# What I'd like to see!



## PrettyFatGirl4U (Nov 16, 2006)

So as the smoke clears from the innundation of feedback on the Dr. Keith show most people here at Dimension's agree it was a positive show presented in an even, non-belittling manor.

Now altho it is great that the participants in the show recognize their beauty and are comfortable with who they are at any size, they ALL were people who earn their living on adult websites.

What would be even more empowering to me, as a fat woman, would be a show highlighting successful people of size who are equally comfortable with who they are and are successful in many and varied fields! 

It's all well and good to be confident but adult website models DON'T represent the majority of fat people who are also confident, successful, well educated, and well spoken too! 

Let's see some professionals who are just as confident and sucessful in their fields, and the significant others who love them! 

To me, *THAT* would dispell the myth that fat people are lazy, stupid, and/or unkempt and do nothing but eat all day!

How about it Leah and Dr. Keith??


----------



## largenlovely (Nov 16, 2006)

perhaps i'm taking this wrong, but the tone sounded pretty negative towards webmodels...being that you said we DON'T represent the majority of fat people. I'm not sure how we don't...being that we're fat regardless of what we do. .. i'm not sure which part of it you are referring to that we don't represent. 

Also, i think that episode DID dispell the myth that fat people are lazy, stupid or what have you...it sounds almost as if you're implying that this episode didn't do that. 

Just hoping for a clarification 

Melissa




PrettyFatGirl4U said:


> It's all well and good to be confident but adult website models DON'T represent the majority of fat people who are also confident, successful, well educated, and well spoken too!
> 
> To me, *THAT* would dispell the myth that fat people are lazy, stupid, and/or unkempt and do nothing but eat all day!


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 16, 2006)

PrettyFatGirl4U said:


> So as the smoke clears from the innundation of feedback on the Dr. Keith show most people here at Dimension's agree it was a positive show presented in an even, non-belittling manor.
> 
> Now altho it is great that the participants in the show recognize their beauty and are comfortable with who they are at any size, they ALL were people who earn their living on adult websites.
> 
> ...



First you commend the guests from Tuesday's show, and now you're basically saying that they didn't "dispell the myth"? That they're unkempt and stupid? Despite the editing that went into the show, I felt that the women gave a valiant effort in representing this community. Even if I wasn't crazy about Keith and his spin-off, the guests couldn't have done it any better and they all should be proud.

And by the way...Kristin, the one who appeared with her feeder boyfriend, does not have a paysite.


----------



## AnnMarie (Nov 16, 2006)

I think there are issues at play here... the webmodels are obviously the most easy to find and reach out to when a show is looking for people to speak out. 

Also, keep in mind that many of the webmodels are in fact very normal professional people who also HAPPEN to have a side hobby/part-time gig doing modeling. 

I don't think you were trying to trash webmodels, I think you were simply saying it would be nice if a show wanted to talk to a doctor and a lawyer and a happy hairstylist ..... professions that cover more of the collective populations' experience. 

I can understand that, but I think it's all about small steps, and TV shows are always going to be after the part that has a slight shock value. "They're fat AND people pay them for pictures!! Did you hear that, Mabel??"

Anyway, I watched the show a while ago, I thought it was fine.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 16, 2006)

AnnMarie said:


> I can understand that, but I think it's all about small steps, and TV shows are always going to be after the part that has a slight shock value. "They're fat AND people pay them for pictures!! Did you hear that, Mabel??"



Precisely. With ratings on the brain, talk show hosts will always pick the fat paysite model/stripper/porn star/(insert sexy profession here) in the thong as opposed to the fat systems analyst. Even so, professional background doesn't really make a difference to me if the message is the same.


----------



## largenlovely (Nov 16, 2006)

ok, that makes more sense...and i can understand that too. That was probably the only diversity that wasn't shown on the episode. I do think they tried to get a slice of each pie (feeders, fa's, fat girls and feedees), but i suppose they can't work everything in there....and like you said, web personalities are a lot easier to contact and are more likely to be open to discussing this sort of thing. I think the problem i had was with saying we didn't represent the majority of fat people. I'm fat...i represent lol



AnnMarie said:


> I don't think you were trying to trash webmodels, I think you were simply saying it would be nice if a show wanted to talk to a doctor and a lawyer and a happy hairstylist ..... professions that cover more of the collective populations' experience.


