"But Rio, fat people smell bad!"
I would not even dignify this with a response, except that I have heard this nonsese far too often to let it go.
First, I want to say that I have an extremely sensitive sense of smell. This is a blessing and a curse, depending on the situation, but it allows me to create exquisitely spiced dishes, among other great things. One of the curses of this sense of smell is that people with unpleasant odors are often more detectable to me than to those around me. So, let me give you my PERSONAL experiences with people and odor.
Looking back on my friends and acquaintances, I can honestly say that I cannot recall a smelly fat person in my circle, but I have had many, many unhygienic thin people. I'm not saying that thin people stink, but that body size does not determine odor.
S was a year ahead of me in collage. He was well over six feet tall, and probably only weighed about 120 pounds. S was very cute, and he had a huge crush on me. He might have stood a chance, but S was not acquainted with deodorant or toothpaste. Friends had tried many times to introduce him to the substances, both tactfully and directly, but it just never sunk in for very long. I'll give S the benefit of the doubt and consider that he might have been allergic, but he remained single until an equally unhygienic girl of average size decided to date him. I'm glad that they found each other, but I hope I don't have to be in a room with both of them ever again.
X and Y were both attractive young men of slender, but not skinny, build. X and Y seemed okay on the surface--they used deodorant, brushed their teeth, but when the clothes came off, intimacy revealed that both had some kind of aversion to washing their nether regions, especially in the rear. Despite being tactful, and eventually direct, neither would ever start washing their ass cracks during my time dating them. I mean, honestly, guys, dingleberries are for furry animals, not humans.
M was a young woman of average size. Because her parents never had decent hygiene (and her father was missing most of his teeth by the age of 50), she didn't know any better. Her hair was always unwashed, hanging in greasy clumps. Her clothing was never washed either.
C was a very tall, thin girl with whom I went to university years ago. C was very sweet, but she had a tendency to wear very short skirts, and she never washed her nether regions. She smelled like a walking yeast infection, and so did her whole room. It was really hard to visit her sometimes, because the smell gave me a headache, but I wasn't really prepared to talk to her about it.
T is a 350-pound woman. She take a shower, using soap on all of her parts. She uses a long-handled scrubber to get all the nooks and crannies. She washes her hair, brushes her teeth, and does her laundry regularly. At the end of a long workday where she has done physical labor, she gets onto the bus to go home. Because she's worked all day, she's somewhat grimy and sweaty, just like the lean guy sitting next to her. They both have a little bit of body odor, but because they are looking for the fat woman to be smelly, other people on the bus only notice that she smells a bit, shutting out the rest of the laborers whose bodies they aren't conditioned to think of as "disgusting".
This is a perception issue, one that does not resemble reality. Hygiene can be neglected in all types of people, especially those who did not have as much education (in M's case), those who had weird religious aversions to touching themselves in certain places (X and Y), and people who don't have their medical problems properly treated (C, for example). In some cases, there are people who cannot help their odors, either because of a medical condition that makes odors more prevalent, or because they have allergies to things like deodorant and certain soaps. There are also underprivileged people who do not have access to laundry facilities, a change of clothing, or shower facilities, especially if they are homeless.
So what I'm saying is, body size has nothing to do with a person's odor, and a person's odor does not determine their value as a human being anyway. If you're on public transportation, going home after a work day, everyone is more likely to stink a bit, because they have been working and sweating all day. That's life.
Showing posts with label big buts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label big buts. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Big Buts, Part Seven: Do I Hate Thin People?
"But Rio, why do you hate thin people so much?"
...
I get this a lot. I really do not understand it. I challenge anyone to look through my blog and find anything saying that I hate thin people, or that they suck, or anything of the sort.
I believe in fat acceptance. Accepting fat people does not mean that you then hate thin people. I can't imagine how someone would believe otherwise, unless they're the type that, when they lose one outlet for their hatred and venom, they must immediately transfer it to another target. Being a feminist does not mean someone hates men*, it means that they want women to be treated like human beings, equal to men. You don't have to sacrifice one group to give another group rights and respect! As a fat person, I want to be treated as respectfully as a thin person is treated in our society. As a woman, I want the same rights and respect as a man.
Imagine this:
Two people, Casey and Dana. Casey is standing up on a platform, while Dana is down below. Casey has access to a bunch of rocks to throw at Dana, while Dana has none, and would not have the strength to throw them high enough to hit Casey anyway. Now, there are several options we could take here:
It is not necessary to tear down one group of people in order to put a less privileged one on equal footing. What we DO have to sacrifice in order to do this, though, is the idea that we need to have someone beneath us in order to feel important. Finding your self-worth is pretty hard, and we are unfortunately taught the dirty shortcut of ranking ourselves over someone else. Dehumanizing other people, however, is harmful to everyone involved in the long run--when you throw rocks at someone (metaphorically or literally), you create a cycle of hatred and vengeance that can be very difficult to break. Admitting that you were wrong in the way you treated someone is really, really tough, but it's absolutely necessary if you want to find your true self-worth, which is independent from someone else being inferior to you.
So, in short, no, I don't hate thin people. Thin people who read my writings and believe otherwise may want to examine why they are reacting this way; I believe that it is probably because I'm refusing to acknowledge their "superior" status. That's really uncomfortable, obviously. It probably stings a bit when I say things like, "Yes, you have worked really hard to become thin, but that doesn't actually mean anything to me," especially when those who have lost a lot of weight are accustomed to high praise from just about everyone else. There's also the upsetting idea that putting a lot of effort into something doesn't make that something valuable to everyone else. What you did to lose weight was for your own benefit; it is not some kind of heroic, humanitarian task, no matter how much people piss and moan about health care costs.
