logical inconsistencies is tolerated...the alternate thinking process that enables ideas that would be paradoxical to the conscious self to peacefully coexist within the mind

See what I mean?

I fear that the war on obesity is lost, or has even, as is fashionable, ceased to exist, for fear of upsetting people into an early grave.

We're talking about weight change, war is not required, all that is, is to find out how to reset the body's destination with regard to its (homeostatic) restoration of its own mass. Put simply, a way to use the body to alter weight, that works. Is that Tanya's complaint? Quackery continuing in place of science, about what a disgrace that is? 

Nike Inc, the multinational company named after the Greek goddess of victory, has introduced plus-sized mannequins to its flagship store in London to “celebrate the diversity and inclusivity of sport”. They wear the famous Nike tick, which says: welcome to the mainstream.

Okay, she's talking about the un or dis-easing of fat people to the point where it surpasses the dis-easing of (repeating) the same pathological and doomed experiment of weight loss dieting. This un-easing consists mostly of; medicalisation, pathologisation, bullying, insulting, punishing, condemning, silencing and hiding the existence of people above a certain size. Tanya feels this mannequin represents a violation of those well-known medical tools. Why isn't she prepared to state this clearly?

I would never want a woman to hate herself for what she finds in the looking-glass.  

She can't bear to think of herself as the type of person who would seek to make women unhappy on account of their looks. 

Advertising has always bullied women, but this is something more insidious. I have watched the spindly, starved creature – the child ballet dancer – who was, for many years, the accepted ideal, walking down the Paris runways in so much make-up you could miss the signs of malnutrition. It was an ideal designed to induce enough self-hatred that women would shop to be rid of it.

Always bullied, really? Not, welcomed them to the "mainstream"? You know I've never found this sort of rhetoric remotely plausible, not even when I first heard it as a child. Then I assumed I'd catch on eventually. Not so. 

My view is simpler, advertisers strive to shift the product of those who pay them. Haute Couture is well known to be a province of middle and upper class folk. Fashion uses thin models to sell their clothes as female curves were felt to distract from the rags they display. In terms of its mores, its an outgrowth of middle and upper class sentiments and ideals, of what they aspire to be.

Middle and upper class [slim] women complain about this by shooting the messenger, thin women and their bodies, but what they're really complaining about is not winning at thinning. They don't want to dismantle this system of "unattainable bodies", they want to win at being the it-girl. They're uneased about that so they re-route their complaint. Rather than examine their own feelings.

If this is about poor old innocent women being made unhappy bad men in advertising, why does the notion of having something that works for all women not really interest these complainers? Winning wouldn't be exclusive then would it? You can see this in the elitism of Tanya types in her desperately trying to have her celery and munch it too, trying to be underhand in exhorting everyone to keep fat women in their place, hidden.  

This sort of argument as it is presented is dead on its auto-dialled arse. Fat phobia is ruthlessly exposing it and others,

Recovery depends not on...... personal responsibility and seeing the truth.

Personal responsibility and seeing the truth eh? What's personally responsible about insisting your mind is in the control of advertisers? That they dictate your view of yourself? If you are so personally responsible, why don't you own your mind? Either you like the perfume etc., advertised, or you don't. If you do buy it-through personally responsibly earning sufficient funds- if you dont, leave it be. 

Why are you so oppressed by images folks trying to sell you stuff use? I'm waiting for you to tell me again in a way that doesn't require you to do/be the opposite of what you insist fat women are/are failing to be. Have at it TanTan.

the truth is not so pretty; it is unease that sells clothes and bags and perfume and cosmetics as redemption

What uneases you, eases us? Presumably that is the distance between refinement and erm, being as common as fat. How does feminism make sense if women differ so fundamentally?

The fat-acceptance movement, which says that any weight is healthy if it is yours, is no friend to women, even if it does seem to have found a friend in Nike.

FAM says pretty much what Tanya said in her 2008 piece, "In defence of our fatties, let them eat cake".

For many months now, it has been clear that I'm at war with society. Or rather, that society is at war with me. Call me paranoid if you must but everywhere I look, I am denounced, oppressed and scolded. According to the advertising industry, I am unattractive; men don't want me. Or if they do, they certainly won't tell their friends about it. Clothing shops don't cater for me. In fact, they detest me. In Bond Street, I am literally waved away from the racks of precious clothes.

Well.....

...the Kim Kardashian body – was even weirder, and worse. It’s both fat and thin – a pornographic body designed by gamers – and, if you are mad enough to want it, is only really achievable by surgery and sleeping in the gym.

Those hating fat women's bodies invariably like to go in hard on other women's bodies-they're demonstrating their fairness. Word to them, spreading your mysognist gaze to other bodies, isn't saving you. I mean, "pornographic body"? Your guess is as good as mine.

She obviously does want FAT women to hate themselves for what they see in the looking glass. That doesn't sound good at all. It would be bad enough if you said you wanted women to hate themselves on account of their looks. Picking out specific women somehow sounds like trying to creep through a squeaking door. The feminist notion of "sisterhood" ergo, all women and feminism itself is on the ropes.

But to have control over your body you must first know it; to be oblivious is not to be happy, unless you are a child.

Oblivious to what hun? It's called FAT acceptance, is thin now spelled f-a-t?

To know your body is not by any means to hate it, Tanya knows this, but how to advocate for women to be pressed into doing something by making them feel like shit about themselves until they keep doing it: for some, whilst complaining any such discomfiture oppresses women, without seeming to be a sell-out biche?

Dear o' lorrr, it's a conundrum I don't envy. 

Suffice it to say again, this could all be avoided by finding the proper way to alter bodyweight rather than trying to uphold discomfort to drive people into repeating failure and deepening despair. But people like Tanya don't seem to want that either.

Viner Doll Emission

What in the SEO is this?

Elaine Gormley was desperate when she turned to slimming pills. She had been obese since childhood, but lost a significant amount of weight by going to Slimming W💀rld classes in her early 20s. One in three slimmers have purchased pills online, according to the joint #FakeMeds survey by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and Slimming W💀rld.......Golder and Gormley eventually lost their weight healthily, thanks to Slimming W💀rld.

Sense a running theme here? It's supposed to be hidden by asking a question with an obvious answer; Why is the market for slimming pills booming?

“Everything I read and saw on TV said obesity was linked to every cancer you could imagine. It frightened me into thinking, ‘You’ve got to do something, you’ve only got yourself here for the kids now,” she says.

The 'obesity' blockade on relevance if not science, supports the weight must be lowered solely through calorie restriction and/or exercise purging, often for life rule.

Given the endless moaning about increase in societal body mass, its obvious that this is irrelevant relic of history. Science has produced a stream of "miracle drugs" [i.e. drugs that actually work], so there's a sense that an effective intervention should have arrived long ago. People taught slimming drugs are the "holy grail", will be on the look out for them.

Virtually any slimming drug ever promoted by health care has been harmful, ineffective, often both.

It is still entirely rational to sense changing your weight is inherently a trivial non-issue that should be something your body does whilst you get on with your life, not something you have to permanently sink significant parts of your conscious bandwidth too, something that configuration of your brain was never designed for.

Every time life throws a curveball, you're supposed to expect to fall off, imagine if contraception "worked" that way. 

Rather than face facts the guardian appears to be continuing to double down on its attempts to salvage itself at least in part by using the forces of 'obesity' promotion + commercial slimming. Writer Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett just sounds like another transmission outlet for her mistress's voice.