----------



## PrettyFatGirl4U (Nov 16, 2006)

Here's my post with the original *INCLUSIONARY* language highlighted:



PrettyFatGirl4U said:


> So as the smoke clears from the innundation of feedback on the Dr. Keith show *most people *{including myself which I have stated in numerous posts}here at Dimension's *agree it was a positive show *presented in an even, non-belittling manor.
> 
> Now altho *it is great that the participants in the show recognize their beauty and are comfortable with who they are at any size*, they ALL were people who earn their living on adult websites.
> 
> ...



In the original, as you can see, I did NOT exclude website models as confident, intelligent, well spoken, ect nor would I "trash" anybody even if their choices are not mine....however it is my opinion that NO, web models DO NOT represent the average fat woman - most of us do not have websites. And taking off one's clothes, no matter how artistically and creatively it is done is not an activity limited to fat women nor is it an activity readily accepted as "professional" by mainstream America. I believe a show like Dr. Ablow's would have lots *more* impact on fat acceptance in mainstream society if, as Ann Marie said, he was interviewing doctors, lawyers, ect. who happen to be fat. And while it is true that many adult models participate part time or on the side as a hobby, ect. and have other professions or careers, that fact was not even discussed or mentioned in Dr. Ablow's broadcast.


----------



## -X- (Nov 16, 2006)

_I agree that you werent trying to bash any of the BBW models out there, but I do understand what your saying. As Anne Marie said though, its all to be taken in small steps and hopefully within time we will see the confident doctors, lawyers, scientist, etc. For now, I'm satisfied with what the public eye have been able to see so far, knowing that if they were to be 'overwhelmed' with all of the information that they would probably still be unable to understand the essentials in life::* A big lawyer is no different than a thinner lawyer outside of their body appearance, no different by meaning that we're all human beings. *

Until any biased/brainwashed-type society is able to understand that not everyone wants to be a thin super model, or like a certain genre of music, clothing,food,pets etc., the sooner we'd be better of knowing what really needs to be done, whatever that may be. I know we'll probably never acheive a society like that, a utopia, however what little we can do now to calm the fire I think is all for the better._


----------



## largenlovely (Nov 16, 2006)

Ok so that means it has less impact on the society because of the girls occupation regardless of how well they carried themselves and how articulate they were on the show...that's what you're saying if you claim it will have more impact if they were lawyers and doctors. 

Also, fat girls are fat girls ...whether they/we have a website or not. If we walk through the grocery store then we are representing fat girls, if we go to the doctor we are representing fat girls, in every day life WE are representing fat girls...and for you to say that they're/we're NOT representing the average fat girl because of our occupation is offensive. Also, as a friend pointed out to me earlier, the producers came to this forum looking for volunteers and the webmodels were who stepped forward. 

I'm not trying to start anything here but i was actually offended by the tone. 



> however it is my opinion that NO, web models DO NOT represent the average fat woman - most of us do not have websites. And taking off one's clothes, no matter how artistically and creatively it is done is not an activity limited to fat women nor is it an activity readily accepted as "professional" by mainstream America. I believe a show like Dr. Ablow's would have lots *more* impact on fat acceptance in mainstream society if, as Ann Marie said, he was interviewing doctors, lawyers, ect. who happen to be fat. And while it is true that many adult models participate part time or on the side as a hobby, ect. and have other professions or careers, that fact was not even discussed or mentioned in Dr. Ablow's broadcast.


----------



## EtobicokeFA (Nov 17, 2006)

I agree with you PrettyFatGirl! 

It's good for webmodels to show up and prove you can be happy and fat at the same time. However we don't want people to either think that being a webmodel is the only way for a fat person to be successful or happy. We also don't want people to think that only feedes can be happy with their weight. 

Besides while I thought that the show was great, I would have loved it if one of the guests was a doctor or a nurse.


----------



## JoyJoy (Nov 17, 2006)

I can understand why offense was taken at what PFG is trying to say, but let's look at it from a different perspective. 