On a final note, I want to mention that, if I hated thin people, I wouldn't have married one. In my social life, I don't treat thin friends any differently from fat friends. I don't tell thin people to eat more, to gain weight, or anything of the sort--because a person's body size is none of my business. No, I don't hate thin people. No, I don't want you to go and gain weight if you're thin. I just don't think your body size has anything to do with your value as a human being, and I won't accept it when others behave as if it does.
*This does NOT mean that there are no feminists who hate men; it means that hating men is not a requirement of feminism.
...
I get this a lot. I really do not understand it. I challenge anyone to look through my blog and find anything saying that I hate thin people, or that they suck, or anything of the sort.
I believe in fat acceptance. Accepting fat people does not mean that you then hate thin people. I can't imagine how someone would believe otherwise, unless they're the type that, when they lose one outlet for their hatred and venom, they must immediately transfer it to another target. Being a feminist does not mean someone hates men*, it means that they want women to be treated like human beings, equal to men. You don't have to sacrifice one group to give another group rights and respect! As a fat person, I want to be treated as respectfully as a thin person is treated in our society. As a woman, I want the same rights and respect as a man.
Imagine this:
Two people, Casey and Dana. Casey is standing up on a platform, while Dana is down below. Casey has access to a bunch of rocks to throw at Dana, while Dana has none, and would not have the strength to throw them high enough to hit Casey anyway. Now, there are several options we could take here:
- Dana climbs up to the platform where Casey is, and knocks Casey off the platform, switching their roles. Now Dana is privileged, while Casey is not. This results in an endless struggle where the two switch places in a cycle of vengeance.
- Casey climbs down to where Dana is, sacrificing privilege to gain equal footing. This doesn't benefit Dana that much, except that Casey isn't throwing rocks, but because Casey resents being lowered to Dana's situation, there are fistfights and discord between them.
- Casey lowers a rope and helps Dana up to the platform, putting them both on equal footing. This DOES benefit Dana, of course, and Casey has to sacrifice very little to do this--and may even benefit from Dana's experience, ideas, and companionship.
It is not necessary to tear down one group of people in order to put a less privileged one on equal footing. What we DO have to sacrifice in order to do this, though, is the idea that we need to have someone beneath us in order to feel important. Finding your self-worth is pretty hard, and we are unfortunately taught the dirty shortcut of ranking ourselves over someone else. Dehumanizing other people, however, is harmful to everyone involved in the long run--when you throw rocks at someone (metaphorically or literally), you create a cycle of hatred and vengeance that can be very difficult to break. Admitting that you were wrong in the way you treated someone is really, really tough, but it's absolutely necessary if you want to find your true self-worth, which is independent from someone else being inferior to you.
So, in short, no, I don't hate thin people. Thin people who read my writings and believe otherwise may want to examine why they are reacting this way; I believe that it is probably because I'm refusing to acknowledge their "superior" status. That's really uncomfortable, obviously. It probably stings a bit when I say things like, "Yes, you have worked really hard to become thin, but that doesn't actually mean anything to me," especially when those who have lost a lot of weight are accustomed to high praise from just about everyone else. There's also the upsetting idea that putting a lot of effort into something doesn't make that something valuable to everyone else. What you did to lose weight was for your own benefit; it is not some kind of heroic, humanitarian task, no matter how much people piss and moan about health care costs.
On a final note, I want to mention that, if I hated thin people, I wouldn't have married one. In my social life, I don't treat thin friends any differently from fat friends. I don't tell thin people to eat more, to gain weight, or anything of the sort--because a person's body size is none of my business. No, I don't hate thin people. No, I don't want you to go and gain weight if you're thin. I just don't think your body size has anything to do with your value as a human being, and I won't accept it when others behave as if it does.
*This does NOT mean that there are no feminists who hate men; it means that hating men is not a requirement of feminism.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Big Buts, Part Six: The Godwin Diet
"But you don't see fat people in famines or concentration camps!"
Oh no, you didn't! You didn't! Surely you're not invoking the most horrific events in human history as justification for the persecution of fat people?
Oh, you are? Well then, I guess I'll tackle that one, but just remember that this was YOUR idea, not mine.
The shameful and sick use of this "but" is one that really sets my teeth on edge. People who were forcibly starved, many or most starved to death, did in fact use their fat reserves in order to prolong their lives. They lost fat tissue, muscle mass, and bone density. Their organs went into failure. The human body has evolved strategies for surviving food shortages for a period of time, but that does not mean such strategies can be used indefinitely. A more efficient body still has finite resources, even if they are used at a slower rate than a body with a fast metabolism.
People's bodies became emaciated when they went long periods of time without eating anything. It is true that this happens. However, that does not mean that it was a good thing for them to become emaciated. It does not mean that it is a good idea to induce famine when food is abundant. Yes, a fat person will become less fat when put on a starvation diet, but why should they have to endure that? Famine is a horror. It is suffering. It is damaging to the body and mind. Why do you think someone should voluntarily undergo that? Maybe because you're just being a smartass, and trying to prove the point that "dieting works"?
Sure, starving the human body results in fat reserves being utilized. But once that period of starving is over, the body wants to rebuild those reserves, plus some extra. So, in order to remain thin, the person who has lost a lot of weight will have to endure the pain and suffering of starvation for his or her entire life. And for what reason? Health? Would you rather live a shorter life feeling good, or live longer in misery? Appearance? Why should I have to suffer for the sake of other people's misguided aesthetics?
Another thing: Surely you don't think that emaciated famine victims are healthy? There is a great deal of damage done to them by starvation, and that same damage can be seen in people who deliberately eat very low calorie diets, including cognitive problems, infertility, and heart damage. Yes, a fat person with a slow metabolism, thyroid disease, and PCOS might lose weight if they reduce their intake to a ridiculously low amount, but that doesn't mean it's healthy for them to do so, or that it will improve their quality of life enough to offset the side effects of very low calorie diets.