When it comes to losing weight, most of us know the only real way to do it is a sustained period of healthy eating and exercise, requiring hard work and patience.

A real Viner doll in fact. The latest in a lengthening line, including token males Denis Campbell and George Monbiot.

When guardianwoman especially tries to release their inner conservative on other women in this way, it's like women who'd tell their daughters to stay in abusive relationships due to the "sanctity of marriage", not convincing. To be that, you have to apply that same level of empty conservatism to yourself, and they most definitely don't.

When Rosie Boycott-seen over here as a pioneering second waver-claimed 'obesity' was a side effect of feminism,

A food expert and adviser to Sadiq Khan has claimed the current obesity crisis was fuelled by feminism as more women swapped the kitchen for the workplace.

Feminists were'n't falling over themselves to say; "If we're pushed to cook everything from scratch around work and/or other duties; hard work and patience shall overcome",

The rightwing media made its mind up about working mothers long ago. Don’t expect a groundbreaking Harvard study to change it 

I won't expect the reality of the failure of calorie restriction dieting to do any such either. Complaining about the extent of BMI 30 + is complaining about the failure of slimming industry and its non-existent 'product' of telling people to starve and purge off weight.

Look at the tone of RLC's previous article, we can see how easily her same dosage of tendentious condescension can be applied, "How to refocus the spotlight on female writers"? "hard work and patience." ~ Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett.

How helpful.  

Women too often have their lives rather than their books reviewed.

Oh I'm feeling that, are you? When slimy arseholes just keep making shit about you or your life or your supposed personal failings when its really about thoroughly contrived systemic failures,

...following a breakup and an operation, the 29-year-old from Belleek in County Fermanagh had gained all 10 stone 6lb of it back.“I lost my focus. I felt I was unloved,” she says.

Articles about giving working mothers, mothers or women a break from pointless exacting standards, play up such a glaring exemption. Having a part-time extra job acting out function your body could easily do itself,is no way to live. 

It's hard to take being expected to feel unworthy of benefiting from accurate and relevant science from those with such lofty expectations of life. I don't share those, I just want people to be able to alter their own bodies themselves, without trauma or pathology.

Why are we able to pull the desire to be an anorexic athlete out of our arses, but women can't just bow down to lesser demands made on them? If this isn't a thing, others seem such non-issues.

We cannot be on the same page if there is this chasm of expectation.

Feminism is assumed to be for the bourgie/haute-bourgeoisie + upper class women isn't it? At times like this, they can't even be bothered to hide it.

Feminists? Selfists, more like. Not even choosy-choice can make them pretend we should be allowed to choose whether to inflict this on ourselves. Feminism is an exemption for them from patriarchal dictates, the rest of us can just have good old misogyny. 

In case the likes of Katharine Viner don't want to get it, way more than the hard work and patience required for any reasonable aim has been expended, nothing we have done or will do, no sacrifice we have made or can make, no costs we have paid or will pay, not even our own lives will ever be proof enough for anyone, including the sorority.

The 'obesity' crusade has weakened women, and it's weakened and exposed feminism.

I don't care what the media is getting for this shit, keep supporting it and we'll continue who applies that term to no-one but their own supposedly elevated class or anyone they slum-to-anoint. 

Hunger for a Change

Extracts from Roxane Gay's book Hunger featured in the guardian the other day. I admit I wasn't looking forward, I'm not her type of reader. "My body is a cage of my own making" turned out to be a different kettle of fish all together.

Beautifully written-so say those who know about these things. I'm kidding, even I could tell! At first I was wound up by that title-I doubt its anything of the sort, her own making that is. After some time I remembered the book is called Hunger. I began to sense a certain aggression-"I'm saying, I did it to myself, now you can stfu and listen for once."

Someone used to crowd control. 

I even began to wonder whether I've been at fault for not being more prepared to accommodate what's required. For me though, it wouldn't be true. I know weight isn't conscious choice. I know a body demanding more energy than is about function not emotion.

Is weight an unconscious choice choice though? I've always tried to leave that open, but the more people claim it is, the less convincing that feels, esp. given their explanations. Why is the big question, why go to all that trouble?

And where does this wellspring of what-ob-means come from? Is it genetically influenced?

It's a case of only when proper means of reversing body mass is available, will it be easier to perceive just how mechanical this all is.

In some sense, the reaction of the readers was most peculiar. Never have so many 'nice' middle class people been so relieved and joyous about such monstrous violation. As long as you're working within the current favoured ob trope for those who think they're nice-Nice Guys [I'm using that pansexually]-"Food addiction", that is.

Though more rigorously moderated-to minimise the, "I was raped and still managed to maintain a hell-thay wait" type comments, the extent of collapse of the usual impenetrable gabble, you know it, I'm not even going to mention it, was quite alarming. As if the biggest problem people have with fat metaphysics is the lack of (perceived) brokenness on offer- that complaint undermined only by self-pitying whines about "self-pity".

Like, this is how to be a woman/ finally-a fat woman.

Slimness signifies woman in some way, the absence of it seems to equate to the absence of womanhood, with the knowledge that it is there. Which lends a sense of impertinence. The criticisms of fat activists are tendentious and strained.

Fat women it seems are perceived as impinging on the space usually assigned to masculinity- without the qualifications for it. Therefore we come across something like aggressive, but low (very) low status males. Notable are the reaction of women, who were just as relieved/happy that finally fatz had joined them and they could get behind a fatty-joy of joys.

Nothing new, but I'm still surprised it makes this much difference especially to the sort of women informed by feminism. 

Though it is 2017 and not 18 or even 1717, it seems women cannot advocate through argument, or rely on reason they must emote, from a place of being breached. The more 'unsympathetic' the greater the impact needed to crack through the hard carapace of favoured delusion.

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

Four aspects spoke to me. How these types require you to talk about being, i.e. "I chose fat, using food" to do x. How people treat you as a fat person. The impotence imposed on any fat person who's ever tried to be slim/lose weight-the latter goal replaced the former when it became clear that this route had turned that into a pipe dream.

And the parts I enjoyed most, about playing your duty,

I am, perhaps, self-obsessed beyond measure. No matter where I am, I wonder about where I stand and how I look. I think, I am the fattest person in this apartment building. I am the fattest person in this class. I am the fattest person at this university. I am the fattest person in this theatre. I am the fattest person on this aeroplane. I am the fattest person in this airport. I am the fattest person in this city. I am the fattest person at this conference. I am the fattest person in this restaurant. I am the fattest person in this shopping mall. I am the fattest person on this panel. I am the fattest person in this casino.

The self absorption of neurosis, in this case imposed neurosis of the 'obese' characterisation, so true. It's this kind of crap that drove me to step out of dutiful portrayal of the 'obese' role, remembering you are doing baad.  I know the comment is more about Roxane's awareness of her size, but its what you're supposed to say to yourself, remember you are fat.

It's motivational.

Being multiply-raped at the age of 12 is so unthinkable that it was just as much so after I read it as before. Nothing can make that fit in my head, my imagination runs out. Yet I recognised parts;

...no one but those boys could hear me scream.....the surprising strength in their limbs. I remember that they laughed a lot. I remember that they had nothing but disdain for me.

At that moment I thought, how little has changed, I couldn't help myself. So much of being abused in general is like what people want the experience of fat to be. Not for their own personal satisfaction you understand, for the good of health. Of society.

