From Brazil. For low fat yoghurt. Iconic film images of Mena Suvari, Sharon Stone, Marilyn Monroe photomanipulated.
Tagline: Forget about it. Men’s preference will never change. Fit Light Yogurt.
Via Jess McCabe, at The F-Word blog.
Categories: Miscellaneous
Are we all still here? 
Otterday and Open Thread 
So my plans for writing today didn’t quite work out 
Otterday! And Open Thread 
Hoyden About Town 
I just compared the way-too-fat-to-schtupp Mena Suvari image to the original, with which I was unfamiliar. I think my head exploded.
Speechless. Fucking speechless.
And let’s forget about the fact that Marilyn Monroe already had a lot more meat on her bones than the two more modern pics (hence why they had to inflate her like Violet Beauregard in the altered version) – because apparently “men’s preferences never change”.
Geez.
Good point, Liz. When compared to an original image of Marilyn below, look at how the Brazilian ad agency has chosen an angle that doesn’t “cheat” for flattering effect in the same way either.
I just realised I left out the hat-tip to Jess McCabe over at The F-word for the story.
I take your point; but I, for one, would appreciate the altered Marilyn Monroe shape not being compared to Violet Beauregarde. Kthxbai.
Marilyn Monroe’s plus size-ness is something of an urban legend.
“Men’s preferences never change”? Um, I’m pretty sure that in Brazil women used to get breast reductions and buttock implants, which would be considered bizarre in the breast implant and liposuction ‘States.
That being said, truly disgusting ad. And as usual, even though we always hear that women are thin only for other women (!!!), it’s all about the MENZ. (Not necessarily that the menz are all into skinniness, but that women are supposed to want to be skinny for the menz.)
Considering I am approximately the same shape as the altered Marilyn Monroe pic, if not larger, and am very happy with my body, I was referring to the artificiality of the result rather than the aesthetics.
However, I realise now that it could come across as offensive, and I apologise if it did.
It was probably very politically incorrect of me to laugh but I’ve just been reading Sharon Stone’s denial of plastic surgery and I could imagine her face if she saw this. I can say this being of the MM size and probably a bit more.
Wouldn’t they have had to have permission to use the images or is that null and void with the ‘supersize me’?
The American Beauty one is actually really, really hot.
That ad misfired for me.
Yeah, you’d think they’d do something to make the models look bad if they’re trying to imply the ugliness of fat people. Those are some pretty awesome, flattering pictures. This ad campaign is evil, but at least it’s poorly-executed evil.
I think all three women in the ads look great and the first one is actually very, very hot – man I wish I looked that great!
Er, perhaps my brain is wired weirdly, but I don’t think the answer is “fat women are hot”, I think it’s more like “don’t shame/belittle women for not being hot [whatever ‘hot’ may be].”
Ya, number one is really ‘hot’, but like you say, that’s not the point here (except it’s funny that the ad is misfiring).
Sex sells, yes (whether that’s a good thing is an exercise for the reaer): To say ‘eat our yogurt because otherwise you’ll get fat, and look how ugly these icons would be if they were fat’ is wrong-headed on so many levels.
All women’s bodies are beautiful. I think it is savage to belittle women in this manner in order to sell them a product.
Having had another, closer look at the photos, I’m now going to go crawl under a rock. My first assumption was that the pictures were of the original actresses but digitally manipulated (and not very well in the case of the third, especially if you look at the way her ankles and feet appear to be very poorly airbrushed), which is what I was objecting to. If they are actually different models doing the same poses, then my comments were inexcusable.
I thought all the women in the altered pictures look great, but of course the point is that what men prefer should be irrelevant to the way in which we women construct our body image.
I like the one replacing Menua Suvari in American Beauty much better than the origional.
At least this woman looks adult and happy; in the origional Menua was cast as a teen character, being cast as a pedophilla fantasy object in this scene by the Dad. Which undermined whatever appeal the rose-bed imagery has!
Marilyn Monroe was no plus sized girl. A vintage size 12 is incredibly tiny. I just costumed a show with 40’s vintage clothing, and our smallest girls – whose waists were ~30 inches – were wearing vintage size 16.
That said, I can’t believe that these ads ever saw the light of day.
They all look hot to me.
What does it matter? If you feel good or bad about yourself, are you really going to blame it on a yogurt advertisement?
I know that I would gladly be caught in torrid situations with any of those ladies, and I’m not exactly Captain Wafer-thin, either. Yeah, I’m fat, and I don’t feel bad when I see some hunky funky hot boy riding a horse or racing a car or trying on a nice pair of jeans. If you are comparing yourself to those dudes, maybe you need to think about something else besides your outward appearance.
Grandma used to say tht sexiness was all in the head and groin. In the dark etc etc etc
As a Brazilian native I must say Brazilians lack concious big time when it comes to trying to be less offensive about one’s body weight, meaning they’re rather blunt and rude about addressing the “issue”. Women rather have an extremelly hot bodies and no brains in that country, I’m not kiddin’ you- so there is no lack of walking bimbos. It’s like walking into a movie really, where you have no validation as a human being if you’re overweight- so if you think the US is bad, you have yet to know Brazil!
Hence tge fact that Brazil is the number one country when it comes to plastic surgeries, people get liposuction like it’s walk to the park. Women live to work out and they are walking bibles when it comes to dieting. Are they successful? Doubtfully so, as one would notice by walking around the streets of major cities, there are lots of large and stunning women, who grew up insecure about their looks and have yet to discover what is happiness like b/c they hate themselvs.
Still its more of a crime to be overweight than to shoot someone in the head- seriously!
So, I can say as one woman, who wears size 18(and thankfully currently living overseas), that the sad truth of my country is that society is absolutely brainwashed by the idea of being thin and I hardly believe that anyone would speak up about how offensive this is.
BTW, that brand of yougurt SUCKS big time!!
Since the women in these images would have been considered ideally beautiful for the purposes of art five hundred years ago or so, I think it’s safe to say men’s preferences have changed. His capacity for ill-advised advertising campaigns, however, apparently never will.
The first one in the roses is really really hot and the other two don’t seem gross in any way, of course I’m a lesbian and not a man, but really skinny chicks make me think I migh hurt myself if I hugged them, and curves are a lot sexier then pointy angles.
wolf53813@yahoo.com
Hello, everyone dropping in from Metafilter. Nice to see you.
I’m sure all of you noting that you find at least one of these women in the ads hot are not meaning to be insensitive, but posting a hot-or-not evaluation is tending towards being part of the problem, not the solution.
The problem with the ads is the exploitation of the already horribly intrusive hot-or-not “value” system placed on women, the pervasive power of fatphobia, and the idea that distorting one’s natural self in pursuit of stereotypical male approval is a logical and healthy response to fatphobia.