What we're trying to do is show people that fat people aren't side show freaks or a group that can continue to be looked down upon. We're a widely diverse, often highly intelligent, well-educated group of people, on a website or not. This show didn't completely accurately reflect that, although the women on the show are wonderful examples of our ilk. (bear with me before you jump on that statement, please) I mean, let's face it, I'm sure that as web models, you know that there is a large sector of society who looks down on those who expose their bodies for money. 

That's not to say that I or anyone else here feels that way (for the record, I certainly don't..I've contemplated having my own site before, but lacked the motivation), but we're not talking about people here on dimensions or in our community...we're talking about society in general. I haven't seen the entire show, but I've read what others have had to say, and saw a clip of it, and I believe it was an excellent presentation from some very appropriate members of our community. But, were I NOT a member of this community, and an average joe watching at home, in my mind I would have seen it as a group of women still outside the realm of what is "normal and acceptable", since being a webmodel isn't something you run into every day. (Again, keep in mind, I'm not casting judgment on webmodels, I'm playing devil's advocate here. Stop and really be honest about what you think run of the mill America watching this show is going to feel.)

I think the point that PFG is trying to make is that..yes..this show was a great stepping stone in the right direction, but now let's see if folks like Dr. Ablow are willing to show the world another aspect of "us", by having shows that feature other, more mainstream examples, of strong, beautiful fat women (like the ones who were on this show) and men who love them.


----------



## moonvine (Nov 17, 2006)

largenlovely said:


> perhaps i'm taking this wrong, but the tone sounded pretty negative towards webmodels...being that you said we DON'T represent the majority of fat people. I'm not sure how we don't...being that we're fat regardless of what we do. .. i'm not sure which part of it you are referring to that we don't represent.



I'm not the OP, but I read that as "most fat people are not webmodels," and that that is the way you don't represent the majority. As in, the majority of fat people are not webmodels. But I could be wrong.


----------



## EbonySSBBW (Nov 17, 2006)

I saw the show and I thought that it was a good show but I agree with some of the others here...I didn't really feel that I was represented on that show. I'm a fat chick who is confident but I DON'T want to gain weight and I DO know that there are increased risks associated with being this size. I don't think that it's just a myth. Also, I DO eat more than my skinny friends...I didn't get fat just eating salads and veggies everyday. Yes, there is more than just eating that got me to this size but I have put away some food in my time. Lastly, I'm not associated with the adult entertainment industry. I just felt like the show was not about the average fat chick but yet the roles that fat chicks play as paysite girls. That's ok because they had the guts to go on the show and they all looked great but I didn't really see the show as something that is going to advance the size acceptance movement. 

By the way, Joy, I agree with what you said in reference to how models in the sex industry are viewed by society (I'm not saying that it's right). We have to be realistic about that and so trying to connect fat acceptance to the sex industry is only going to head us in the wrong direction, in my opinion.


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Nov 17, 2006)

largenlovely said:


> perhaps i'm taking this wrong, but the tone sounded pretty negative towards webmodels...being that you said we DON'T represent the majority of fat people. I'm not sure how we don't...being that we're fat regardless of what we do. .. i'm not sure which part of it you are referring to that we don't represent.
> 
> Also, i think that episode DID dispell the myth that fat people are lazy, stupid or what have you...it sounds almost as if you're implying that this episode didn't do that.
> 
> ...


'

I'm not the OP so I can't speak for her, but the way I took her post to read was that most people would expect web models to be someone who felt happy with their body, was comfortable in their own skin and that it would be great to see other fat people in other jobs who felt the same way about themselves.


----------



## mossystate (Nov 17, 2006)

That is why I asked on another(one of the 2.5 million threads devoted to this..heh) if there were any 'normal janes' on the panel.I have to say that I would have preferred if maybe only one woman on the panel was a paysite person.That is NOT saying that those women are not to be heard from, it is just that we don't often see fat women on televsion where there is not an 'angle' involved.But I also understand that the women with paysites are more visible.

I still need a copy of the show(speakers on comp are not working), but from the sound of it, I would not have wanted to be on that panel,but at least these women may have opened the minds of a few people...hopefully.


----------



## SamanthaNY (Nov 17, 2006)

I applauded the show, as I've already posted - but one of the first things my friends and I discussed was how all the women on the panel had paysites. Two things struck me about that; 1) that the paysites are often the most vocal in fat promotion (which, while positive, I don't necessarily equate with my definition of fat acceptance), and 2) apparently paysite models were the first ones who responded to the requests to appear. 