If folks want a mythos about why people "choose" to be fat, why not that when you have a trauma or shock, your nervous system assumes the construction of that trauma, the head becomes dissonant. Being an ob thing is a good alignment.

Is that true? Not the point, its better than the ones made up by others.

As it is those assaults-and this is why the Internet feels strangely old-fashioned a lot of the time-seemed to reshape RG's nervous system, straining it. Around that goes gain, over time, especially if that doesn't retreat sufficiently. It depends on tendency as always.

Eating is taking in energy. It is the response to hunger and hunger increases when the systems that regulate and colate it are disturbed, and/or the body needs more energy. Few can sit and just eat and eat without hunger or energy misalignment. 

She also seems to be a metabolic outlier. At the end of an interview she said that she'd grow 12 or so inches at around age 16, which seems extraordinary to me. Though not all tall people are fat obviously, it shows real potential toward growth.

Her top weight was 577lbs and if you still have to ask why she had to hit that, the answer is of course, no reason whatever....except, if you can stop a person's body from hitting 577, then you can stop them from hitting 200 or less.

The first rule of medicine is to stabilise. We are still waiting for the industry/field to manage that rather conservative target after all these decades due to it not being found in how much sugar is in digestive buscuits. All that despite their sniffiness at our lack of anorexia talent. Not to mention the increasing ability of others to stop all sorts of cells from proliferating.

I wish I had known I could talk to my parents and get help, and turn to something other than food.

I must say I laughed out loud at the mention of "help" out there that would have stopped Roxane's body in its tracks. If proper investigation had lent itself to inducing a neural realignment, that would have taken something out of the trauma, make her more able to discuss it.

Why would a girl want to tell the parents she has so much compassion for what had happened to their young daughter? Children often feel for their parents. For the responsibilities they have, their emotional/mental states, and what it would mean to them if they knew. Why should a child so utterly betrayed have go through another unthinkable thing? Another loss?

Many people cope by not telling those they love. They're hanging on to the view of themselves before.

She has so many symptoms of the kind of souped up traumatised system and if mercifully that could be made to return to a rest state, the relief she'd have gotten and would still get would probably be appreciable.

That's supposed to motivate research. 

The fact that she loses a bit of weight every time she goes on a dietary regime is a possible sign that her body might respond rather readily to this in a way that would aid the reversal she desires.

We are told constantly we are sick, yet people are expressing surprise that Roxane is in pain, really? So they do know they're lying. Certainly 'obesity' wallahs know some are in pain, they just don't give a damn, they want to tell you you deserve it and there all, "We don't know nuttin' about nuttin'."

I have been wracking my brains for years as to why they've developed this hang 'em and flog 'em mentality when it comes to fat people. I don't claim to be perfect, but over and above umm ethics, the idea of other people's suffering doesn't interest. I don't get what makes this so compelling.

I doubt we'll find out any time soon, they don't want to be that in touch with their fee fees.

Getting people like Roxane's systems to return to a more normalised state would would be grand, but that would also interrupt the ob narrative of distress and sickness. So, many of those involved are just going to keep fucking around with nonsense like "food/eating addiction", whilst pretending to be doing science.

A reminder of what certain establishment scientists and medics wanted to do to gay men and AIDS, under the cover of science. One shudders to think what would have happened there if they'd got their way. 

The thing that's saved fat people is that being fat is not disease or inherently a pathology in and of itself, though if it was, the sort of body count of the various opiate crises ironically would have jerked people out of this ugly stupor.

That doesn't mean there isn't a job to be done. I've made it plain that scientists/researchers owe people a debt of honour in this affair. And, that would open up a portal to greater achievement in various fields of physical and mental health.

Slander and lies have been told to hurt people who simply haven't deserved it. Whatever anyone thinks or says, the phony baloney attempts to cast weight as addiction/eating disorder/mental health problem won't work. The buck for this culture of false disease must stop somewhere and it has to be here.

This is going to have to be solved properly, nothing less will do.

Presumably that's the underlying source of rage.

Settled Points

Whilst trawling for something else, I landed on a blog representing a notion that epitomises the divide between the fat standard and what the mainstream applies to itself.

This blog was going on about how set point theory was ultimately condescending and infantilizing to, in this case, women. Keeping them from taking responsibility for their weight (and this was part of why fat acceptance was losing its way).

Another one of her posts spoke about a certain neurotic condition, in the usual way, as if it was an illness.

That represents nervous imbalance as a set point. And that looks exactly as condescending, infantilizing, shifty and vanity serving as you think acknowledging CRIWL is not the right way to achieve weight loss does.

In case of any need of a reminder, as CRIWL is the only route to weight loss. Most people will have to accept the size they are.

If that's confusing, I'm saying that the idea that an imbalanced nervous system is some kind of an illness is in the main, vanity serving drivel. Remember, one of the chiefest foes of dealing with neurosis=vanity.

Yes, there are a minority of people who have functional disorders of some kind, that make them more likely to become mentally unbalanced in this way. Either in terms of the formation of their nervous system, or their organs.

Mainstream therapy culture has advancing this comforting gesture of a set point, for decades. Therapy's efficacy is, shall we say, someone moot [tact-c'est moi; today]. Ergo, someone has to explain why, someone goes into therapy, on the premise that they have an issue, therapy is supposed to solve this. It how shall we say, doesn't. How to explain that?

Therapy doesn't work?

The decision was made to define neurosis as something that is like an infectious disease. Things like depression etc., can make you feel very unwell, they can actually make you sick, but they aren't like illnesses. They aren't a set point, they're more a settled point.

It's often strange when others see in fat people how they themselves act all the time, but don't seem to notice, or remark on. Probably as they know they'd be challenged.

If anything, it was this attitude that was belatedly applied to fatness-which is why its named and why its so contested. Fat people are not subject to the rules applied to others. Whereas those rare people who have a neurosis based on internal fillips become the template for anyone diagnosed with that condition, no matter how far away they are from there.

Fat people are defined by people who are ill and fat, and they're defined as people who would be well, if they weren't fat.

And before those who are fat and neurotic and think this is an outrage get excited, you have already accepted what I'm saying, you just don't apply it to your neuroses-same as everyone else. Anyone accepting the notion that weight or health can be controlled by changing your thinking, eating and activity has accepted the idea that a settled point is not a set point. That your neurosis is open ended and can change in an instant and/or remain for a lifetime. Potentially by your own actions.

The biggest noise made about neuroses is not; just calm down is wrong, its that just calming down is real hard when your nerves are in that state. You do actually have to calm down, cheer up, stop checking, etc.,

You can be fat to thin for anything from a lifetime to a short or no time. Ditto your nervous/mental state. You've all already accepted this, via the fat standard.

Shut up Catocracy

Can women pimping what they imagine is male favour just shut up. No question mark. If you are so concerned with the health of chubby or fat women, confine your comments to insisting on proper science into ways of manipulating body weight successfully and painlessly.

Rather than go all Saudi Arabia and claim fat/ter women shouldn't be seen in public. Our bodies are not obscene and do not need to be removed from view. We've already come from that. We hear it- slimness is western hijab. 'Tis the means to get there has a crater sized hole in it and keeps sinking before it reaches the bank. Deal with that or admit you just want fat people to attack themselves for your entertainment, profit and social advancement *yawhn.*

I'm not getting into arguments about whether the tag 'obese' is wrong for Ashley Graham because its insulting and she's bootiful. People still cannot seem to get that 'obesity' starts at a BMI of 30 and that most fat people fall between 30-35.