Finally, I want to ask a very simple question: Which famine and Holocaust victims do YOU think were more likely to survive? The thin ones, or the fat ones? And, of those who survived and were able to build a stable life with an adequate food supply, how many of them do you think stayed emaciated?
Just stop using victimized people as an excuse to hate fat people. It's disrespectful, disgusting, and disingenuous. Enough already.
Oh no, you didn't! You didn't! Surely you're not invoking the most horrific events in human history as justification for the persecution of fat people?
Oh, you are? Well then, I guess I'll tackle that one, but just remember that this was YOUR idea, not mine.
The shameful and sick use of this "but" is one that really sets my teeth on edge. People who were forcibly starved, many or most starved to death, did in fact use their fat reserves in order to prolong their lives. They lost fat tissue, muscle mass, and bone density. Their organs went into failure. The human body has evolved strategies for surviving food shortages for a period of time, but that does not mean such strategies can be used indefinitely. A more efficient body still has finite resources, even if they are used at a slower rate than a body with a fast metabolism.
People's bodies became emaciated when they went long periods of time without eating anything. It is true that this happens. However, that does not mean that it was a good thing for them to become emaciated. It does not mean that it is a good idea to induce famine when food is abundant. Yes, a fat person will become less fat when put on a starvation diet, but why should they have to endure that? Famine is a horror. It is suffering. It is damaging to the body and mind. Why do you think someone should voluntarily undergo that? Maybe because you're just being a smartass, and trying to prove the point that "dieting works"?
Sure, starving the human body results in fat reserves being utilized. But once that period of starving is over, the body wants to rebuild those reserves, plus some extra. So, in order to remain thin, the person who has lost a lot of weight will have to endure the pain and suffering of starvation for his or her entire life. And for what reason? Health? Would you rather live a shorter life feeling good, or live longer in misery? Appearance? Why should I have to suffer for the sake of other people's misguided aesthetics?
Another thing: Surely you don't think that emaciated famine victims are healthy? There is a great deal of damage done to them by starvation, and that same damage can be seen in people who deliberately eat very low calorie diets, including cognitive problems, infertility, and heart damage. Yes, a fat person with a slow metabolism, thyroid disease, and PCOS might lose weight if they reduce their intake to a ridiculously low amount, but that doesn't mean it's healthy for them to do so, or that it will improve their quality of life enough to offset the side effects of very low calorie diets.
Finally, I want to ask a very simple question: Which famine and Holocaust victims do YOU think were more likely to survive? The thin ones, or the fat ones? And, of those who survived and were able to build a stable life with an adequate food supply, how many of them do you think stayed emaciated?
Just stop using victimized people as an excuse to hate fat people. It's disrespectful, disgusting, and disingenuous. Enough already.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Big Buts, Part Five: Fat Makes You Celibate
"But don't you want someone to love you? Aren't you afraid you'll be single your entire life? If you don't lose weight, then don't complain about not having sex!"
Actually, I want to tackle that last part first. I keep seeing accusations that people of the size positive community are "constantly whining that no one will have sex with them." I am completely baffled as to where they are getting this information, because I have yet to see it in any of the blogs or journals of the FA community. In fact, I can't think of a single fat friend of mine who has a problem getting laid. Most of them are happily married or in long term relationships. Some are partnered to fat people, some to thin people, and all combinations inbetween. In fact, I've been acquainted with at least three fat couples who have open relationships, and they do not lack for partners, thick and thin, with which to exercise that openness. I myself am married to a thin man, and we do not lack for a sex life (sorry, mom) (yes, my mom reads my blog).
Yesterday, I requested that readers shower me with comments and photos about their relationships. As of this writing, 21 different people shared their love stories with me. Considering I'm just a little wee blogger who doesn't have the large audience that Shapely Prose enjoys, I think that's a pretty good number--and I expect it to go up! Attraction is different for everyone, and, from what I've seen, it's rarely actually about fat or thin.
My mother's family has a considerable number of large people, from my grandfather, to his siblings, and all sorts of cousins and the like. Every fat person in that family who wants to be married is married, most of them with offspring (I opted out of that, myself). My mother actually takes after HER mom in being average sized, but there's quite a bit of fat in the family.
You see, not everyone finds fat people inherently unattractive. And we aren't sitting around crying into our Ben & Jerry's wondering why we can't get a date. I've personally never lacked for interested parties of all sizes and genders, and the only real obstacle a fat person has is their own anxiety and fear--which is usually the result of shallow, mean people telling us that no one will possibly want us, love us, or sleep with us unless we lose weight.
Given the climate in which fat singles must venture forth into the dating world, it's actually quite amazing that we manage to summon the courage to face potential cruelty and humiliation in order to find the special person that is a good match. Amazing, yes, but as hard as folks try and shoot us down before we've even thought about trying, we do it, and we get laid, loved, and married just as easily as thin people if we have the confidence to respond to signals from those who are interested.
Actually, I want to tackle that last part first. I keep seeing accusations that people of the size positive community are "constantly whining that no one will have sex with them." I am completely baffled as to where they are getting this information, because I have yet to see it in any of the blogs or journals of the FA community. In fact, I can't think of a single fat friend of mine who has a problem getting laid. Most of them are happily married or in long term relationships. Some are partnered to fat people, some to thin people, and all combinations inbetween. In fact, I've been acquainted with at least three fat couples who have open relationships, and they do not lack for partners, thick and thin, with which to exercise that openness. I myself am married to a thin man, and we do not lack for a sex life (sorry, mom) (yes, my mom reads my blog).
Yesterday, I requested that readers shower me with comments and photos about their relationships. As of this writing, 21 different people shared their love stories with me. Considering I'm just a little wee blogger who doesn't have the large audience that Shapely Prose enjoys, I think that's a pretty good number--and I expect it to go up! Attraction is different for everyone, and, from what I've seen, it's rarely actually about fat or thin.