Reality check: the human male is responsive to certain forms of female attractiveness. Now though size varies from time to time thoughout the years (and more), basically the ration of waist to hips and bust size etc still attract because they do suggest fertility, potential motherhood etc and to deny this by getting dander up about heavy is beautiful and fat is nice too and that sort of thing is just plain unrealistic. Hey, if you like chubby babes, go to it with my blessings, but do not, please, suggest that all shapes and sizes are equally attractive. They are not. Period.
freddie, it doesn’t matter if you don’t find fat women attractive. That’s fine. But why move on from that to suggesting that they are unattractive to anybody, which is what the ad implies?
As to the waist/hip ratio, while there is some evidence for health in middle age that this ratio is important, I know of no evidence that suggests that waist/hip ratio affects fertility. Cite?
A lot of the factoids about fat and health are myths, so that women considered fat can be perfectly healthy and strong. If you are healthy and strong, then why lose weight just to fit an advertising stereotype?
“basically the ration of waist to hips and bust size etc still attract because they do suggest fertility, potential motherhood etc”
A “fat” woman (fat being defined as anything over Nicole Richie/Posh Spice size) is much more likely to be fertile and able to conceive than an anorexic woman who doesn’t even menstruate.
A waist to hip ratio and breast size do not have anything to do with weight – a larger woman with a 35″ waist and 50″ hips has a “perfect” 0.7 waist to hip ratio and could have double D breasts. A thin woman with a 24″ waist and 31″ hips has a waist to hip ratio closer to 0.8 and could have AA breasts.
Also I don’t think the 0.7 waist to hip ratio is universal. Judging from this picture and some of her movies I’ve seen, I doubt that Angelina Jolie has the much-vaunted 0.7 waist to hip ratio. But obviously she’s considered beautiful by many people (some of them human males). Neither are big breasts – Keira Knightley and Kate Moss would not even have careers if only big breasted women were considered attractive.
Not to mention that with all the money and heartache we spend on birth control, abortions and sterilization, I doubt that most people see sex as solely to means to have a child with a fertile partner.
And yes, what tigtog said at #25. Feminists are less concerned about what’s hawt and sexxy and more concerned with being judgmental and sexist about women’s bodies.
Pssst, base to Hoydens: I think we’ve hit a few squares on fat hate bingo.
“You just want an excuse to be fat”
“You must be delusional if you think it’s okay to be fat”
Argh –
“I doubt that most people see sex as solely to means to have a child with a fertile partner.”
“I doubt that most people see sex as solely A means to have a child with a fertile partner.”
“Feminists are less concerned about what’s hawt and sexxy and more concerned with being judgmental and sexist about women’s bodies.”
“Feminists are less concerned about what’s hawt and sexxy and more concerned with NOT being judgmental and sexist about women’s bodies.”
I guess some are annoyed with what I have said so I will simply say that I find that in my little mind and imagination most women I find very appealing are not overly heavy. This is not to say that overweight women are not healthy and of course they can and do have babies. When I look at the statues and painting from the classic period on, I find that folks admired sometimes “solid” women and certainly always well proportioned women but I do not find overly heavy women represented. Why is that?
http://transwoman.tripod.com/beauty.htm
sums up a lot of what has been at issue here
As to very fat people in art, there aren’t many figures of very fat women or men, unless they were royals or aristocrats who commissioned their own portraits. Outside portraiture, there is generally a preference in art for the aesthetics of a strong and relatively youthful body, for either sex.
But what exactly do you mean by “overly heavy”? I’m pretty sure all three of these women below would be as “heavy” as the fat faux-Marilyn in the post above, and would be considered “overly heavy” by any fashion magazine. In Rubens’ time a more matronly figure was considered ideal compared to today’s idealisation of the girlish figure.
Wow. The Ms Rosepetal image has been viewed over 4000 times now on my Flickr stream.
Freddie, the problem with your argument is that you’re arguing “I see/feel X, thus X is universally true.” No one is trying to argue that you do not see/feel X. littoralmermaid and tigtog are giving you specific counter-examples: situations where X is not true.
So, to recap: you argue that beauty is a proxy for fertility and men will always want and have always wanted a specific female body type. littoralmermaid points out that the modern-day standard of beauty does not indicate fertility, in that many women who meet current beauty standards are too thin to menstruate/conceive/bear children, undermining the reasoning behind your point. tigtog points out that men outside the US and men in previous times have had other beauty standards, undermining the empirical evidence for your point. tigtog, littoralmermaid, and I don’t need to show that all men desire Y rather than X, just that desire is not monolithic. I think they’ve done that pretty well. What’s your next move?
freddie-
“I find that folks admired sometimes ‘solid’ women and certainly always well proportioned women but I do not find overly heavy women represented.”
Agh, and definitions snag every fat/beauty culture discussion – what is “thin”, what is “fat”, etc. There’s a wide gulf between what’s considered “thin” today and what’s medically overweight/obese.
Doctors have told me that I am “lean” and that I should not lose any more weight (and that I can afford to gain a little), but by media standards I am fat because I am substantially heavier than the vast majority of “thin” actresses and models. I suspect the same is true for many women.
You referred to the universal unattractiveness of women who are “chubby” or “fat”. Well, women who were considered “solid” or “well-proportioned” in the past would be considered *fat* if fat is anything bigger than Paris Hilton.
In a twisted way, I almost feel this is empowering regardless of what the Ad Agency is trying to do. It puts more pictures of plus-sized women everywhere, creating a normalizing effect.
Not only are they putting pictures which normally aren’t out there everywhere, but these women are made up to look beautiful. The lighting is good, the pictures are sexy.
The captions are stuck in the past while the pictures are changing the future.
God,
I cant believe the amount of self delusion in this thread. Men prefer chicks that arent fat! Women prefer men that arent fat as well. Geez! I understand that the amount of advertising that features women nowadays creates a whole host of problems like poor self-body image and the like which is bad but simply denying that most men prefer women who are a lot thinner than those featured in these ads is ludicrously deluded.
You will be taken a lot more seriously if you claim that women of a NORMAL healthy body mass index (i.e. someone like kate winslet) are not represented fairly in modern day advertising when instead unrealisticly thin/tall models are usually used. Insisting that figures like the ones used in these ads are sexy or that there is nothing wrong having a figure like these women (who are obviously overweight and unhealthy) is stupid, delusional and just as dangerous as unhealthily thin models on the cover of vogue.