What is offensive is the way certain people have the capacity to re-name and/or re-classify and demote human beings, in order to produce a continuous stream of lies about them. The suspension of science is mortifying.

I knew this "thin models = anorexia" would be used against fat bodies. I have always regarded that as thoroughly disengenous. The size of fashion models is an expression of attitudes held by those who are trying to blame it on young women, often of their own class!

The motivation is similar, envy social jostling feeling it can be expressed behind a veneer of "concern."

It is dieting and its calories in/out basis that = [more] anorexia, bulimia, hyperphagia. Other women's bodies are not responsible for women's body ish-yous. Stop blaming them and look at the insistence that all weight loss must come about through disorder and self-punishment.

There is no such thing as "healthy dieting" there is just dieting where your body successfully defends you against the assault of starvation and stops it becoming anorexia or triggering powerful counterreactions like hyperphagia. Though individuals vary, this upshot of successful defence is the overall norm.

That is why diets /lifestyle changey-choice/weight management are doomed to fail. That isn't my opinion that is simply the way our bodies are designed.

Anorexia etc., happen when something goes wrong with some aspect of the defences against such self induced famine.

I'll spell it out for you Ms Sour Currie, hater doesn't equal diagnostician. Don't think you're kidding anyone that you don't want people to get diabetes etc., in punishment for being fat. Just like bad girls who slept with too many men should get dead too, preferably after an agonising death bed soliloquy of bitter regret.


How one should have kept one end or the other tightly shut. In order to enter the kingdom of good girl.

Even if that was to happen, it is people like you who not listening. This public ache for fat people's agony and suffering is something that should tell even the most whacked out fat phobe that they've hit the loony tunes buffer, hard. 

Get a hold of yourselves, this is in plain sight!

Supporting starvation as the only option for altering weight means you want fat people to be sentenced to a life time of painful failure? Supporting the pathologization and stigmatization of women's bodies means you want fat people to be sentence to a life time of self perpetuated neurosis, 'depression' and unhappiness.

We've already done it.

Currie is a serial offender. She was using fat hate to espouse her own personal credo. And like so many like her she cannot begin to apply her own purported rationale to herself. Edwina Currie used to be slim and thought that was all about her.

She gained weight with age. I've nothing against this. But do feel anybody who pretends weight loss via dieting is viable, has no right to gain any weight or be fat. If your body is living testament to its failure, you make a liar out of yourself in claiming otherwise.

Memo to feminists, this is what you look like when trying to find a way to shiv fat women back or front, with unconvincing health concern. One you never had for a second in all the years fat women were drowning helplessly in vitriol, inside and out. 

We rescued ourselves against your fighting us every step of the way.You're still trying to find a way to, without sounding misogynist. You too sound like promoters of catocracy, as in "cat fight." Where once you've deciding to accept your allotted societal status, you crank and fight for supremacy within that.

Bully for you.

But we know what it looks like when people like Currie genuinely care. 

Fat People, not protected by secret lipophile cabal

Well, well, well. I had every intention of ignoring Nicole Arbour and her "satire"-fat shaming is not a thing, fat people just made that up. Fat shaming, what a brilliant idea, who came up with that?! Shaming people out of their bad habits, I'm okay with that, etc.,

Then I got to the bit where she claimed she'd been "censored" and that her youtube channel had been taken down after google had e-mailed her pointing to violation of terms of service. Automatically my brain activity went on a slight incline, who would have had the power to get google to act in such a manner? Few give much a shizz about acting on what fat people have to say, let's be candid.

So I went looking for who might be behind this, lo and behold I found nothing from the mainstream 'legit' media. On the other hand, these guys, calling themselves "Inquistr" seem to have come up trumps. They, in this case writer, Scott Hough, with the help of twitterers Boogie 2988 and (Rissa) @sandypear discovered some untoward activity. 

Seems La lipophobia "took down" her own channel- actually, she made it private. It was up the whole time. Censorship MFBA.

Fascinating that people want to press fat people into a typically braindead "PC gone mad" contrivance-that paedo "promoting" forum went straight for this as an assault on "free speech", without bothering to check. I'm sure their contrition will not only exist, but be as brave and as bold as their 'courage' in informing folks on the innate naturalness of seeking sexual relations with the underaged.

Not only is this denouement the real funny. It is the only way this works as a satire- on the continued assertion that fat people are protected by a fat apologist cabal, is this what Princess Punchdown meant? Yeah, you can have that excuse for free Nicole!

Wish Fulfillment

Good for Yoni Freedhoff. He was reading the book Princess Bride to his children and decided to stop when he reached the passages he quoted, read them in full but in case you're feeling link-fatigued/lazy;

The year that Buttercup was born, the most beautiful woman in the world was a French scullery maid named Annette......Annette worked in Paris for the Duke and Duchess de Guice and it did not escape the Duke's notice that someone extraordinary was polishing the pewter......the Duchess set about studying Annette and shortly found her adversary's tragic flaw.  

Chocolate.   

Armed now, the Duchess set to work. The Palace de Guiche turned into a candy castle.
Annette never had a chance. Inside a season, she went from delicate to whopping, and the Duke never glanced in her direction without sad bewilderment clouding his eyes.

Isn't that the dream? Weight as a lever of total control?

YF goes with "weight bias," in doing so inadvertently demonstrates sadly his 'field' is the genesis and the heart of liberating this kind of mal-feeling. His and other @besity wallahs credo for "weight loss" attacks the same target as the Duchess, hunger and appetite. Indeed, it sees fat people in the same way as the Duchess sees Annette, but in reverse......... (or not? Looking at all the slim people plumping up, you have to wonder.....)

And so right out of the gate The Princess Bride is teaching kids that obesity is consequent to gluttony,

Interesting. To me its telling people that weight is a lever of controlling people. A means of being able to destroy them. It's how women can beat up and degrade other women, depriving them of the ultimate prize of competition, not the male gaze, wealth.

The class element plays out too. Annette's weakness was hunger-which is always hidden by drawing the eye to food or "gluttony." She started off slim though. She was provided with food and she just couldn't resist-probably because she was common.

And of course for "chocolate" you could read how's your father.

And, @besity, so glibly off the tongue reminds us of the keying of brains everywhere into this artificial creation called @bese. This depersonalized yet deeply personal classification/prison so easily stands in for person or blocks person/ people  or individual from standing alone.

It is the wish fulFILLment inherent in this little fable that demonstrates what a turn-on the @bese construct is for so many. A lot of them feminist, who like to collude with this, overriding their principles. Competition, power getting other women out of your way.

I suppose this is the price paid for the participation called "survival"-you know when you say you dress up to survive, maybe. But it keeps alive the code that is its basis-in your mind, undermining your urge toward liberation (assuming you indeed have one). What you invest in marks you, whatever your rationale for it. 

In an age of democracy, where everyone's supposed to have a say.

People love the idea that they can run or ruin a person at their whim, just like this story. No wonder there's no urge to find resolution for what's claimed to be the greatest threat to civilisation evah.

Scared to Let go

I see professional ex-anorexic Emma Woolf has emitted a new more spiritual seeming tract; "Letting Go: How to heal your hurt, love your body and transform your life." I'd be happy to suspend disbelief, alas I don't believe a word.

A look at the contents and oh golly gee: "Chapter 6- Supersize v Superskinny." Spending 20 years in unwitting pursuit of lifestyle orthorexia/anorexia has acclimatized me to vain hopes repeatedly going down in flames, but even I can tell what's coming......