My mother's family has a considerable number of large people, from my grandfather, to his siblings, and all sorts of cousins and the like. Every fat person in that family who wants to be married is married, most of them with offspring (I opted out of that, myself). My mother actually takes after HER mom in being average sized, but there's quite a bit of fat in the family.
You see, not everyone finds fat people inherently unattractive. And we aren't sitting around crying into our Ben & Jerry's wondering why we can't get a date. I've personally never lacked for interested parties of all sizes and genders, and the only real obstacle a fat person has is their own anxiety and fear--which is usually the result of shallow, mean people telling us that no one will possibly want us, love us, or sleep with us unless we lose weight.
Given the climate in which fat singles must venture forth into the dating world, it's actually quite amazing that we manage to summon the courage to face potential cruelty and humiliation in order to find the special person that is a good match. Amazing, yes, but as hard as folks try and shoot us down before we've even thought about trying, we do it, and we get laid, loved, and married just as easily as thin people if we have the confidence to respond to signals from those who are interested.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Big Buts, Part Four: Are you what you eat?
"But if you weren't eating ________, you wouldn't be fat, so you are lying!"
Oh, I love this one so much. This is where we just can't win. We are faced with nasty hyperbole about hamburgers and donuts, and when we say,"That's just not the case," we're accused of lying. Fat haters tend to assume that a person being fat is enough evidence to convict them of excessive eating, incorrect eating, or both. There are two major problems with this, though.
The first problem is that a person's size is not any kind of proof that they are eating the wrong things, or eating too much. While the haters will deny this until they are foaming at the mouth, it is well documented that dieting makes people fatter in the long run. Those who DO manage to remain thin after losing weight do so at the cost of having to maintain a very low calorie diet. This kind of diet requires a great deal of effort, because fighting against hunger and the brain's attempts to get us to eat more is very very difficult. It's a form of suffering. If people choose to suffer in order to become and stay thin, then that is their choice--but I am of the opinion that suffering is a bad thing, and I'd rather have less of it in my life.
Unfortunately, some people take offense at those of us who do not choose to suffer. They don't think it's fair; after all, they've put in all this effort, so why should someone else be allowed to opt out? And, rather than give up their own suffering, they instead decide that, if we aren't going to do it voluntarily, then by god they'll make us suffer, either by following the same path they did, or by social stigmatism and outright cruelty. Here's the thing, folks: Just become something is difficult, it does not mean that it is worthwhile or admirable. If it became socially acceptable to shove dock spiders up your nostrils, I would have to take a pass on that as well.
The second problem I have with accusing people of bad eating, and then of lying about bad eating, is that what othe people eat isn't someone else's business. It amazes me the number of people who are pro-choice about abortion, yet will condemn someone for eating a cupcake. Whatever happened to the idea that what you do with your body is your business? What you put into your body is your business? Honestly, I could give you a million and one reasons why eating meat makes you a murderer (JUST AN EXAMPLE, FOLKS), but I'd rather people come to their own conclusions about how they feel about the various ethical, environmental, and other considerations regarding eating animals.
If I'm interested in whether or not eating cupcakes and carrot sticks is a good idea, the information is out there, and I can read it and make up my own mind. But if you're screaming at me about having a piece of chocolate, and telling me that enjoying a treat is the reason I am not worthy of basic courtesy? And that eating one chocolate means that all I do is sit around eating chocolates all day? I'm going to tell you how much of a crass moron you are, and you'll totally deserve it.
Plain and simple, unless you are following someone around every moment of every day, you really don't know what they do or do not eat, regardless of the size of their body. And, even if you did, and you found that, yes, that fat girl is actually eating a gallon of ice cream and four dozen donuts every three hours? It's still not any of your goddamned business, and it's not an excuse to dehumanize her.
Oh, I love this one so much. This is where we just can't win. We are faced with nasty hyperbole about hamburgers and donuts, and when we say,"That's just not the case," we're accused of lying. Fat haters tend to assume that a person being fat is enough evidence to convict them of excessive eating, incorrect eating, or both. There are two major problems with this, though.
The first problem is that a person's size is not any kind of proof that they are eating the wrong things, or eating too much. While the haters will deny this until they are foaming at the mouth, it is well documented that dieting makes people fatter in the long run. Those who DO manage to remain thin after losing weight do so at the cost of having to maintain a very low calorie diet. This kind of diet requires a great deal of effort, because fighting against hunger and the brain's attempts to get us to eat more is very very difficult. It's a form of suffering. If people choose to suffer in order to become and stay thin, then that is their choice--but I am of the opinion that suffering is a bad thing, and I'd rather have less of it in my life.
Unfortunately, some people take offense at those of us who do not choose to suffer. They don't think it's fair; after all, they've put in all this effort, so why should someone else be allowed to opt out? And, rather than give up their own suffering, they instead decide that, if we aren't going to do it voluntarily, then by god they'll make us suffer, either by following the same path they did, or by social stigmatism and outright cruelty. Here's the thing, folks: Just become something is difficult, it does not mean that it is worthwhile or admirable. If it became socially acceptable to shove dock spiders up your nostrils, I would have to take a pass on that as well.
The second problem I have with accusing people of bad eating, and then of lying about bad eating, is that what othe people eat isn't someone else's business. It amazes me the number of people who are pro-choice about abortion, yet will condemn someone for eating a cupcake. Whatever happened to the idea that what you do with your body is your business? What you put into your body is your business? Honestly, I could give you a million and one reasons why eating meat makes you a murderer (JUST AN EXAMPLE, FOLKS), but I'd rather people come to their own conclusions about how they feel about the various ethical, environmental, and other considerations regarding eating animals.