Two other things that I think could be pointed out though.... the show never _said _it was going to be about fat or size acceptance. Those are terms that we can't even figure out within our community, so I don't know how it could ever be explained to the outside world, and considering the divisions around their very definition***, I'd consider any attempt a train-wreck. The show didn't aim to portray a random, happy fat person, they wanted people who were 'fatabulous', and I believe that's what they got. The second point is that we often have the perception that anyone who goes on these shows represents all of us, and our community. In retrospect, I think that's perhaps unfair, and putting too much pressure on people who are already assuming a lot of risk. While the women on the panel spoke well, and made some good strides towards battling fat-people myths, I don't consider that they necessarily spoke for me about everything, nor would I want, or expect them to.

With all that in mind, what the OP said makes sense. If I were to choose who would best represent me - it'd be Ebony (or someone like her), because what she just said was spot-on. 

***NOT an invitation to continue that discussion


----------



## EbonySSBBW (Nov 17, 2006)

SamanthaNY said:


> I applauded the show, as I've already posted - but one of the first things my friends and I discussed was how all the women on the panel had paysites. Two things struck me about that; 1) that the paysites are often the most vocal in fat promotion (which, while positive, I don't necessarily equate with my definition of fat acceptance), and 2) apparently paysite models were the first ones who responded to the requests to appear.
> 
> Two other things that I think could be pointed out though.... the show never _said _it was going to be about fat or size acceptance. Those are terms that we can't even figure out within our community, so I don't know how it could ever be explained to the outside world, and considering the divisions around their very definition***, I'd consider any attempt a train-wreck. The show didn't aim to portray a random, happy fat person, they wanted people who were 'fatabulous', and I believe that's what they got. The second point is that we often have the perception that anyone who goes on these shows represents all of us, and our community. In retrospect, I think that's perhaps unfair, and putting too much pressure on people who are already assuming a lot of risk. While the women on the panel spoke well, and made some good strides towards battling fat-people myths, I don't consider that they necessarily spoke for me about everything, nor would I want, or expect them to.
> 
> ...



Samantha, you are right with what you said about the show. The show was about exactly what it said it would be about. I think that because most of the women on the show were from our little community here, the connection was made to the whole fat acceptance movement (whatever that is). There was even talk about it in the threads before the show aired and people were happy that they were representing us (fat chicks). I still think that it was a good show but that's all it was for me....just a show. 

By the way, I would consider it an honor to represent you and any of the other awesome fat chicks in our community. Hopefully I will get that chance someday but under different circumstances.


----------



## mossystate (Nov 17, 2006)

Perhaps a case of wishful thinking, and of course coming here to see so many talk about how this was so much about this 'community'..well..damn I need to see this..*L*


----------



## KuroBara (Nov 17, 2006)

I whole-heartedly commend the models who put themselves on the line and did what could have potentially been a flaming disaster. You go girls!!! And guys!!

That said, some none models would have been great. Paysite (nor anything else seemingly related to porn, no matter how stretched) models of any size are not given the same respect (unfair, yes, but true) as "cleaner" professions. The show seemed to me to try to feed into the outside world's misconception that BBWs are either sexless or oversexed bundles of lard. 

But honestly, I'll bet even if a rocket scientist had offered to do the show, she would have been rejected. That, successful, happy well adjusted BBW and/or FAs, not what he wanted his audience to see. That wound being up what they saw, but I believe deep in my pessimistic heart that was not his intention, cause fat people should be unhappy and the people who love them are creepy.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 17, 2006)

JoyJoy said:


> What we're trying to do is show people that fat people aren't side show freaks or a group that can continue to be looked down upon. We're a widely diverse, often highly intelligent, well-educated group of people, on a website or not.



Then PrettyFatGirl4U should have worded her argument differently. The conclusion of her post suggests that the women who participated on Dr.Keith didn't get the job done or just weren't good enough to break the stereotypes associated with fat women. Personally, with so many friends who advertise paysites here, I also thought her wording was a little offensive.