If its attacked for being shocking, it is - because they show shocking realities. They show the reality of the morbidly obese, gruesome weight-related illnesses, even supersized mortuaries -but this is fact, not fiction.

So achingly predictable, I can but laugh.

....many viewers credit Supersize with shocking them into making positive, healthy changes to their diet and lifestyle. In that way, it's an important -if brutal- wake-up call about the causes and consequences of obesity.

Funny how Zuperskinny just fades into the ether when there's any opprobrium about. In the spirit of the programme itself which obviously uses the thin to cover its "healthily-weighted" arse.

But wait a mo, be fair, how does she speak about anorexia-the most deadly psychiatric blah, blub, blurrr?

'Here are the ingredients for my special serial mix.' Pauline opens the kitchen cupboards and unloads an assortment of packets and jars.....

Excellent, we begin with a subject speaking in her own words. We are given her name. She's very much a person, not an amorphous dis-ease branding. It takes Pauline an hour to assemble her special brekkie mix, described in careful detail and an hour to eat it. Which, leaving this context aside, is a great tip for you fatz who keep woolfing down your grub, apparently..... What about "gruesome" effects?

The woman in front of me is beautiful but ravaged, her skin etched with lines, her long blonde hair dry as straw.... 

Awwww.....So far so muesli commercial. Be honest, if I hadn't told you what this was about, how long would it have taken you to guess?

Pauline goes on to speak of the impact anorexia has had on her life. She feels it has been stolen by it. Oh how many have more than an inkling of what that feels like! And, round of applause, she appears to manage all this, without leavening it with how repulsive and vile fat people are, [wait perhaps that's about recovery.] EW should take notes.

Woolfie goes on to tell us about Pauline's character, "warm and friendly" such as you wouldn't guess she was going through such "torment"....... Her time consuming eating rituals are punctuated by a "pointless punishing exercise regime." Yeah, tried that, just didn't have the 'discipline,' luckily.

What to say about the odd way 'obesity' acts again as a sort of mental colostomy bag for "honesty and bravery" about any chosen topic, in this case anorexia? The things Woolf is repressing about that is coming out in the way she speaks about fat people. There's a quite distinct split. That she cannot seem to talk about AN, without putting the boot into fat people is some kind of symptom-and it doesn't spell recovery. 'Obesity' is acting as a buffer zone, it's where her other feelings are being re-routed to. A nice comfy shield so she doesn't hurt herself in treacherous terrain.

She's right to be overwhelmed and scared, but she has access to resources and professional and other support. If she can't manage it........

This kind of peculiar displacement- and there's lots of it about-is far more insidious than slimz parading around in ridiculous fat suits, trying to re-take ownership of other people's experience.

When or if you ever do let go of your utter disgust, contempt and hatred for those who do not display anorexia's most associated trait- and have the boldness to integrate the feelings you're running from Emma, I'll be the first to cheer.

Skinny Bird Watching-Quelle Outrage

Hold the phone. Something terrible has happened.

What? Have people have had their humanity displaced by being defined as dis-ease? Epidemic? Is the medical machine trying to turn them into a silo for worthless toxic drugs, seeking to violate every piece of privacy a person has? Are they being denied medical treatment until they are able to overcome their bodies innate resistance to the imposition of pathology?

Non, nein and nope.

A new "plus size" fashion imprint decided to launch with a PR stunt it called #skinnybirdwatching trying even to get it trending on twitter. I can't be bothered to go into what this was supposed to be about-I didn't care then and I don't care now.

Luckily, even the type of fat women who would respond to this kind of crap-i.e. mainstream- are wising up. Unlike their slimmer counterparts who continue to ride 'obesity' bullshit as if its not dehumanizing assault on personal autonomy. They can whine though and act all hoity-toity as if they give a damn about anyone but themselves. They can really throw down some fake high dudgeon.

I hereby inform you that is supposedly a "body shaming" outrage. And this is what it looks like when slimmer women feel moved to get upset. Take a good look and imagine what it might look like if they gave half a damn about something truly outrageous.

Oh and by the way, fat women should be ashamed of this and should avoid it 'cos its a "bad move." And one fat person=all fat people;

The questionable move has inspired a collective disapproving reaction from people of all sizes, who recognize that skinny shaming is a bad move for anyone claiming to promote body confidence.

Oh really? Well the 'obesity' cult's still being worked by thin and slim women and they're seem happy with that. So each and every one who can only give a rats arse about themselves can shove their so called equally misplaced "outrage" where they think the sun shines out of. Some of us aren't remotely interested in their game of body size oneupmanship, that is not strategic that's ethics.

It's called, do unto others and I know how this system works, and I don't like it and want no part of it. How dare people take that for granted. People who don't feel they owe it to fat women and I certainly don't feel we owe it to slim women either, for that very reason. We abjure what is currently being embraced, because we don't believe in it. Not to be on our best behaviour as if we're on trial to be judged by those who happily partake of far worse than this fluff. When is that demanded of slim women by us? That they be perfect? That they always do the right thing?

We're still, how about you try connecting with some real feeling? I'd love to see that.

Changing the Terms of Choice

Weight has to be(come) a choice does it? Excellent, welcome aboard the noble idea that there must be a viable accessible way of adjusting weight at source, for whatever reason. More especially for those suffering function and health problems because of metabolic upset. They’re left aside because those invested in the crusade have an agenda that's never involved them either. 

Any sense that the authorities want us to “lose weight” should treated with great suspicion and be answered by such as the efforts of someone like Naomi Cook to seek out actual science in hopes of some proper means of weight reversal for her beloved daughter, Hana.

Once the reality of that is available, those who really don’t want any part can reject it and will then be making a meaningful choice. Not wanting to change what is (or feeling like that), isn't the same as choosing to bring something into being.

Statistical insignificance is hardly relevant. Nor do I have any trouble with the idea of wanting to choose to be fat. I have a problem with pathology being advanced as a supposed means of "losing weight" and anything shielding the extent of its failure and dysfunction. There's nothing wrong with actual weight loss itself. That's just a natural metabolic phenomena our bodies produce on a daily basis, it's part of taking in, converting and using energy.

Ultimately, MM is railing against constriction of her own choosing. She’s one of those insisting fatness is integral to her being and any talk of weight change =eliminationism. You don’t have to choose a state to defend it. Lack of real choice doesn’t cheapen that defence nor the state itself. That's the kind of rot they tell fat people because we still choose to give a shit what fat phobes say.

This is the norm for most states such as race, gender, sexuality. Mostly these aren’t viewed as elective conscious choices.

Again, the difference with fatness is the lack of choice is contrived by those claiming to want people to unchose it. In short, they cannot be trusted to tell the truth about their intentions, they're that unedifying. What they definitely want is for us is to waste lots of time doing busy work. Having our minds preoccupied, engaging in futile fights with our own bodies. As with people in jail, to stop them getting into mischief. 

Actively choosing any state, beleaguered or otherwise tends to change the whole character of your attitude to it. It would tend to lead to a completely different psychology. One that is so obviously not present in fat people, when it comes to their fatness.

One of the reasons (illegal) drug addicts have shown such incredible and sustained moxie, whilst being assaulted, marginalized, tortured and effectively sentenced to abstinence or death by the law, not doctors, the media, or family and friends- is the extent of choice involved in drug taking. Though, I emphasize, dependence is about susceptibility-after choice.