If I'm interested in whether or not eating cupcakes and carrot sticks is a good idea, the information is out there, and I can read it and make up my own mind. But if you're screaming at me about having a piece of chocolate, and telling me that enjoying a treat is the reason I am not worthy of basic courtesy? And that eating one chocolate means that all I do is sit around eating chocolates all day? I'm going to tell you how much of a crass moron you are, and you'll totally deserve it.
Plain and simple, unless you are following someone around every moment of every day, you really don't know what they do or do not eat, regardless of the size of their body. And, even if you did, and you found that, yes, that fat girl is actually eating a gallon of ice cream and four dozen donuts every three hours? It's still not any of your goddamned business, and it's not an excuse to dehumanize her.
Monday, January 21, 2008
Big Buts, Part Three: Forces of Attraction
"But you want to force people to find fat people attractive!"
I have seen this numerous times, including several references to size positive advocates as "Fat Acceptance Thugs", trying to force thin, "fit" people to be attracted to us. Yet another straw man, of course, created out of whole cloth (to mix a metaphor with a fallacy); a rather pathetic attempt to make size positive advocates look like fascists who dictate what is and is not attractive. The most egregious part of this fallacy is that people who say this are attributing a level of power to the FA movement that is literally impossible.
What are they imagining here? Let me think of some scenarios:
- Fat people in a circle surrounded by candles, the air thick with incense, and a thin victim tied spread-eagle to an altar in the middle. The fat people chant something in arcane languages, casting a spell on their victim, forcing the innocent soul to only lust after people who weigh over 300 pounds.
- Fat people in a secret laboratory, concocting powerful pheromones to wear, giving everyone around them NO choice but to tackle them and start humping away until they die from exhaustion.
- Fat people kidnapping thin folks and subjecting them to chemical and psychological brainwashing, then releasing them once they are sure the victims are only interested in sex with fat people.
- Fat people going house to house with guns and torture equipment, threatening and waterboarding anyone who does not have sex with at least one of them.
Yeah, I don't think so. Look, you idiots (yeah, I know two ad hominems don't make a right, but c'mon, it's not FAIR to take the high road every time), no one is forcing you to find anyone attractive. No one! Attraction is not something that can be forced. It is not something that can be chosen, either. What we ARE asking is that YOU don't badger US into changing ourselves to be attractive to you. If you aren't interested, then let's go our separate ways, and we'll each find someone else.
Another thing we'd like is for you to stop fucking pestering people who DO find us attractive. If your buddy is interested in or dating a fat person, don't be an ass about it. Let your friends make their own decisions about relationships. Why is it so important to you to humiliate your friend for having a relationship with someone whom YOU consider unattractive? Sounds like you're forcing someone to be attracted to the kind of person you choose, doesn't it?
Here's another thing we'd like you to do: Stop being rude to us. Fine, you aren't attracted. Whatever. That doesn't mean you have to humiliate us, scream nasty names at us, or otherwise be uncivil. If we express an interest in you, and you don't feel the same way, just say so, and move on with your life. If we aren't expressing an interest in you, then why the hell are you bugging us about what we look like anyway? Just leave us alone. If we're being polite to you, how about being polite in return? If we are ignoring you, why not ignore us in return? Why is that so much to ask?
Finally, even if I had the ability to force someone to find me attractive, I wouldn't want to do it. I would rather have natural attraction--and on all levels. Mental, emotional, physical--and yes, believe it or not, some people (a lot of them, in fact!) are attracted to me, a fat woman. I didn't club my first husband over the head and drag him to the altar by the hair. I didn't drug the second one and cackle madly as he unwittingly wed me in a stupor. Both were attracted to my fat ass, physically and otherwise (and I won't go into the details of my divorce, but it was amicable and sad, and had nothing to do with physical attraction or fat; we just weren't right for each other, and it took us a while to figure that out). My current husband still requires no drugging, blackmailing, or regular beatings to keep him interested in me. So get over yourselves already.
So no, no one is "forcing" you to be attracted to anyone. Even if we wanted to, which we don't, we don't have the power. Even if we had the power, it wouldn't be worth it to have someone who wasn't interested on their own. All we want is some basic respect--you don't have to be horny for us, but for god's sake, could you use some manners?
I have seen this numerous times, including several references to size positive advocates as "Fat Acceptance Thugs", trying to force thin, "fit" people to be attracted to us. Yet another straw man, of course, created out of whole cloth (to mix a metaphor with a fallacy); a rather pathetic attempt to make size positive advocates look like fascists who dictate what is and is not attractive. The most egregious part of this fallacy is that people who say this are attributing a level of power to the FA movement that is literally impossible.
What are they imagining here? Let me think of some scenarios:
- Fat people in a circle surrounded by candles, the air thick with incense, and a thin victim tied spread-eagle to an altar in the middle. The fat people chant something in arcane languages, casting a spell on their victim, forcing the innocent soul to only lust after people who weigh over 300 pounds.
- Fat people in a secret laboratory, concocting powerful pheromones to wear, giving everyone around them NO choice but to tackle them and start humping away until they die from exhaustion.
- Fat people kidnapping thin folks and subjecting them to chemical and psychological brainwashing, then releasing them once they are sure the victims are only interested in sex with fat people.
- Fat people going house to house with guns and torture equipment, threatening and waterboarding anyone who does not have sex with at least one of them.
Yeah, I don't think so. Look, you idiots (yeah, I know two ad hominems don't make a right, but c'mon, it's not FAIR to take the high road every time), no one is forcing you to find anyone attractive. No one! Attraction is not something that can be forced. It is not something that can be chosen, either. What we ARE asking is that YOU don't badger US into changing ourselves to be attractive to you. If you aren't interested, then let's go our separate ways, and we'll each find someone else.