Benster, you forgot to tell us how bad fat-acceptance is for the children, and thus you have denied me my Bingo! (although the adjudicators may rule against me on the epidemic box even though you did say the women were unhealthy)
I admire solid women and I admire not so solid women. I do admire many suer models these days but I donot admire what appers anorexic, ie, Paris H. I have known professional models–my former wife was a fashion illustrator–and they were healthy ladies. lI wander the beach and I do not like cellulite-ridden thighs. What attracts the average male seems to me to be both healthy, well proportioned, and prety. I once took yoga with a womaan who was very well built. Alas, glancing up from that nice body to see her face,which reflected her 70 years, was, well, offputting. I figured that it ws therefore a number of things put together that made for attractiveness. I find 18-year -old girls attractive and often with nice (hard) bodies, and note that is the healthiness etc of youth that appeals. I still like others can admire women in their 40s plus who manage to retain despite the years a certain attracctiveness. But it is not being overweight or with sagging this or thats which consitutes their attrativeness. Yes: advertising feeds into things but it would not were there not also some basic appeal to begin with. I go from time to time (for my site) to retro women and YES they are a bit more fleshly usually but maintain the right proportions to make for sexincsss, as do the pinups of WWII, certainly not anorexic looking babes.
[Edited: porn link deleted. …lauredhel]
Freddie, you’re still just talking about what you like. With no evidence. This is argumentative malpractice!
Give us some evidence (not anecdotes about who you, personally, think is sexy), or bow out.
Now I am accused of arguing only about what I like. Ok. Then what I like is what I like but is there a “standard” that everyone should or does like? Seems to me that “beauties” do not become film stars, models, ad girls, beauty queens (contests), etc unless what they have or seem to represent appeals to a large population, and that women too aspire to b e like those women. Sure, ads will have something to do with this but an ad with what many consider unattrative will simply not appeal to most people.thus, what I like as a reasonably intelligent and educated male is reflected in he larger population.
[Edited:porn link deleted – tigtog]
It’s true ladies, loose that weight you little piggies!
“Insisting that figures like the ones used in these ads are sexy or that there is nothing wrong having a figure like these women (who are obviously overweight and unhealthy)”
Are you a doctor? Then you don’t really know if they’re overweight and unhealthy. I stated earlier that I am “fat” by media standards but I have never been told that I have a health related weight problem by a doctor.
“anorexic looking”
Yes, let’s bash skinny women not because compulsory thinness is harmful to women, but because the MENZ don’t think it’s hot.
[link to porn site deleted again – get a clue please – tigtog]
I m not a doctor but I do know that too much weight is not a good thing for potential diabetes, heart condition, blood pressure.I am not here concerned about illness but address only what I (me only) find attractive. Now you may not like that and that is fine for you but just as I do not tell others what they need to eat, read, see, etc so too I do know what I find appealing to me. And too thin and too fat–by my standards–does not do it. Simple, right?
Where -can- I get one of those fat hate bingo cards?
Marilyn Monroe was a British size 12. That’s a good bit smaller than an American size 12 but still big enough to get you laughed off the average catwalk, mens magazine or film set.
Morrighan, the bingo card is over at red3.blogspot.com, the blog of its creator, BStu (and he made a second one, too, so you can play with a friend and see who gets bingo first).
BStu also has an awesome post both at Red No.3 and at Kate Harding’s blog Shapely Prose about how his aesthetic preference always has been for for fatter women: he finds fat women sexy. Recommended reading.
I have not said that men seek only body types that imply fertility! I said that men seek a certain range of beauty types and within those ranges, there is the suggestion of fertility (nubile chicks?)…As for modern women not meeting those types or standards: nonsense. The overly thin, given as an example to oint to my “error” is silly. I am not talking about very thin women, not by a long shot. Now since there are so many babies in the world, or in the US, and they are being born daily, clearly there are many women who are both fertile and fertile-suggesting. But then women of just about any weight can have babies, so that fertility is but a part of it.
In passing; I had posted a link to a fine Flickr site but the moderator yanked it as “porn.” Wow. Beautiful women showing their bodies and nothing going on sexually and that is Porn! and the link can not be shown while discussing bodies…just plain stupid and oh so very American
[link to porn site deleted again – further comments that include it will no longer be moderated, simply deleted – tigtog]
freddie, you are arguing in bad faith and derailing the thread.
You are the one who introduced “anorexic looking babes” as yet another example of what freddie does and doesn’t like, as if this discussion should be All About You.
Posting a link to a porn-blog (soft porn – sure. still porn) on a feminist blogis either ignorant or trolling. No further discussion of that moderation decision will be entered into on the blog. Read the Guidelines for our moderation policies.
Also, we’re Australians.
Freddie tells me he’s taking his ball and going home, after responding via email three times to his comment notifications instead of even attempting to leave a comment on the blog. Bah.
Freddie (or anyone else), if you want to have a discussion of the issues, try it without mentioning your personal preferences, because your personal preferences are irrelevant. You are still welcome to post here as long as you don’t post links to porn.
I’m with the lady who said that these ads might actually be good. Then again, it is just another way to objectify and pornify (thanks Twisty) all women. Increased depiction of normal, and large ladies is a good thing, but context is just as important.
(And I know, I know, no one cares about my sexual preferences, but dear spin cycle that first lady is just astoundingly beautiful)
These doublespeak ads, are something unto themselves. Ok, like they’re trying to sell yogurt to fat women. So they have all these pictures of beautiful plus-size women, then just as their gaining customer loyalty by showing real women, they ruin it all with their catch line. I think that’s worse, than just having a ad with thin people. It’s a bait and switch.
Society is fucked up. No questions asked. Women have to be skinny to get men? that’s sick. fcuking society. I hate it. why do women have to look skinny? WHY?! WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH PEOPLE?!?!? I HATE THE MEDIA AND I HATE PEOPLE WHO AGREE WITH THIS AD. YOU FUCKING SUCK!
MY POINT: BEAUTY COMES FROM WITHIN…FUCKERS!
I showed those pictures to a friend, and the first question he asked was, “Why would those women be in those ads?”
I was kind of ashamed that I hadn’t asked the same question.
David said:
“It’s true ladies, loose that weight you little piggies!”
If you claim your opinion is truth for all men, please give me some credible evidence.
http://www.villagevoice.com/nyclife/0725,rogers,76972,15.html
Men’s preferences are not what they seem to be.
At least not in real life.
While most men may prefer the pin-up model to hang on their walls, they do not end up marrying one.
In the end, more skin wins out over less.
George Vreeland Hill
Marketing targets our insecurities, so from that point of view it doesn’t matter what our real preferences are as long as marketing can make us feel that we don’t measure up to some aesthetic ideal.
The response to this ad really shows just how effective the targeting of our insecurities can be.
but marketing can only target our insecurities if (1) we are vey insecure, (2) it projects an appeal that has merit–overly fat women are NOT attractive. Not. All the marketing in the world will not work for some products in many circumstances (ex: the Ford Edsel)so what you are saying is just way to say We are mere victims; it is not our fault; nothing is our fault; someone else made me be or do what I am.