Choice gives you a completely different underlying mindset and awareness. Lack of choice is integral to why fat people are so continually abject and surrendered. And why so many are clueless about the assaults made on them even when ferocious.

There’s no way we would have struggled for so long against something we chose. Choice would have meant we would have negotiated the lack of social approval far better than this for one.

I don't object to the idea that I choose to be fat, it just doesn't feel right. The point about weight is its essential lack of meaning, means you have to have some feeling about it, to choose it. Which may explain why fat liberation makes a person feel in charge and like they're opting for fatness.

Also, defining something you had no conscious awareness of being an option, or meaning to you as choice, changes the terms of the word as we tend to refer to it-conscious elective rational opting for or even preferencing of something. This has nothing to do with the conventions of social justice.  I not having any desire for something means its choice, how can you say other things you've had no desire for aren't also choice? I'm up for discussing that, I think the choice either/or dichotomy is often too rigid. But I'm guessing a lot of people would have trouble with that.

It is a sea change to go from wanting to diet, to slim to having no truck with that. However, that isn’t about weight, its about mindset, which is just as important perhaps more so.

You chose to change your mind in the face of opposition, some of it internal.

Framing fatness as a trait independent of the whole of you is a construct of calories in/out and a false one at that. Weight, is the whole of you and that’s kind of how metabolic function is, holistic. Weight is the outcome of the interplay going on in your whole body and whatever forces are acting on it.

To sum it up perhaps a bit crudely, fatness is not really a trait you can choose independent of its context within you, in the main. That’s an affectation of the delusion based ‘ob’ crusade. Ditto slimness.

It’s ultimately the reason “weight loss” actually calorie manipulation fails. Weight can only be properly changed at source, not after the fact, unless your defences fail or fall short. Equally, weight being multi-factorial and open-ended, means spontaneous reversals can affect homeostasis.  Meaning weight, can reverse because something else has changed that has had this knock on effect/outcome.

For example, whether I’d personally “choose to be fat” or not, isn’t a question I can answer directly. What I want above all, is to function at an optimum level, in sustainable maximum balance. If fatness is needed for that, cool, if not, that’s equally okay with me. Weight doesn’t define me, either to dehumanize me, or to humanize me.

My humanity is in me, it is me, regardless of my body size, that’s the point for me of FA. All size is equally human, end of story. It doesn’t run, human starts at thin, then peters out as weight gets higher.

I’m not here to mirror fat hating idiocies. A fat identity is conformity. It comes of positioning FA as the opposite of the crusade. Mirroring what it does, as if that’s a guide for how to be. The whole of this mess of a construct and its crusade comes from slim people’s drive to turn slimness into an identity. 

I’ve never had any interest in a fat identity due to weight not being a way to sum up a person. It’s more trait than an ID. It’s an aspect, not the whole. It’s not even your body; it’s the size of it. Everything you see that’s unbalanced about the pursuit of slimness, will be mirrored in any fat id-the blueprint is the problem, not the weight inserted into it.

Even if I for some reason felt an urge for such, I’d still resist because, whilst no-one is stronger in asserting fat people are as good as anyone-we are no better than anyone either.Look at what its done to so many slim people to defend their wretched creation. Is that what you want for yourself?

When, you insert fat into slim people’s weight ID blueprint, you end up in the same destination. Now where is that? Oh yes, dumping anything they do not wish to associate with themselves, death, disease, general badness, on fat people.

So I repeat the question, whom or what will be your dumping ground because that is intrinsic to the weight-as-id model?

Not slimz obviously. So who’s left? That’s right, YOU. Fat people. If you think that makes no sense, I give you, self-hating fatz. That’s pretty much their act. Ape what they think slim people are, fat phobes, then separate themselves from such an insult by dumping on any fat resistance.

All this aping of slimz shows they retain an aura of representing human authenticity. One fat people have yet to acquire even in the minds of fat people. If we wish to possess our own aura of credibility, we cannot get it this way. That is something that is inside us, even if its buried-there’s no way around that. We cannot get it from the outside in. Not from social justice strictures, not from approval of slimz or anyone else. Only ourselves.

You may say but how? Well, how did we get from living in terror of being called “fat” to forgetting that its supposed to be an insult? We made the decision and we improvised along the way. We created a route as we went along, making it up as we went.That is what creates social justice conventions.

Whether it was apologizing to the child we were, the one we didn’t believe in and wronged. Or saying the word “fat” over and over again.

Whether it was just hanging in there, keeping faith with our aim, knowing that one day we would reach a point where we neutralized and/or invested fatness with the real positive aura of our own humanity. We did that.

And we can do it again, and again- this time to completely restore the default that humanness that resides 100% within us and needs no confirmation, no borrowing, no aping from slimz, as much as we adore them.

Real Women L0L

"Un-photoshopped   "the female body-no matter what size or shape"

Examine closely for shaming of the skinnies

That's what the work that brought the term to prominence always referred to, real women. Women in the flesh, have curves. Whether women are thin or not, they curve. They have curves. Especially when their bodies aren't excessively gym modified.

An added reference of RWHC was working class women (in this case Chicana/Latina) and their bodies were made by their lives and their work. Where some of them get the "exercise" that doesn't count.

And that was the problem. WC +/or WoC don't count among the internet classes. "Real women" was cynically false flagged into "skinny shaming." That this nonsense was acceded to is pure and simply thin and class privilege. It had nothing to do with injustice full stop. The idea that thin/slim women ever feel less than real is not convincing.

Yeah, I'm sure they feel insecure in the face of an acceptably voluptuous woman, that's hardly the same thing.

The point of this sort of distraction is slim women still feel caught out by fat women's refutation of the pathology assigned them. They know they "should" support it, but they can't quite make themselves. And they can't think of an acceptable sounding way to put that.

Demanding meaningless shows of subservience is supposed to reassure slim people, but it never does.

Fat people as usual feel very guilty and responsible when slimz are distressed in conjunction with them, so went with this status politicking. Also perhaps to win them round [slim chance].

The irony is, real women have curves, was precisely in response to the surround of technically altered images of women that encourages all to see themselves through this lens of barely attainable. Thin and slim women keep trying to make a complaint about how its assumed they suffer no image problems. Forgetting that they've signed on for being the only acceptable human form/s and are supposedly thus due to their highly evolved consciousness.

If there was desire to communicate. This could have been an opportunity to explore this anguish honestly. Join forces to overcome it. Instead, women aren't ready for that so, the priority is "damage limitation."

Shape Backlash

Since the beginning of the internet imprint of fat acceptance, a lot of slim/mer women seem to have struggled with an overwhelming bitch of a fact. Being caught out in their collusion with the official objectification of other women.

This has emphasized the objectification of all women.

They didn't care because they accepted their elevation by weight.  Being crowned with a (slim) halo obviously felt, feels uplifting.

Humans keep falling for this faux superiority elevation act. I suppose the hook is rooted in the optimist bias of our minds. Positive objectification feels positive, even when you are ultimately losing by buying into it as slim/mer people have.  

Witness spectacles such as women calling themselves feminist, insisting fat women we are "unscientific" by referring to the ways our bodies actually work in reality because that's not women's place. Men are the only one's qualified to decide that. How arrogant of us to "forget" [i.e. assume we were just self reporting].

Deviating from established fictions ballasted by male privilege has shown that women don't feel they have any real innate credibility in describing what it is to be human. We're more qualified in testing matters of the intellect like housework and crafts.