By the way, if this is that big of a problem for her, she just as easily could have raised her hand and participated on that panel. But she didn't, probably because she, like many of us, thought that the show would turn out poorly and decided against the potential embarassment. Or then again, maybe she simply wasn't picked because she doesn't have a paysite. Talk shows aren't how they used to be. They want shock value and they want to put asses in seats, which is why they'll jump through hoops to get something extreme like a fat girl who has her own adult site.

You can always contact Montel Williams...I'm THINK he still has his show running, and he's one of the few guys left in the business who will take his guests seriously no matter what they do for a living.


----------



## JoyJoy (Nov 17, 2006)

UncannyBruceman said:


> Then PrettyFatGirl4U should have worded her argument differently. The conclusion of her post suggests that the women who participated on Dr.Keith didn't get the job done or just weren't good enough to break the stereotypes associated with fat women. Personally, with so many friends who advertise paysites here, I also thought her wording was a little offensive.
> 
> By the way, if this is that big of a problem for her, she just as easily could have raised her hand and participated on that panel. But she didn't, probably because she, like many of us, thought that the show would turn out poorly and decided against the potential embarassment. Or then again, maybe she simply wasn't picked because she doesn't have a paysite. Talk shows aren't how they used to be. They want shock value and they want to put asses in seats, which is why they'll jump through hoops to get something extreme like a fat girl who has her own adult site.
> 
> You can always contact Montel Williams...I'm THINK he still has his show running, and he's one of the few guys left in the business who will take his guests seriously no matter what they do for a living.


 Bruce, you're looking for an argument where there isn't one. I don't believe anything in PFG's post cast any kind of aspersions on this show or the girls who were on it. The way I, and I believe others, understood it was that she was trying to say, "Okay, that was great, what next?" and giving her thoughts on what she'd like to see now...hence the name of the thread. She wasn't complaining at all, so stop making it out like she was. If you want to argue, there's plenty of that over on HP. Otherwise, lighten up, man.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 17, 2006)

Does a discussion board not thrive on arguments? It'd be pretty boring around here if everyone thought the same way...

If this means to much to her, then I encourage her, you, and everyone else who agrees on this to contact Dr.Keith. Leah33 had already come in here on Wed to thank the participants for coming and she did mention something of a possible followup show.


----------



## largenlovely (Nov 17, 2006)

I think it was a valid question on the wording. People word things in a way that expresses their conscious *and* subconscious thoughts...which is why i asked for clarification. Then, by her 2nd explanation, i feel that is exactly what she was saying. Saying that webmodels don't represent the average fat girls was offensive to at least me and a few others. I'm a fat girl every day of the week 24 hours a day and i definitely represent fat girls regardless of my occupation. I asked a few other people just to make sure i wasn't making a big deal out of nothing and there were others who felt the same way. I just wanted to make my point is all and now i'm done 

Melissa


----------



## JoyJoy (Nov 17, 2006)

UncannyBruceman said:


> Does a discussion board not thrive on arguments? It'd be pretty boring around here if everyone thought the same way...
> 
> If this means to much to her, then I encourage her, you, and everyone else who agrees on this to contact Dr.Keith. Leah33 had already come in here on Wed to thank the participants for coming and she did mention something of a possible followup show.


 Healthy debate, yes, I'm all for that. Arguments usually end up being very unproductive and angry, with one or both parties on the defensive, making the entire topic unpleasant and, usually, dead. Now that's boring.


----------



## Tarella (Nov 17, 2006)

PrettyFatGirl4U said:


> So as the smoke clears from the innundation of feedback on the Dr. Keith show most people here at Dimension's agree it was a positive show presented in an even, non-belittling manor.
> 
> Now altho it is great that the participants in the show recognize their beauty and are comfortable with who they are at any size, they ALL were people who earn their living on adult websites.
> 
> ...



Great Post and I share some of the same thoughts.....

I would and wouldn't like to see that. I really like your idea but I think the media industry is guilty more times than not of seeking purely sensationalistic topics and guests. It would be nice to see just regular happy fat people portrayed as average people; however, that really isn't going to get high ratings or interest.

I commend the women here who are confident and savvy enough to run a paysite (I think most of them are beautiful, intelligent and endeavourous); however, I personally don't feel that they represent all of my own values as a woman and there is nothing wrong with that. They do a great job of showing that fat women are just as sexy and open as their thinner peers with the same industry.