Another thing we'd like is for you to stop fucking pestering people who DO find us attractive. If your buddy is interested in or dating a fat person, don't be an ass about it. Let your friends make their own decisions about relationships. Why is it so important to you to humiliate your friend for having a relationship with someone whom YOU consider unattractive? Sounds like you're forcing someone to be attracted to the kind of person you choose, doesn't it?
Here's another thing we'd like you to do: Stop being rude to us. Fine, you aren't attracted. Whatever. That doesn't mean you have to humiliate us, scream nasty names at us, or otherwise be uncivil. If we express an interest in you, and you don't feel the same way, just say so, and move on with your life. If we aren't expressing an interest in you, then why the hell are you bugging us about what we look like anyway? Just leave us alone. If we're being polite to you, how about being polite in return? If we are ignoring you, why not ignore us in return? Why is that so much to ask?
Finally, even if I had the ability to force someone to find me attractive, I wouldn't want to do it. I would rather have natural attraction--and on all levels. Mental, emotional, physical--and yes, believe it or not, some people (a lot of them, in fact!) are attracted to me, a fat woman. I didn't club my first husband over the head and drag him to the altar by the hair. I didn't drug the second one and cackle madly as he unwittingly wed me in a stupor. Both were attracted to my fat ass, physically and otherwise (and I won't go into the details of my divorce, but it was amicable and sad, and had nothing to do with physical attraction or fat; we just weren't right for each other, and it took us a while to figure that out). My current husband still requires no drugging, blackmailing, or regular beatings to keep him interested in me. So get over yourselves already.
So no, no one is "forcing" you to be attracted to anyone. Even if we wanted to, which we don't, we don't have the power. Even if we had the power, it wouldn't be worth it to have someone who wasn't interested on their own. All we want is some basic respect--you don't have to be horny for us, but for god's sake, could you use some manners?
Friday, January 18, 2008
Big Buts, part two: The 400-lb straw man
"But...people are like 400 pounds now! Epidemic! Epidemic!
My first reaction to this "but" is to say, "Are you one of them? No? Then it's none of your business." However, I know that isn't good enough for some people, because people who use "buts" are always but-ing in on other people's private lives. So, with apologies to those out there who ARE 400 pounds, and an invitation to you for input, I am going to kick this "but" right here and now.
First of all, the "obesity epidemic" does not, despite what the pictures next to the hysterical articles depict, mean that there is a majority of people who are, and I apologize for this, "super" sized. Yes, very large people exist, and they may or may not have problems because of their size, but the so-called epidemic is aimed at smaller people, while holding up images of 400 pound people (headless female ones, usually) to frighten us into thinking that we are all "doomed" to become that image if we don't toe* the thindustry line right away.
My friends (and foes), this is what we call a "straw man". People who bring up the subject of the very fat (and please, if anyone who fits this category can give me the most polite term, I would be grateful, and more than happy to edit this post to put it right) as a reason for 200-pound women to start eating in a disorderly fashion are being completely ridiculous. Yes, 400 pound people exist, but that does not mean that EVERYONE will become that large simply from eating too much--and the haters know it. They know perfectly well that there are thin people who eat huge volumes of food without gaining an ounce, and they are WELL AWARE that a moderately fat woman is not going to become 400 pounds just because she doesn't engage in calorie restriction.
But yet, they hold up those headless photos, wagging their fingers in our faces, and tell us that we'll sure be sorry when we LOOK LIKE THAT, because how else are they going to be able to claim that they're doing us a favor by being complete asswipes to us? How else are they going to excuse their hateful behavior without looking selfish (as with the "health care costs" argument, which IS a selfish argument)? It doesn't matter that they know it's not true, and that we know it's not true; as long as they can hold up the photos and be patronizing douchebags, they shut down the argument with hyperbole. I can say, "But I really don't eat Big Macs, I'm a vegetarian," and they can completely disregard what I just said, hold up the picture, and say, "DO YOU WANT TO LOOK LIKE THIS YOU FATTY FATTY MC FATTY? STOP EATING BIG MACS! AND IF YOU DON'T, YOU WILL DESERVE TO BE THE 400 POUND FATTY THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE!" I mean, really, how do you respond to that, when the other side just keeps spraying spittle in your face, and refusing to engage in polite, meaningful discourse? You can't.
What you can do, though, is know the truth--that eating hamburgers isn't what makes a very fat person fat. There have to be other factors involved, including thyroid disease, insulin resistance, stuff like that. I mean, gosh, does anyone remember the woman who had a 900 pound (correct me if that's the wrong number; I don't have internet connection up here; just using the laptop) ovarian cyst removed? You don't diet away a cyst. Yet, because of the shaming and cruelty fat people have to endure, she did not get medical treatment to diagnose the cyst until it had grown to frightening proportions. Are you haters proud of yourselves for that one?
I'm a fat woman. I don't presume to speak for people who weigh significantly more than I do, but I do know that, unless a serious medical problem crops up, I am highly unlikely to become one of them, no matter how much cake I eat, no matter if I choose the real sour cream instead of the fat free stuff. If I eat more calories than usual, my metabolism rises to burn the extra energy so that I don't rise significantly above my setpoint. Trust me on this; I have had erratic eating behavior without a major change in weight beyond the normal fluctuations a woman's body goes through. So light a match and set that straw man aflame--and don't fall for the hysterical hand-wringing anymore.
Small addendum: I read on Sandy's blog that Celebrity Attention Whore Chef's goal in dissecting a 400-lb man on television is to show how bad the "average British diet" is. If that were true, he'd be dissecting an average British man--176 pounds. Using the gory spectacle of the 400-pound cadaver, however, is a very clear example of this ridiculous straw man that fatphobics are shoving in our faces. I, for one, am NOT fooled. How about you?
* "Toe the line" is the correct form of this phrase. People, please stop saying "tow the line", you aren't pulling it behind a boat, you're standing there with your toes along the line, all in a perfect row together, like good little soldiers.