This has been one of those sneaky tests for women, one that has shown us up very badly indeed and no, I don't mean being competitive. Invoking banal misogynistic expectations of women under the guise of feminist analysis as distraction ain't cute. This is about women's conviction that reality is something outside us-something we receive, unless its fashion or something.

Proving our own unnecessary levels of disgust and contempt for ourselves as female human beings. Rather than worry about fat/thin shaming or what, let's just try and have the (feminine?) grace to end this farce shall we? It's dragged us all down.

And no, class-male is not to blame for this. This ones on us.

Nevermind, no-one's perfect right? Let she who's without sin cast the first stone and all that.

In the end, we all know: "Putting other women down doesn't lift you up." "Shaming thin bodies isn't helpful to fat women." We can see that now. What have slimz got out of this really? The media aimed at women is deluged with their multiple insecurities. They've not gotten away from their "internalized misogyny" by trying to dump that on lesser status women, it's just stirred it up. So why didn't they say any of this to themselves during their gathering enthusiasm for the crusade? Come on now.

We can see you!!!

And wouldn't you know who's currently fuelling this fire?

T/W: Contains lots of swears. 

 

spot any fat chicks up in this beatcch??!!

Enter Mz Minaj.

This piece of fluff is pretty crude in its erm storyline, featuring what Mz M's "anaconda" does and doesn't like.  But an aspect of its overall message touches on something quite interesting.

First at taste of the nontroversy;

Why are we publicly deemed "skinny BITCHES" if we're naturally smaller than sz 6? Horrified i'm considered a bitch for not being overweight
— NATALIA KILLS (@NataliaKills) August 27, 2014

Minaj actually raps; "Little in the middle but she got much back" "Yeah, this one is for my bitches with a fat ass in the f***ing club." "I said, where my fat ass big bitches in the club."[I'm being delicate tuhday.] Then she says "f*** skinny bitches.."

Inevitably;

Larger framed women need to stop bullying/victimizing girls with small frames, less voluptuous figures as if they're unattractive/anorexic
— NATALIA KILLS (@NataliaKills) August 27, 2014

Ouch to the [thin] anorexics. Minaj is mostly talking about shape and how having one associated with femaleness is totes the best. It's a bit like the idea that slim is the only way to be human, just without the backing of the medical machine.

This kind of shape has been deemed a liability in the feminist era. In the aura of FA, plus Black women's necessary self assertion, she's proclaims the integrity of having an outstanding tush-on a small frame.

One irony is her (supposed) current arch nemesis's most startling physical feature is her very prominent hips, on a small frame. 

Feeling duly inspired she squeals; "fat ass big bitches" and then eff "skinny bitches", managing to prod the genesis of fat phobia in the feminist movement. Before you pseud me.

The way that a female identifying shape; big bust, big butt, big hips, big thighs goes against feminism's much favoured straight up and down/ muscular androgyny. Downplaying anything seen as emphasizing femaleness.

What these lady features have in common is fat mass. This is how "fat" has become such a devastating put down to women. It is the humiliating reminder of woman=lesser. Hence feminist's problem with fat and why women are called fat merely for not being straight up and down AND thin. Whether conscious or not Minaj slips from fat arse to big bitches.

The combination of fat phobic misogyny, plus feminist androgyny means women "feel fat", for being anything more than a gender pranging beanpole. 

I noted the "Buns of Steel" era with confusion, 'til I worked out what was happening. Having an andro, though fat shape myself, I didn't get the hip / butt anguish. Women, many of whom did not even see themselves as feminist let me in on this via their actions.

All kinds of women are in on this shape trouble. Having a female identifying shape has been almost a faux pas for a while. Hip and thigh whittling dominates the slimming and fitness industries. In the era when the un corsetted stomach has been a seat of profound disgust, we have been deluged with slim your hips/ buns of steel, slim/tone those thighs.

I knew it was inevitable that there would be some swingback from such an extreme position. Just never thought FA would help create the spark for it.

Society's Cauldron

Here's how fatness inadvertently shines a light on things others were rather left shady;

Maybe – just maybe – telling women that they're making a mistake by not personally dealing better with public and social problems is just another way of selling – and materially benefiting from – our supposed shortcomings.

I always feel a slight outer body sensation when feminists do this. Say exactly why I expected them to instinctively have baulked at crusade and its construct.

Whatever people think about fatness, choosing food as the route to change weight-then individualising it, is exactly this. Forcing individual fat people to turn around the juggernaut of society's food system. Fat people's insides, mental and physical have been into the internal junction to re-route this against the will of other people's conflicting impulses. Whilst being accorded no social power or influence over either.

Hence the cutting. Cut fat people into acting as a place mat for everyone else.

Whether it's the medical profession's desire to maintain their extent of monopoly over healing via the unsustainably passive patient doctor 'relationship', their interesting professional structure, or the desire for their workspaces-that's you and me-to be "tidier."

Or trying to leave the slimstream out of a life built around restricting and expending calories, despite them choosing that way for us. Sadly, feminism breaks down without a sympathetic frame to draw it on. In this case white middle/upper class women.

Theoretically, that shouldn't be, but this is the reality.

This is the understanding that is sisterhood. Not, brown nosing women, but recognizing the devaluation of any woman via the route of misogyny, devalues all women.

Misogynoir, classism, homophobia, fat phobia etc., ultimately devalue all women, including those feeling insulated by the distance of assumed superiority.

So, what do these feminists really believe? That women should be torn to shreds by having to work out society's systemic grievance-against its own momentum and desires?

Or that they should not.

I think we know.

Responses are defined by the terms of engagement

Here's a post complaining about lack of niceness forcing the author to abandon her deeply held belief in HAES-or fat people improving their health from where they are. I've never gotten used to the idea that this requires a mighty acronym.

It's a kind of complaint that usually sounds off-kilter, given people like this think nothing of telling fatz to piss away their whole lives in search of thinness through unlikely means; as if that's nothing. In contrast they're rather precious about their own fee fees. Some contact with someone they deem not nice and its over. They should try the "niceness" of a life being beaten up, inside and out, by weight loss diet fail.

The post links to another by the blogger himself tauntingly entitled; "Why HAES may never go mainstream." That being posed as the ultimate test of what's worthwhile is very revealling. The shame is fat people don't appear, popular. Again, the only real thing in this world. To shamelessly crash Godwin's; Hitler was elected the first time. Amusingly, he comments on "obesity research";

Fighting misinformation with misinformation, relevant omissions with relevant omissions, and logical fallacies with logical fallacies, is not the way to accredit your movement,

Get that! "Misinformation....... relevant omissions.....logical fallacies", indeed. This is what we should of heard from med profs long ago. So, appearing to do the same is not enough to acquire the holy grail of mainstream acceptance. Even though that's clearly worked for 'obesity'!

and if HAES has any hope of actually penetrating mainstream medicine, something I would dearly love to see happen, they're going to need to hold themselves up to at least the same, if not a higher level of scrutiny to which they hold others.

Yes, without the halo effect of slimness-what some refer to as "thin privilege", its own standard reflected in the response to it, looks reprehensible. Answering 'obesity' means taking it on its own often senseless terms plus devil's horns means its standards will be reflected and played up in your responses to it. What these people are complaining about is the scent of that hanging over fat people.

And as fat people are defined as intrinsically pathological, it makes sense that this must be all theirs.

People already know 'obesity' is BS, well, their minds have worked it out. Just because you suspend your moral and critical faculties, doesn't mean you stop them functioning. It's just BS they want to get on board with at all costs. Dealing with this can be hard work, these people have gained an insight into that and they assume that is down to fat people or those that support them.