Nathan, you are reading me too narrowly, and I’m sure you don’t intend to argue that you are so special that you have no insecurities. You’re not a robot, are you?
It is only when we are aware of our insecurities that we can reject attempts to target and manipulate them for another’s gain. Nonetheless, having rejected the manipulation we are still aware of the underlying insecurity which was targetted, and resentful that it has been brought to the forefront of our attention, and that is what has provoked the strong reaction to these ads.
The Ford Edsel sold remarkably well initially due to heavy marketing, by the way.
I am not a robot. I have or have had insecurities but hardly accept each and every ad or marketing attempt to get my money and sell me products. Edsel was a disaster from the beginning:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edsel
If you take a deep breath and a step back Nathan, you’ll see that we’re actually in ferocious agreement about the insecurity thing.
Not so much about the Edsel (from your cite):
“63,110 Edsels sold the first year. Though this was below expectations, it was still the second largest car launch for any brand to date, second only to the Plymouth introduction in 1928.”
I can not help but gasp when you mention me by name, dearheart, but I will try Mindfulness and counting breaths…
No need to argue Edsel. There are man y things out there that fail despite marketing…I note the amaingly great films about WWII by Eastwoodk, and though criically acclaimed as outstanding they have not have much success at the boxoffice–America has had it fill of war for the moment, till we find another one to begin.
Ladies, though, perhaps need to be fat?
http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20060730234812data_trunc_sys.shtml
I am a bit of a history buff and I notice that in America, during the time of agricultural society, say Grape of Wrath period, the phtos of the citizenry usually depicted lean folks–men and women. Being portly was cool for guys who were middle aged, with money, non-laboring types. Now, these guys workout, eat right, have trainers. And the poor, the workers? overweight (I said it!) from fast food dumps…so it goes, as Kurt V loved to say
xxxx
What is your point here tig tog? Are you trying to sarcastically make fun of my post by referring to some checklist of anti-fat comments in your bingo card that I seem to have ticked off thus proving i am some rabid anti fat person whose comments are obviously cliched, prejudiced and immature and can thus be discounted?
I don’t hate fat people at all but I don’t think being overweight is a good thing at all and that we should aspire to be fat or be happy with it as you seem to be saying. I understand that there are a lot of unhealthy body images being promoted in the media today and that a lot of women as a result who are of a perfectly healthy and normal body weight feel unfairly self conscious about themselves and may suffer from poor body image. However when people who are obviously overweight blame the media for making them feel unhappy about themselves rather than adopt a more healthy lifestyle it’s a failure to take responsibility for ones own actions or inactions – that is not societies fault.
You could have simply addressed my point instead that most men desire women that are less heavy than those in this ad. I understand that if you are overweight this may not be very nice to have to accept but it is the simple undeniable truth. Advertisers make money by using sex appeal to sell stuff. If coke sold more sugary drinks by using fat female models instead of thin ones to appeal to men it would because it would mean they would make more money. What do they care about body image? They just want to make money. But they don’t use fat models do they? Why – because people aren’t attracted to them – thats why.
Being overweight is not healthy nor is it sexy for most of the population whether you are male or female. Choosing to lose weight and make a positive step in your life is going to make you a lot happier in your life in the long term rather than defending being fat on the internet and attacking people who are only stating the plain truth.
i should probably also add that I understand that there is indeed something offensive about these ads – namely that the implied message is that women should be making their food choices solely in order to appeal to men, obviously a message which drives the average feminist crazy.
But I think that the reaction on this board annoys me much more than that message as rather than critique the ad for preying on womens insecurities about their weight so many posters are insisting that fat is good when it plainly isn’t. Hate the ad for what it is but please don’t start insisting things are black when they are obviously white. Otherwise reasonable people just think you are stupid.
Benster, I wrote this post especially for people like you.
“It seems you don’t need to postulate an unconscious calculator of mate value or any other ‘programmed-brain’ argument to explain why prototypical images are more attractive,” Winkielman said. “The mental mechanism appears to be extremely simple: facilitate processing of certain objects and they ring a louder bell. This explanation accounts for cultural differences in beauty – and historical differences in beauty as well – because beauty basically depends on what you’ve been exposed to and what is therefore easy on your mind.”
http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20060827021607data_trunc_sys.shtml
fat girls are NOT attractive. Period. Why pretend otherwise?
To YOU, Nathan.
Why should anyone here care what you do or do not find attractive?
However when people who are obviously overweight blame the media for making them feel unhappy about themselves rather than adopt a more healthy lifestyle it’s a failure to take responsibility for ones own actions or inactions – that is not societies [sic] fault.
You’re suggesting that a “more healthy lifestyle” (which you’ll need to define) is incongruous with a fat, positive body image, right?
Also, you’ll need to define “obviously overweight” and what “responsibility” one must take if one is “obviously overweight”.
You could have simply addressed my point instead that most men desire women that are less heavy than those in this ad.
Prove it.
I understand that if you are overweight this may not be very nice to have to accept but it is the simple undeniable truth.
No, it’s quite deniable. I’d like to state here for the record that red sweaters are far less desirable than green ones. I mean, it’s just a fact. Look at them – they’re red, and are obviously inferior!
Same nonsensical argument. And spare me the “just trying to assist with your health” or “just trying to fix the burden you’re putting on the healthcare system” arguments.
Being overweight is not healthy nor is it sexy for most of the population whether you are male or female.
Again, prove it. This is almost a joke: you’re spitting out these ignorant, myopic statements without backing a single one of them up – at all – and expecting people to swallow it. Come on now. If you want to play, you need to bring your facts, don’t you think?
Choosing to lose weight and make a positive step in your life is going to make you a lot happier in your life in the long term rather than defending being fat on the internet and attacking people who are only stating the plain truth.
Oh, right, fat people are sad and not doing anything positive. I forgot. Thanks for the reminder.
Look. It’s pretty clear that your comments are *opinions* and not facts, although you’re stating them as such. Worse, your opinions seem to come from woefully biased sources.
I continue to read the comments and enjoy them all. I do, though, have one question:
If you had a choice, would you prefer to be “just right” (weight for your age, height, gender) or 50 pounds above what would be considered good or average for age, gender, height? Choose.
I would prefer to be at the weight at which my body was healthiest. Full of strength, stamina, energy.
Many people struggling to maintain some media driven “ideal” weight are fighting against their body’s natural setpoint amongst the normal variation of body types. If you struggle against your body’s natural setpoint weight you are making yourself more unhealthy instead of being at the weight needed for your body to be its healthiest.