My first reaction to this "but" is to say, "Are you one of them? No? Then it's none of your business." However, I know that isn't good enough for some people, because people who use "buts" are always but-ing in on other people's private lives. So, with apologies to those out there who ARE 400 pounds, and an invitation to you for input, I am going to kick this "but" right here and now.
First of all, the "obesity epidemic" does not, despite what the pictures next to the hysterical articles depict, mean that there is a majority of people who are, and I apologize for this, "super" sized. Yes, very large people exist, and they may or may not have problems because of their size, but the so-called epidemic is aimed at smaller people, while holding up images of 400 pound people (headless female ones, usually) to frighten us into thinking that we are all "doomed" to become that image if we don't toe* the thindustry line right away.
My friends (and foes), this is what we call a "straw man". People who bring up the subject of the very fat (and please, if anyone who fits this category can give me the most polite term, I would be grateful, and more than happy to edit this post to put it right) as a reason for 200-pound women to start eating in a disorderly fashion are being completely ridiculous. Yes, 400 pound people exist, but that does not mean that EVERYONE will become that large simply from eating too much--and the haters know it. They know perfectly well that there are thin people who eat huge volumes of food without gaining an ounce, and they are WELL AWARE that a moderately fat woman is not going to become 400 pounds just because she doesn't engage in calorie restriction.
But yet, they hold up those headless photos, wagging their fingers in our faces, and tell us that we'll sure be sorry when we LOOK LIKE THAT, because how else are they going to be able to claim that they're doing us a favor by being complete asswipes to us? How else are they going to excuse their hateful behavior without looking selfish (as with the "health care costs" argument, which IS a selfish argument)? It doesn't matter that they know it's not true, and that we know it's not true; as long as they can hold up the photos and be patronizing douchebags, they shut down the argument with hyperbole. I can say, "But I really don't eat Big Macs, I'm a vegetarian," and they can completely disregard what I just said, hold up the picture, and say, "DO YOU WANT TO LOOK LIKE THIS YOU FATTY FATTY MC FATTY? STOP EATING BIG MACS! AND IF YOU DON'T, YOU WILL DESERVE TO BE THE 400 POUND FATTY THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE!" I mean, really, how do you respond to that, when the other side just keeps spraying spittle in your face, and refusing to engage in polite, meaningful discourse? You can't.
What you can do, though, is know the truth--that eating hamburgers isn't what makes a very fat person fat. There have to be other factors involved, including thyroid disease, insulin resistance, stuff like that. I mean, gosh, does anyone remember the woman who had a 900 pound (correct me if that's the wrong number; I don't have internet connection up here; just using the laptop) ovarian cyst removed? You don't diet away a cyst. Yet, because of the shaming and cruelty fat people have to endure, she did not get medical treatment to diagnose the cyst until it had grown to frightening proportions. Are you haters proud of yourselves for that one?
I'm a fat woman. I don't presume to speak for people who weigh significantly more than I do, but I do know that, unless a serious medical problem crops up, I am highly unlikely to become one of them, no matter how much cake I eat, no matter if I choose the real sour cream instead of the fat free stuff. If I eat more calories than usual, my metabolism rises to burn the extra energy so that I don't rise significantly above my setpoint. Trust me on this; I have had erratic eating behavior without a major change in weight beyond the normal fluctuations a woman's body goes through. So light a match and set that straw man aflame--and don't fall for the hysterical hand-wringing anymore.
Small addendum: I read on Sandy's blog that Celebrity Attention Whore Chef's goal in dissecting a 400-lb man on television is to show how bad the "average British diet" is. If that were true, he'd be dissecting an average British man--176 pounds. Using the gory spectacle of the 400-pound cadaver, however, is a very clear example of this ridiculous straw man that fatphobics are shoving in our faces. I, for one, am NOT fooled. How about you?
* "Toe the line" is the correct form of this phrase. People, please stop saying "tow the line", you aren't pulling it behind a boat, you're standing there with your toes along the line, all in a perfect row together, like good little soldiers.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Big Buts, Part One: A real whopper of a red herring
There are some big "buts" that I am really tired of hearing regarding fat people and the "epidemic". This is the first one.
"But...health care costs! OMG!"
This red herring argument crops up as a way of legitimizing poor treatment of fat people. Whether or not you accept that being fat is inherently unhealthy, it can be argued that a person should have the freedom to be unhealthy, so long as their doing so does not infringe on the health of other people. Smokers, for example, are free to engage in their health-damaging activity, but it is not fair for them to inflict their smoke on other people*.
Someone being fat, however does not physically affect other people**, so there needed to be an excuse to infringe upon a person's freedom to engage in "unhealthful" behavior. Claiming that fat people drive up healthcare costs is a disingenuous way to justify dehumanizing them. It's a clever little scheme to make the hardworking, put-upon thin people look like victims for having to hand over their whole paychecks to pay medical costs for the greedy, evil fat people who have nothing better to do than eat donuts all day and gloat about how they've suckered the witless skinny folk.
Here's the thing, though: Even if being fat WERE unhealthy, and even if diets were extremely effective, which it isn't and they aren't***, that still doesn't give anybody the right to tell other people what to do with their bodies. You can smoke, and you can refuse blood transfusions, and you can go base jumping, and you can go work in a coal mine, and nobody should be able to stop you from doing it based on "health care costs". Yes, some behaviors are risky. Some people are going to need more medical care than others. That's part of being a society--we should take care of one another, if we have the means to do so, and that means not denying someone basic freedoms or medical treatment based solely on their fat tissue.
Using fat as a scapegoat for the REAL problems in our health care system doesn't accomplish anything. You might as well say that old people are driving up health care costs. They are, you know, and if they would just stop being old and die already, that would save lots of money--but that is not a reason to dehumanize the elderly. Another demographic that uses a disproportionate amount of health care is premature infants, who use about $26 billion a year in health care in the United States. If we just let 'em die, or smother them at birth, that'd save us a lot of money, right? See how easy it is to dehumanize a whole group of people when we believe that they are costing us money? It's not so nice when we're talking about your grandpa, or your new niece, is it?