Rather than what they're up against.

To set a better standard, you'd have to ignore 'obesity' all together. I've always been in favour of that. 'Obesity' is held up to so little sustained critical scrutiny and HAES or any kind of fat acceptance is rarely anything but. But then, ('obesity')  shouldn't need to be of course as it should be pursuing facts in the first place. It should be leading the pursuit for health at every size.

Your thin or slim body is no insult to mine

See, this is the kind of thing that gets fat people into even more unnecessary trouble than we already have. In short, a Norweigan health 'n' fitness trainer-who happens to be the girlfriend of footballer-posted a selfie of her abdomen four days after giving birth. She is thin and it is flat.

What do I think?

People's bodies are not statements of meaning.

Positive objectification is still, objectification.

People's bodies are not against your own.

Nub: Bodies are not talking to your dumb arse.

If you think so, that's likely because you see weight solely in terms of calories in calories out. This means that if a body is fat, its overate. If a body is thin, its underate. The two only diverge if you're the type that cannot sustain an underlying thesis-which is-bodies = calories.

Luckily, I know this isn't true. From observation of others, even more than personal experience, though that has been instructive enough.

Therefore I know that some women's bodies appear largely unadjusted by pregnancy. This is relative of course. This woman Caroline Berg Eriksen's life is exercise and fitness. The women I've known were just living their lives, yet, their stomachs flattened themselves. Presumably, on the face of it, they're even more "lucky" than her?!

It's not unheard of for a (thin/slim) woman to double her weight in one pregnancy, yet others already fat, put on nothing or a fraction of the (previously) acceptable 21 pounds.

I personally know of a few women who left the maternity ward-after a couple of days, in the clothes they wore before they were pregnant/were showing. I know women who lost weight after having children, one quite dramatically, she used to be fat and became thin, not slim thinnnn. I've seen women beat up by pregnancy, age 10 years, look like they've had the life sucked out of them. Ended up thin of hair. Oh, that's just visuals.

It's turned inside out and out of their minds, never to really recover them. Trust me, "luck", is way more than appearance.

I've no sympathy for the whining "because I've hated myself since I was twelve". That is not the voice of those trying to reclaim their humanity. That's the voice of hustling the body hierarchy. People like that can have it.

For years, now I've watched as mostly slim to plump women have insisted on turning thin women's bodies into some kind of insult against them. Framing them grotesquely as being the cause of "eating disorders"-anorexia. Using that as a crude way at undermining the currency of thin, they themselves largely supported by desiring to be thin themselves. Happy to buy into the abuse of fat ones which they also turn into an insult that bites them on the arse if they fatten a tad too much.

I used to wonder why thinz never seem to tell them baldly to stop riding them like this. To the extent that I began to wonder if they perhaps didn't care in some way. To my astonishment, it was when fat acceptance revived on the nets, that the missing critique was dumped on us. Yes, apparently this mis-use of slim bodies came from fat people hating thinz!!! That was ironic given some many fat, myself included actually identified more with the plight of thinz and not with the women misusing them/their bodies. After all, we know how that feels even better than they do.

I realized, they're playing some kind of tag team on this. Snooze. 

Since then, fat acceptance often via "body positivity", has been lumbered with this crude attempt to undermine the false value accorded to women who are less than slim. Especially with the endless squawking about this unconvincing  "real women" meme that travels purely on the currency of the halo effect of class, race and slimness.

I will say this again fat people cannot solve slimmer people's petty positioning, hatreds and resentments. We've got enough on thanks. And if thinz aren't going to take it up with those dealing this, directly, naming and shaming exactly who's up to this, expect them to keep doing it.  

'Obesity' creates disagreement, whether there is or not

Those of you who are on a certain wavelength, will have picked up that once you change the definition of human to disease, you create a cognitive mental block. This makes it harder to know what either you and others are really talking about.

I don't mean that in the sense of being out of your depth, though there is that, more that you cannot make connections between what you think and what others think. Take;

I have always been suspicious of those elements of the fat acceptance movement that fly in the face of medical consensus, by arguing that health is independent of body weight. I see their lobbying as akin to a group of eating disorder sufferers arguing that their methods are healthy.

Somebody please do; burrup, dup, ching! 

Let's take the use here of "medical consensus". A replacement for something like; the bible/koran/torah/bhagavad gita says.

I understand the desperation of realizing the absence of overriding authority makes for harder work, but I'm unsympathetic. Instead of baiting the religious, this is the type of thing the irreligious should be engaged in working out.

Science advances through using experiments to repeat results. This indicates these results are not mere chance but underlying process. Slowly a mosaic of reality pieces builds up. Each becomes scientific consensus. Obviously, that is not of the same quality as a lot of scientists agreeing on supposition.

"health is independent of body weight."

Now, this is an knotty one. Not everyone within or outside FA agrees on this. I must say for me, it's not quite an either/or. Nor in the end is it of any real importance because nothing justifies the form the 'obesity' crusade has taken, full stop. So its academic as they say.

Its easiest for me to explain by asking a question; do you think slim people's ill health-physical or mental- is due wholly or in part to their slimness? No? Then you see things the same way as the fat people in question. Some may say, ah, ha, slim is healthful. Fine, why do slim people get the same sickness and die of the same things as fat people? Genes, heredity, environment, mental health, food, activity levels, habits?

So, not intrinsically to do with them being slim? What about the fact that overall, slimmer people are more like to commit suicide than fatter people? Is that related intrinsically to their slimness?

Mmmm..........yes and no?

Some have died because they were not fat. Or because they attacked their weight. Does that mean depressed slim people should become gainers? Or do we just accept a slim person committed suicide and all told, their weight isn't a salient factor?

Now, whether you agree with a fat person seeing fat people in general this way or not, can you still baldly state that its an extreme, irrational or disordered view?

Don't forget, seeing fatness as slimness with a fat suit on is opinion not fact, despite its triumphant hegemony. It is not shared by everyone. Nor does it stand up to biological fact. A fat body is a whole interactive unit, the same as any other size body.

The so called "eating disorder sufferers" got that one right. Whilst the 'consensus' was getting it wrong. Much of it still is. The idea of calorie restriction as weight reversal is based on the "fat suit" view of fatness. That fat bodies aren't suits is the essence of why that approach fails.

The point to reiterate is, even if one can say some slim people might have survived if they were fatter though it may or may not be true is in the end neither here nor there.

Weight, given our inability to manipulate it with ease is too crude a mechanism to stand alone or expect to be a health aid to either slim or fat. So really, the issue is, identify the real problems undermining health and deal with those, rather than attacking weight at either end.

Not to forget, this particular person and others that share her reverence for 'obesity' occultism, cannot make any distinction between fat acceptance that meets approval and that which does not, because she defines ALL fat people, regardless of their allegiance-including those who share her views-as beneath the category of human being.

That creates disagreement, whether there is or isn't. And if people like her, knew what they were talking about, they'd know that and stop defining people thus. Wait for the penny to drop, or watch some paint dry, pick your torture.

Any fat person who refuses to accept what everyone wants can be accused of being divisive. But this kind of thing shows that divisiveness comes from people who have created such a mental gulf by dehumanizing others, that they can't even recognize when they think and/or feel the same way.

They end up making a disagreement, from their own interpretations!!!

The whole point of 'obesity' is to divide fat from human, FGS.