I choose option C. I prefer to be “just right” for me and I don’t really care if that’s 100lbs above “average.” Who wants to be average? It rather denotes a lack of courage and imagination in my mind and would make for a very boring world. Kinda like I can sum up your narrow mindedness with one quote… “There are lies, there are damn lies, and then there are statistics.”
And your opinion isn’t universal truth, dear. I’m very fat and have never had lack of lovers or boyfriends from all across the size range. -I’m- having a hard time understanding what’s so hard to grasp about that concept for you.
There comes a point where I just have to sit back and laugh at the insistent “It’s just NOT!” arguments of the people who argue against fat acceptance. It’s remarkably like a small child who is trying very, very hard to define their own reality in a way that makes sense to them being confronting by something that blows their little minds.
You CAN be fat and healthy. You CAN be fat and attractive. You CAN be fat and happy with yourself, your body, your life.
People insisting that it just ISN’T TRUE *hand to forehead* isn’t going to change the science that is disproving people’s assumptions about fat, isn’t going to change the lives of the fat people who are fat and totally attractive, isn’t going to negate the power of fat people who love themselves.
Arguing that fat people aren’t people deserving of love and respect and admiration and every other thing given to thin people…. It’s a losing battle. I truly believe that. The fight sucks and, a lot of the time, it feels like we are being pushed backwards. But change is coming and no amount of denial on the part of people who are afraid of fat is going to change that.
Seeing as “Nathan Zuckerman” seems to have now descended into blatant trollery, I think it’s only fair that other readers/commentors on the blog know that “Nathan” and “Freddie” upthread who wouldn’t stop posting porn links are posting from the same IP number. Make of that what you will.
I’m not actually interested in addressing Freddie personally, just this comment, which I’ve seen so many places before. I have three things to say to this (and they are only samples from a much longer list I won’t bore people with):
a) Ballroom dancing
b) Champion show animals
c) Topiary (“meatball”) trees
The human pursuit of ‘perfection’ doesn’t seem to have a lot to do with real desire. Anything that gives us spontaneous pleasure we like to ‘perfect’ into a form that is weirdly sterile and sanitized, then we award prizes to anyone who comes closest to achieving the impossible (but ultimately kind of boring) standards. I think this must have to do with the human fear of loss or impermanence, or something. People like to think that if they can pin down something that gives them joy and define it to the nth degree, maybe they can make it happen whenever they want it to.
I think anorexic Hollywood beauties are the human equivalent of those show chickens bred to have such out-of-control feathers they can barely see, and such heavy breasts they can hardly walk – – – or German Shepherd show dogs, whose ‘most perfect’ show form, as bred by humans, causes crippling arthritis in the dogs’ hips. Or like the weird, stiff cha cha of ballroom dancing vs. the fluid, joy of the original folk dance it came from.
If you’re honest about it, I think it’s difficult to predict who you’re going to love, or even be attracted to – and it’s certainly not possible to pin down who someone else is going to be attracted to. If men really never found fat chicks attractive, it wouldn’t be necessary for these guys to come over and tell us so. I think beer is swill, but I don’t get all bent out of joint if someone else likes it – and usually I don’t comment, in a room full of people enjoying beer, that I think beer is swill.
I have not seen any remarks that are saying that overweight people are bad, no good etc but rather than such women are less attractive to most men…to suggest that being for idealized weight does not by itself constitute being against those who are more or less than an ideal weight, either in women or in men, in children, or in mature people.
[Edited to add image below – guess who? – Moderator]
I’m shocked, just shocked, that there might be a manufactured agreement from such individuals tigtog. Moving on from that completely unexpected revelation…
Um, yeah they are. Not your thing? That’s cool. Thin women need love, too. Good on you. Just don’t pretend that your preference, or even the majority preference, has any sort of definative power. Its just your opinion, and the FACT is that others don’t share that opinion. No pretending necessary.
And to Benster, fat people can be healthy. They can be the subject of sexual desire. They can be happy. One thing nearly all fat people cannot do safely or reliably is become not fat people. If that changes, there might at least be something to discuss, but until it does you might as well be using the Tooth Fairy as a citation because you’re arguing for something which just doesn’t exist and no amount of hand-wringing is going to change that.
Nathan I read the article you linked to and you seem to have missed its point. It argues that there’s nothing inherent in beauty – that it can be “arbitrarily programmed” – and is simply a matter of the imagery that you’ve been exposed to. That fits with my experience. I’ve seen plenty of images of beautiful fat women in beautiful clothes and contexts, and the hotness of these women is obvious to me.
The study you cite also tends to contradict your argument, and the ad’s point – that preferences will never change. It suggests that preference is very malleable, and if we were to apply its conclusions to the larger social context, it would imply that preference probably has a lot to do with what bodies the media fetishizes and what bodies it stigmatizes.
But that’s a trivial point. The more fundamental fallacy being played out here is that “the normal” or the statistical average (however we would try to measure it) equals superiority. The converse would be that difference equals inferiority.
The urge is almot irresistible isn’t it – to create false and inflexible dichotomies between “normal” and “abnormal” and to stuff them into even more ill-defined and childlike categories of good/bad; attractive/unattractive; healthy/unhealthy; acceptable/unacceptable.
But the foundation of life is diversity. Diversity of bodies and physiology. Diversity of desires. It’s exciting. I’m sorry that some people can’t see that. But whether you see it or not, doesn’t make the world the simplistic cartoon land of fat ugly diseased women and beautiful thin healthy babes that you want it to be.
And you can be fat and have a disability or a chronic illness. That isn’t a moral failing, it isn’t an insult to humanity everywhere, and above all it doesn’t make you any less of a person.
Rejecting moral healthism seems to be even more challenging to the status quo than rejecting fatphobia.
Lauredhel, it’s so easy for many of us to slide into ableism, isn’t it? Yes, people who are unhealthy and disabled deserve dignity as well, not phobic finger-pointing, and it’s not fair for the healthy to distance themselves from the realities of disability in the pursuit of persuasion to fat-acceptance.
healthy, ok…nice?ok…respect? only if I know you personally. Attractive? NO.
I don’t mean to use healthy as a restrictive or limiting word. I think “healthy” should realistically encompass a lot more than it currently does. And indeed, just as a thin person can have a disability or chronic disease, so can a fat person. Neither should be regarded as having a moral failing, but fat people are especially made to feel morally responsible for such health concerns and that’s not fair or productive. That fat people can be healthy is meant to refute any fat person being deemed morally failing because of the health concerns they do face. Its not meant to create a privileged group of fat people who get an “out”.
Laurelhead, health is definitely NOT a moral imperative (as I have said a million times myself *grin*). But I think, when someone is saying explicitly, as our sockpuppet friends have been, that fat automatically equals unhealthy, it is valid to counter that.