I also believe that if you filled a huge room full of all the fat women one could find, you would find that most of the women in that room would not consider baring their bodies for the web or magazines. It's not about being fat or not, it's about how one wants to present oneself. The two things are distinct and therefore you can not show a relationship between the two.

I do think that if Dr. Keith had wanted just regular women, his staff would have made requests to "Average American Housewives "on perhaps a Cooking Site etc....after all with a 60 percent obesity rate.....he wouldn't have to go far or long to find that. They wanted controversial, shocking, surprising and something dealing with sex. I hazard to guess that Average American Housewives would not be controversial enough for them to take interest.......that is of course unless the housewives were planning on making skinny women wear fat suits, pelting them with fat insults while forcefeeding them with every imaginable fastfood for shits and giggles*grins*.

I am glad that there exists a place for beautiful women who happen to be fat, to explore their sexuality, expose their luscious curves to those that will adore them, and promote that it's possible that a naked fat woman is just as hot as a naked skinny woman to either of their admirers. I also feel that it is easy to forget that there are more, just-as-gorgeous women out here that don't feel the need or desire to expose themselves, but that they too are beautiful and gorgeous and worthy of celebration by their lovers, admirers, and mates if not media.

Sincerely,

Tara


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 17, 2006)

Worded perfectly, Tara. Perfectly!


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 17, 2006)

Personally, I'd like to think that paysite girls have done more for fat acceptance than NAAFA has done in the several years they've been around (PS where were THEY during the taping?). Not everyone was taking it off and charging for it when I first happened upon Dimensions, you know. In fact, hardly anyone was. Heather, AnnMarie, and Cindy had amazing sites that contained blogs and everyday pictures that proved that every fat girl had a right to confidence and be drop dead sexy! Anyone who didn't agree would be selling themselves short. Suddenly, they realized that they could still manage to portray all of this with class and make a few bucks. Considering all the smut that truly WAS dehumanizing to fat women at that time, they were brilliant for doing it.

I can't speak for everyone and neither can the paysite girls, but you can't deny that their contributions inspired a lot of women to step forward. Where would this place be if it weren't for the classy beauties who graced the pages of Dimensions when it was still in print? Sure, they don't speak for everyone, but surely, the bold steps they've all taken in their lives may have inspired some of you ladies to do the same, paysite or not. And this is why I believe that they shouldn't be seen any differently from any of you. They're all people with similar ideals when it comes to this subject and they paved the road for many of you, and to suggest in any way that they're not representing all of size acceptance just seems wrong to me.


----------



## EbonySSBBW (Nov 17, 2006)

UncannyBruceman said:


> Personally, I'd like to think that paysite girls have done more for fat acceptance than NAAFA has done in the several years they've been around (PS where were THEY during the taping?).




I think that you are confusing some things here. I agree that the paysite models have helped fat chicks realize that they, too, are beautiful and can be sexy. They definitely deserve props for that. However, that is very different than advancing fat acceptance in general society. How have paysite models advanced fat acceptance in general society? To me that means, how have paysite models helped to destroy stereotypes or end fat prejudices and discrimination? Please explain how you have arrived at that conclusion and feel free to site examples, sources, or anything else that would help provide clarification in this area.


----------



## EbonySSBBW (Nov 17, 2006)

largenlovely said:


> I think it was a valid question on the wording. People word things in a way that expresses their conscious *and* subconscious thoughts...which is why i asked for clarification. Then, by her 2nd explanation, i feel that is exactly what she was saying. Saying that webmodels don't represent the average fat girls was offensive to at least me and a few others. I'm a fat girl every day of the week 24 hours a day and i definitely represent fat girls regardless of my occupation. I asked a few other people just to make sure i wasn't making a big deal out of nothing and there were others who felt the same way. I just wanted to make my point is all and now i'm done
> 
> Melissa



I can understand why you might be quick to take offense to what the OP stated in her post. However, it is true that the guests on the panel did not represent the average fat girl. It would have been the same if the show was about single moms and the single moms on the show were all millionaires. They would not represent the average single mom. I don't think it is good or bad, it just is. I think that because many of the guests on the show were from Dimensions, the pressure was put on them to represent our community. It was a good show and it was fun to watch but it wasn't about fat acceptance, it was about fat chicks who love to be fat. That's it.