Here's the thing: If you see a piece of data claiming to be the health care costs due to "obesity" (god I hate that word), you are most likely looking at a number that was created by attributing every single health problem that fat people have been treated for, whether or not it is actually as a result of their adipose tissue. Every health problem a fat person has is assumed by data miners to be attributable to their fatness, even if they've been injured in a car accident, shot by a mugger, or developed a sinus infection. Similarly, the "deaths attributable to obesity" statistics classify all dead obese people as killed by their fat, even if they were murdered with a tuning fork by evil clowns from outer space. Be very skeptical of these kinds of statistics--after all, the CDC had to modify their 400,000 figure after somebody called them on their faulty number crunching.
So, please, shelve the health care costs argument. It's dehumanizing, it's not accurate, and it really is a pretty poor mask for the real issue--hatred of and discrimination against fat people. There's no excuse for it; it's just plain mean, and it's time people started treating each other like civilized human beings instead of digging up bullshit excuses to hate each other.
* And no, I don't want to hear your "omg secondhand smoke is a myth!" denialism. It isn't just about cancer risk--there are many of us with asthma who couldn't do anything fun until our states passed laws that protect us in restaurants and bars. If it weren't for NY's smoking laws, I would never have met my husband, since we met at a club. My mother works in a restaurant where smoking is allowed, and she has developed a chronic persistent cough because of it. Smoking stinks, and it makes a lot of people sick. Do it outside, or in your home, kay?
** OH BUT, you say, AIRLINE SEATS! So you got squished on an airplane? We are all squished on airplanes. If you were willing to pay for a first class seat, you would be guaranteed a reasonable amount of space. You weren't, and because most people aren't, airlines cram as many seats as they can into economy class. See, it's a class issue!
*** And I'm not going to rehash that here. Go to Kate's post about it instead.
"But...health care costs! OMG!"
This red herring argument crops up as a way of legitimizing poor treatment of fat people. Whether or not you accept that being fat is inherently unhealthy, it can be argued that a person should have the freedom to be unhealthy, so long as their doing so does not infringe on the health of other people. Smokers, for example, are free to engage in their health-damaging activity, but it is not fair for them to inflict their smoke on other people*.
Someone being fat, however does not physically affect other people**, so there needed to be an excuse to infringe upon a person's freedom to engage in "unhealthful" behavior. Claiming that fat people drive up healthcare costs is a disingenuous way to justify dehumanizing them. It's a clever little scheme to make the hardworking, put-upon thin people look like victims for having to hand over their whole paychecks to pay medical costs for the greedy, evil fat people who have nothing better to do than eat donuts all day and gloat about how they've suckered the witless skinny folk.
Here's the thing, though: Even if being fat WERE unhealthy, and even if diets were extremely effective, which it isn't and they aren't***, that still doesn't give anybody the right to tell other people what to do with their bodies. You can smoke, and you can refuse blood transfusions, and you can go base jumping, and you can go work in a coal mine, and nobody should be able to stop you from doing it based on "health care costs". Yes, some behaviors are risky. Some people are going to need more medical care than others. That's part of being a society--we should take care of one another, if we have the means to do so, and that means not denying someone basic freedoms or medical treatment based solely on their fat tissue.
Using fat as a scapegoat for the REAL problems in our health care system doesn't accomplish anything. You might as well say that old people are driving up health care costs. They are, you know, and if they would just stop being old and die already, that would save lots of money--but that is not a reason to dehumanize the elderly. Another demographic that uses a disproportionate amount of health care is premature infants, who use about $26 billion a year in health care in the United States. If we just let 'em die, or smother them at birth, that'd save us a lot of money, right? See how easy it is to dehumanize a whole group of people when we believe that they are costing us money? It's not so nice when we're talking about your grandpa, or your new niece, is it?
Here's the thing: If you see a piece of data claiming to be the health care costs due to "obesity" (god I hate that word), you are most likely looking at a number that was created by attributing every single health problem that fat people have been treated for, whether or not it is actually as a result of their adipose tissue. Every health problem a fat person has is assumed by data miners to be attributable to their fatness, even if they've been injured in a car accident, shot by a mugger, or developed a sinus infection. Similarly, the "deaths attributable to obesity" statistics classify all dead obese people as killed by their fat, even if they were murdered with a tuning fork by evil clowns from outer space. Be very skeptical of these kinds of statistics--after all, the CDC had to modify their 400,000 figure after somebody called them on their faulty number crunching.
So, please, shelve the health care costs argument. It's dehumanizing, it's not accurate, and it really is a pretty poor mask for the real issue--hatred of and discrimination against fat people. There's no excuse for it; it's just plain mean, and it's time people started treating each other like civilized human beings instead of digging up bullshit excuses to hate each other.
* And no, I don't want to hear your "omg secondhand smoke is a myth!" denialism. It isn't just about cancer risk--there are many of us with asthma who couldn't do anything fun until our states passed laws that protect us in restaurants and bars. If it weren't for NY's smoking laws, I would never have met my husband, since we met at a club. My mother works in a restaurant where smoking is allowed, and she has developed a chronic persistent cough because of it. Smoking stinks, and it makes a lot of people sick. Do it outside, or in your home, kay?
** OH BUT, you say, AIRLINE SEATS! So you got squished on an airplane? We are all squished on airplanes. If you were willing to pay for a first class seat, you would be guaranteed a reasonable amount of space. You weren't, and because most people aren't, airlines cram as many seats as they can into economy class. See, it's a class issue!
*** And I'm not going to rehash that here. Go to Kate's post about it instead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