For my own part, though upon rereading I can see how the list I gave might be read as all tied up together, what I really mean is that, yes, fat people can be healthy and/or they can be attractive and/or they can be happy with themselves and their lives. One of those qualities does not necessitate the other.
Thanks tigtog.
BStu, the Rotund (Hi! You’re both fab): I wonder if there might be an analogy to be drawn here with the “flavours” of feminism. Might we be zeroing in on the contrast between radical fat-acceptance and health-positive/sex-positive fat acceptance?
Perhaps always responding to “fat people are unhealthy” or “fat people are ugly” with “fat people can be healthy!” or “fat people can be sexy!” is letting the bigots dictate the terms of the discourse.
Mm, will have to cogitate on this some more.
Thanks, Laurelhead, you are fab, tooooooooooo!
Perhaps a better response to “Fat people are unhealthy” might be, “So what if they are?” “Fat people are ugly!” “Again, so what if they are?”
My only concern is that we are really fighting the fat-hatred war on TWO fronts. One front is the external – the people who troll blogs and shout out of car windows and design ads that belittle fat people. The other is internal – and I think this one is the fiercer battle. Because fat people are really, REALLY good at hating themselves.
When I say “fat people CAN be healthy,” part of that message is addressing the trolls and part of it is to try to counter the automatic assumption that many fat people make: that because they are fat they must be unhealthy and making poor choices and it is their own fault and on and on and on.
I think HAES is fantastic and a pretty radical notion but I also think health is a lot less simplistic than it is commonly portrayed – there is a lot to be said for mental health and how it intersects with the body. And – I was thinking about this on my way to work this morning because I need to find a new doctor and I want to write a letter beforehand – I am unwilling to sacrifice my mental health in pursuit of physical health as though the two are not related.
That is how *I* negotiate my personal health and the way it intersects with my fat.
And I have NO idea why I keep typing Laurelhead when it is Lauredhel. Ha! Sorry about that!
And? What’s your point? You (freddie/nathan/postroad/sockpuppet) seem to be starting from the assumption that women should give a damn about what “most men” want them to look like, and, ergo, that women should therefore fall in line and do whatever they must in order to be visually appealing to “most men.”
If you start from an incorrect assumption, pretty much the rest of what you say is going to be invalid.
Nude Troth:
It makes me chuckle, though, and that’s a big plus!
I hear you on the inner demons side of things. That’s an important point and I think it’s any fat activist’s first battle – and one that may never be completely over.
I have a deep suspicion of healthist “wellness” advocacy, because I think that the constant barrage of positive-thinking polemic very often teeters on the edge of blaming anyone who is unwell for “not bothering to think themselves well” – and then casts this as a moral failing. (Diet talk falls right into this same dynamic also, of course!)
We’ve come to a point in health and medicine where many things can be treated or improved, so the things that can’t, instead of being blamed on just plain “shit happens”, or “medicine hasn’t bothered to research this effectively yet”, are getting blamed on the individual sufferer. They must be too negative, or be eating “wrongly” (however that “wrongly is construed by the particular agenda), or not moving around correctly (again, however that is defined). HAES has a much more positive approach to thought/diet/exercise; however it continues to buy into that individualist moral triumvirate, that idea that each person has a responsibility to themselves (and perhaps to society?) to prioritise the optimisation of this three-factor self-care regime.
There is a pile of privilege knotted up with this idea that I think bears close examination, both class and able-bodied (and perhaps others).
I know this is kinda challenging and/or controversial. I know right now we need HAES as a first step to combatting the completely twisted and fucked-up societal idealisation of deprivation and thinness. I’m trying to look to the next step.
Hi, all, new to this blog, but on to business! I think this ad shocked me a bit when I read the caption– I, like many other posters, found the women pictured very attractive, and I was more than a little confused when I finally figured out (D’uh, Ang!) that they weren’t supposed to be attractive. Somewhere along the line, I think we all forgot that “beauty” is not a medical condition, and it isn’t something that we can prove or argue. As far as the overweight=ugly theme that keeps popping up, I wonder if those (ahrrm, hrrm, asshole!) posters realize that 140lbs is “overweight” for a woman who stands 5ft3in. Um, yeahhhh… what?? I am 50lbs overweight, I am a strict vegetarian, I eat no processed sugar or fast foods, and I get about 5 times more exercise than many of my “thin” friends– so the fat=unhealthy argument doesn’t always apply either. Oh, and by the way, I am also a totally smokin’ hot fat babe, so take your fat equates unattractive argument and shove it. I have many thin female friends (who hate being called “anorexic,” which implies illness and is insulting to naturally thin women) who wish that they had more natural curves. Beauty is one thing, and attempting to brainwash the masses to see perfectly healthy large women as unattractive is another. Benster, I hope all of the women in your life can stand up to the unrealistic expectations you put upon them. Cheers, pals. –Ang
Am reluctant to engage with this- v.urrkky!
But would say to Freddie and other youngish conservative blokes etc is, everyone has problems with themselves one way or another- the other bloggers are just saying, more or less, “why put the boot” as to ( in this case) “ordinary” or plumpish women.
And tv/mag/visual advertising is so sterile as to liminal content so often, yes?
Such a waste of communicative talents and resources, when billions of people in the world are living in poverty and need Westerners to live in the real world instead of cotton-woolled in internalised fantasy, neurosis and angst.
For most blokes, you can’t be Sylvester Stallone or, if you want something less arcane; one of the ghastly pimply skinny little pansies from “boybands” who seem to score all the chicks while you, probably a person as worthwhile as they, have to look on ( yet again).
Not everyone has twelve inches dangling down the front, but that’s what you often feel your going to solely judged on by your objects of desire.
Well, same with women. Acceptance and consideration when involving physical criteria- a bit of taste- may earn a talented true friend and top lover for that dark day when all the superficial ones have long gone. The idiot gets past leg length or hair type (or alternatively, cocksize) as sole criterian) only through bitter experience tho methinks!
One problem with making facile assumpition is that they frequently are way ff base. Example: I am hardly either a young bloke and I am hardly conservative. As for all the poverty etc out there: it will exist whether the ads in America go away or not. In fact, I have worked soup kitchens, served in not one but two wars for our nation, have helped out in locals schools, raised money for various causes etc etc so that I do not feel at all “guilty” about what is “out there.” In passing, i have also worked in the ad industry. You may not care for ads, commercialism, etc but they are integral to capitalism and if you do not care for capitalism, then, well, I am not sure what to suggest you do.
But thanks for listening and for giving advice.. No hard feelings on my part.
Why do we all care so much what men think? Including the men posting on this blog?