----------



## Ivy (Nov 17, 2006)

First of all, I would venture to say there almost all women with paysites have other jobs which they are successful in. I work in retail and am a full time college student with a 3.5 gpa. One of my close paysite friends works for one of the top colleges in her state, organizes a community garden program, and runs a house hold. Another woman I know is a full time student with a 4.0 gpa and 9 to 5 job at a doctors office. They pay the bills with their main jobs, the paysite, which by the way isnt a huge money maker for most people, is a side job to help pay off the extra bills that their regular job wont cover. We have paysites, others have an e-bay store, or babysit the neighbors kids, or write a freelance column in the local newspaper to make up the slack . Please, tell me how that isnt the average person?

Secondly, the producers from The Dr. Keith Show did not come here and say We need paysite girls, ONLY. They asked for ANYONE who was willing to, to come on the show. Which is why Dan and Kristen (I believe that was her name) were on there. Neither of them have an adult website. 

Lastly, talk shows are about shock and awe. Even though this show shed a positive light on our community, they were clearly out for shock factor because they threw the whole feederism topic in. And also, as great and positive as the show was, I dont think that Dr. Keith is looking to help with the size-acceptance movements agenda. He wants to have a shocking TV show, not something empowering and agenda oriented like Oprah. For him to do a show just about successful fat people wouldnt make sense. There would have to be something completely shocking and eye catching that would make people want to watch the show.. Today on Dr. Keith.. FAT PEOPLE. THE SHOCKING TRUTH, THEY HAVE REAL JOBS AND ARE SUCCESSFUL! And.. RELATIONSHIPS. With ATTRACTIVE people. Today at 3:30 Honestly, would you tune in for that? I sure wouldnt. There is nothing exciting and out of the ordinary, and nothing he could use his M.D. (not FA) for.


----------



## JoyJoy (Nov 18, 2006)

All excellent points, Ivy, and very well said. Good food for thought.




Ivy said:


> For him to do a show just about successful fat people wouldnt make sense. There would have to be something completely shocking and eye catching that would make people want to watch the show.. Today on Dr. Keith.. FAT PEOPLE. THE SHOCKING TRUTH, THEY HAVE REAL JOBS AND ARE SUCCESSFUL! And.. RELATIONSHIPS. With ATTRACTIVE people. Today at 3:30 Honestly, would you tune in for that? I sure wouldnt. There is nothing exciting and out of the ordinary, and nothing he could use his M.D. (not FA) for.


 The thing is....people don't think of fat people as a whole as well-adjusted, emotionally stable, successful people. Again, if we think outside of the realm of our society here to the general public, I think it would be shocking and eye-opening to many people to realize that a great deal of us don't fit the stereotypes they have in their minds. I think, if presented right, this type of show would generate an audience. It would shake up some people's concepts of fat people, and would give hope to the larger people out there who haven't found a place such as ours yet. The latter alone would be worth it.


----------



## Ivy (Nov 18, 2006)

JoyJoy said:


> All excellent points, Ivy, and very well said. Good food for thought.
> 
> 
> The thing is....people don't think of fat people as a whole as well-adjusted, emotionally stable, successful people. Again, if we think outside of the realm of our society here to the general public, I think it would be shocking and eye-opening to many people to realize that a great deal of us don't fit the stereotypes they have in their minds. I think, if presented right, this type of show would generate an audience. It would shake up some people's concepts of fat people, and would give hope to the larger people out there who haven't found a place such as ours yet. The latter alone would be worth it.



I agree, but maybe on something like Oprah or Tyra Banks. They aren't so shock value oriented. But shows like Dr Keith- their audience whats stuff that is shocking and scandalous. It just feels like the point of the OP (whose posts I generally agree with, by the way) was to say that the women on the show, and paysite girls in general are not successful, normal people and not to get some "great" idea out there. If she really wanted to pitch a show idea, she would have e-mailed the producers.