And if we do care… I disagree with the b.s. slogan of the ad- men’s tastes apparently DO change- they are as susceptible to media images and propaganda about skinniness-is-godliness as women are (much to my dismay- I thought men were more true to their desires).
The part I find hilarious about this whole back and forth is that many men who posted negative comments about the women in these ads don’t even realize this ad is also insulting them.
What this ad is telling women is that “men’s preferences will never change”. Assuming that’s true, who are these men whose preferences we’re supposed to try and appeal to? Is it the guy who works down the street at the drive through Dairy Queen, doing the graveyard shift for minimum wage? Is it the racial minorities who are assumed to have no job, no money, no future and no worth? Is it the new immigrants who are struggling to make ends meet in the face of overwhelming odds? Is it men with mental illnesses or physical disabilities?
No. The man this ad is speaking to is a white, privileged upper class male. He’s got a strong firm body, a nine-inch penis, a great job, a great house, and lots of money in the bank. Because that’s what it takes to be a male in this society, that’s the partner stereotype of the female who is skinny and beautiful and everything those women in the yoghurt ads are supposedly not. It’s that kind of man who afford to make the social and financial exchange inherent in expecting his female partner to be (what I like to call) paradigm hot. It’s that kind of man who is in a position of power enough that he can financially afford to desire a woman strictly for her body, which is what judging a woman’s attractiveness from solely a photo is. And women are supposed to look a certain way in order to trade their looks for the financial security that comes with being that man’s object of desire.
So men out there who are saying these women are not attractive, I have to ask you – are you super athletic and have 3% body fat? Do you have a great job, own your own house, have a great car? Do you have a nine-inch penis? Because if not, you are not the person this ad is aimed at. Just like women of various sizes feel shamed and inadequate because of this ad, perhaps you should take a look in the mirror and realize this ad is also saying something about your adequacy as a man.
For all your talk of not letting your insecurities rule you, you are just as guilty of it as women. Because most men *aren’t* that man, and yet they are all pretending to be, or are putting a lot of work into being him. And why?
So that they can claim/possess the goods appropriate to the status they are trying to be through upscale emulation, one of which is a woman who looks nothing like the women in the yoghurt ads.
Some useful reading on this topic
a) Susan Bordo, “Reading the Slender Body” from Unbearable Weight ““ about our current fanaticism to control our bodies because of our feelings of loss of control on a larger level
b) Juliet Schor, “The New Politics of Consumption” ““ about upscale emulation and the debt culture
c) Kenon Breazeale, “In Spite of Women” ““ about the introduction of the women as advertising tool in magazines, which began with Esquire
d) Sut Jhally, “Image-Based Culture” ““ the title is pretty self explanatory
Aer the sterile ‘wedge’-efforts from Postroad in particular and also Annie a little, it was an absolute pleasure to read Simone’s post, which got beyond personalised sniping to offer an example of constructive thinking in unpacking cultural elements relating to social reproduction and reification.
Truly depressing, but the consolation of forewarning was a balme for injured sensibilites, as was the non-personalised, unconditional inclusiveness- a sign of the generosity of spirit of emotional maturity, as well as an invitation to others concerned at the wasteland of early 21st century culture, to join in ridding ourselves of what holds us back from fulfilment as people. An example of what how beautiful humanity can be, only amplified by the previous exclusionist example(s) of peevish self-absorption. .
And, if it’s too late for many of us, something maybe salvaged for the coming generations, maybe…
I find this is true of many issues in feminism. For all feminists are labelled “man-haters”, it’s not feminists who expect that men will always sexually harass women in the public domain, so there’s nothing to be done except for women to filter their email and hide in their homes. It’s not feminists who assume that rapists are an omnipresent force of nature, so the only solution is for women to protect themselves.
Feminists are the people saying “Men can be better than that”; antifeminists are the people claiming that they can’t.
Rejecting moral healthism seems to be even more challenging to the status quo than rejecting fatphobia.
A little late here, but Lauredhel, I think this is totally true. And I admit that sometimes I consciously or unconsciously let healthism slide when I get hung up on trying to make a point that I hope will help combat fatphobia.
In addition to the stuff all you fabulous folks discussed above, one reason to keep insisting that fat people CAN be healthy is simply that it’s true — and yet, we’re told again and again that it’s not. When someone says “ZOMG, fat people are unhealthy,” it’s not enough to say, “So what if they are?” because that’s sidestepping an opportunity to challenge a blatant, pervasive, damaging lie. Ideally, the response should include both, “No, they’re not” AND “But so what if they were?” Again, I know I fall down on the latter point sometimes, because I get so sputtery about the former. But I don’t think trading one response for the other would be adequate.
However, when I DO remember to add that healthism is no more acceptable than fatphobia, I don’t mean that just applies to people with disabilities or chronic illnesses, visible or invisible. It applies as well to people who are in a position to make more healthful choices (about any number of things) and, for whatever reasons, do not. Because, as important as it is to raise awareness of invisible disabilities and be inclusive of people with disabilities in general, saying, “Some people can’t just do X to get well, you know,” retains the pernicious moral judgment; now it’s the people who CAN do X who are morally unfit, because they choose not to.
“It’s not a choice” is an important icebreaking argument for a lot of causes, but for all of them, the ultimate point is: “Wherever it is a choice, that choice belongs solely to the individual.” Fat people who overeat and don’t exercise are no more morally unfit than fat people who can’t exercise because of disabilities, who are no more morally unfit than fat people who do exercise and eat a healthful diet yet remain fat. An individual’s body should not be judged in moral terms, period.
But convincing people of that just seems SO far away –compared to that, convincing people that there is such a thing as a healthy fatty seems like (forgive me) a piece of cake. So sometimes, in my fervor to see any sign of progress, I definitely bark up the wrong tree. Or just the one tree, when I should be barking up two simultaneously. But I’m absolutely with you on the basic point here.
Lauredhel and others here are entitled to know whether men ever see themselves from a woman’s point of view.
Not as often as we should and usually not with a great deal success or comfort, one suspects.
I suppose it is all encapsulated in that appalling story about the raped girl and the astonishing dislocation from reality indicated in the judge’s remarks. And in the twenty first century; no less!
Hence women here seem to asking, are male attitudes and modes of functioning in their current state cultural or “natural”.
At my age, I tend to think of “real” feminism as an imaginative offshoot of ’70s new leftism; a means of offering powerful new insights and descriptions unfortunately reinforcing that sense of a disconnect resulting from the marriage of humanity, technology, production and social order against culture over the last few thousand years. On the other hand, the new jungle is no less a jungle than the old jungle and I think much of what defines humanity continues in spite of “civilisation”.
What’s disturbing about feminist insights and their historical context is that these seem to confirm much of Rousseau, Marx etc as to a disconnect reinforcing or weakening certain individual and social pathologies.
Getting back to the real world, theoretical musings are not of much use to say, a woman on the receiving end of a back hander from a big drunken angry man, regardless of whether this a cultural affect or a biological one.
But I acknowledge that viewed from a certain trajectory, women’s history, location and being is pretty grim and as a male I should be prepared for the advent of a certain degree of scepticism, suspicion and hostility from some of my sisters, regardless of whether I find this palatable or not ( will skulk off, now!).
Lauredhel,
You hit it right on the head. Thank you!
Kate – all of what you and The Rotund said, in spades. I don’t know that it’s the wrong tree at all, just that there’s more than one tree there. It’s the next step, I guess: going from “No, you’re wrong” as a rebuttal, to “Your response is (a) wrong; and (b) irrelevant, and this is why:”
I’m coming in a little late on this one.
I discussed my husband finding me attractive in a blog entry a couple of months ago. Somehow, he manages to suppress his gag reflex the entire time we are together. I don’t know how he does it. He himself is an exceptionally good-looking man (not because he is slender–his brother is shaped more like me, and he’s also freakin’ adorable, good looks run rampant in this family; even the parents are pretty). He has had women of all sizes throw themselves at him, including those who are exceptionally pretty (including at least one stripper, sheesh).
Yet, somehow, he decided to martyr himself and marry a nasty fat woman. Nobody can figure out why he did it; perhaps he thinks it will generate good karma for him, and he’ll reincarnate as something really cool. Like a tiger! Or, maybe, he is just a really compassionate person and wants to sacrifice himself to make an unattractive fat girl happy.
Or, maybe, he’s not a dumb jerk that has bought into the “fat is gross” hype, and he has allowed his own preferences to determine whom he finds attractive, regardless of their size! Naaaah, that couldn’t be it. Here’s a wedding photo; can you see the look of disgust and despair on his face? (click the thumb to see a full size pic):
[thumb]
For the record, I am fat AND unhealthy! I won the genetic jackpot and inherited a painful disability. So, when you see me in that wheelchair or mart cart, feel free to scowl at me, because obviously the ONLY reason I could be using it is because I’m fat and lazy, not because walking for long periods of time causes me excruciating pain. Go right ahead and mutter to your companions that fatties should be getting exercise, not riding scooters. Was that your foot I ran over while I went past you? Did my cane accidentally hit you upside the head? I’m sooo clumsy, sorry about that!
I would like to see myself as an altered “a whole lotta lov’in” but of course beauty remains regardless of size beautiful fat is still a shallow observation
You women that think most men are just as attracted to overweight women are completely in “fantasyland”. Not all, but certainly most of us men prefer ladies that are on the thinner side. Women don’t necessarily have to be as thin as Kate Moss, but we certainly aren’t as attracted to women as big as the altered pics above of Sharon Stone and M. Monroe. Stop kidding yourselves thinking otherwise. I tell my wife all the time , that her friends from college that were overweight would have a very, very difficult time finding a man, and she has always agreed with me. My wife believes that many overweight women get together and tell themselves in doesn’t matter, but when they are alone and think it through they realize that men like women thin, PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!! And if they ever want to attract men, they must lose the weight.
Nickolai, you obviously haven’t read all the comments in this thread and are arguing with some fantasyland strawwoman yourself.
I am living the fantasyland. And I don’t have to share a planet with Nickolai, so it’s all good.
Maybe some of us are just really, really good at it.
And others would rather gnaw their flabby arms off than put up with a guy like Nickolai anyway. What’s the point of getting thin (if you can, just read Kate Harding’s blog) just so you get the “privilege” of living with some prat who nags you about what you eat?
What’s the point of getting thin… just so you get the “privilege” of living with some prat who nags you about what you eat?
Ding ding ding ding!
Worrying about what “most men” find attractive would suggest that I’m just looking for any man who will have me, and what I’m attracted to is irrelevant. Guess what? I’m not attracted to insecure, judgmental dickwads, so it really doesn’t matter if they like fat women or not. I wouldn’t date them anyway.
And since I do have a long-term partner now, I’ll tell you what: it wasn’t nearly as hard to find a guy who loves my fat body as it was to find one smart enough to keep up with me and not be intimidated. That right there substantially reduced the number of bachelors I considered eligible. Doesn’t mean I should have whacked myself over the head until I got dumber, just to broaden my choices.
Ooops ladies, someone forgot to tell our husbands that they are only supposed to like skinny women. I wonder if it’s too late now we’ve all had kids and settled down. Would it be kinder to tell them and set them free, or assume that they have a brain in their head and like us just the way we are?
There’s moves by certain people and groups to align fat acceptance with “pro-ana” websites and pamphlets. Remember that the medical community has a large economic stake in retaining control over people with disabilities and chronic illnesses – even though most of the problems these people face are social and environmental.
Paul, you haven’t quoted anything or addressed this to anyone, so in a super-century-post-thread, I don’t have any idea what you’re referring to, and can’t figure out what point you’re trying to make. Would you clarify, please?
Hoydens (Hoydenna?), the class of troll you are attracting has dropped off somewhat. I’m disappointed in you.
No, Nathan. The Size Acceptance movement is not in denial that body shape etc matters to some people who look at them.
They just don’t care whether those people approve of them or not. There are other people out there to whom body size doesn’t matter that much, and those people are a lot more fun to be around.
in the dark they are all the same? sure. But in the light or in the world of imagination? Those who are overweight, healthy or otherwise, are in denial if they believe that body shape and its distribution do not matter to both men and to women who look at them.
Wow. So just how far back in time did you have to go to find a woman that agrees with you a woman needs a man? Or maybe the only reason she agrees with you is because she sees all us fat women keeping lovers until we get tired of them then moving on to the next one… while she’s stuck with a jerkwad like you. Though if she’s ignoring the almost 5 decades worth of history and social change to still think a woman’s sole purpose is to find a man to marry… she probably deserves your insecure self.
My views is rather simple: I like what I like and find that many other men with my educational background and position in life tend to agree. If there are those, women or men, who feel otherwise, good for them and let them have what they like. The last comment, though, left me wondering how surly a person can get in name-callingh defensiveness…wow. Get toa therapist. Quick.
Nathan, sweetie, that thing under your chin – it’s your neck mate and you can use it to look away from people who don’t look like you think they should.
Probably the same place he found women who don’t care that he thinks women are all the same in the dark. The place he finds women who love a bloke who believes that women = subhuman, interchangeable sex objects. His imagination.
this is just crazy how they can manipulate pictures to make people look different… but it’s kind of cool in a sense.. but they shouldn’t do that in most cases…I think it may hurt some peoples’ feelings…