----------



## BBWDesire (Nov 18, 2006)

actualy I do not earn my living as an adult web model I do it for fun as many of the other web models this is our creative out let. I am an anthropologist whit a ba and I am working on my ma. I am the average fat girl and I am truy offended by the way you choose to judge us by outward apperances. I think you have a right to your opnion but dont not bash and judge me when you DONT KNOW ME or anything other then what you see on the show and the fourms. I think to judge any one of us is wrong. I feel all the web models I interact with are smart funny pretty and have talent. I am sry if you feel intimidated by us because we live our dream and enjoy life. I feel very sorry you felt the need to attack us in the manner you did so now let me ask you ae you an MD or PHD doctor laywer? guess what that doesnt matter to me I dont know you . After reading your ignorant words I dont want to know you. I just hope you are never judged by the same standards you have judged me with
Desire





PrettyFatGirl4U said:


> So as the smoke clears from the innundation of feedback on the Dr. Keith show most people here at Dimension's agree it was a positive show presented in an even, non-belittling manor.
> 
> Now altho it is great that the participants in the show recognize their beauty and are comfortable with who they are at any size, they ALL were people who earn their living on adult websites.
> 
> ...


----------



## Jon Blaze (Nov 18, 2006)

BBWDesire said:


> actualy I do not earn my living as an adult web model I do it for fun as many of the other web models this is our creative out let. I am an anthropologist whit a ba and I am working on my ma. I am the average fat girl and I am truy offended by the way you choose to judge us by outward apperances. I think you have a right to your opnion but dont not bash and judge me when you DONT KNOW ME or anything other then what you see on the show and the fourms. I think to judge any one of us is wrong. I feel all the web models I interact with are smart funny pretty and have talent. I am sry if you feel intimidated by us because we live our dream and enjoy life. I feel very sorry you felt the need to attack us in the manner you did so now let me ask you ae you an MD or PHD doctor laywer? guess what that doesnt matter to me I dont know you . After reading your ignorant words I dont want to know you. I just hope you are never judged by the same standards you have judged me with
> Desire




You did bring up a good point. She might have been making the assumption that your only job is web modeling. I didn't know you were an anthropologist, but since day one I've found it a rarity for someone to stay "afloat" by just doing web modeling. There are a select few, but like you, I'm pretty sure most web models have another career in line.

The first post is just too demeaning for me to support.

I have one question though:

Since only a small percentage of web models do that as their only career, would it be wrong for web models with other careers to indicate their other skill as well? 

ex: Web Model-Psychologist-School Teacher maybe?


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 18, 2006)

EbonySSBBW said:


> I think that you are confusing some things here. I agree that the paysite models have helped fat chicks realize that they, too, are beautiful and can be sexy. They definitely deserve props for that. However, that is very different than advancing fat acceptance in general society. How have paysite models advanced fat acceptance in general society? To me that means, how have paysite models helped to destroy stereotypes or end fat prejudices and discrimination? Please explain how you have arrived at that conclusion and feel free to site examples, sources, or anything else that would help provide clarification in this area.



Once again, before the age of fat paysites, there were simply homepages. Anyone who was a Dimensions regular before 2002 will know exactly what I'm referring to. Most of the women you see with paysites were here, posting regularly, with free sites with plenty of resources and inspirational material for fat girls and FA's alike.
Even before that, in 1992, at the age of 13, I remember watching an episode of Geraldo and seeing none other than our very own Heather Boyle. I don't remember much about whoever else was on the panel...all I knew was that Heather, who didn't have a paysite in 1992, exemplified everything I could ever seek in a woman. Class, confidence, sex appeal...it was all there. She was out there setting an example LONG before any of you heard of this place, and today, I am honored to be able to call her a friend. So, if you're asking me to site an example, look no farther than her.


----------



## Friday (Nov 18, 2006)

Fat or skinny, some of us are just not the type who are interested in the whole paysite agenda. I won't judge you for choosing that path if you don't judge me for saying that you don't represent me except for the coincidental fact that we are both fat. As someone pointed out no one was asked what they do besides paysites so as far as John Q Public is concerned, that's who you are and that's what you do. I want fat people to be seen as more than talk show fodder and I didn't see that.


----------



## mossystate (Nov 18, 2006)

PrettyFatGirl4U said:


> What would be even more empowering to me, as a fat woman, would be a show highlighting successful people of size who are equally comfortable with who they are and are successful in many and varied fields!
> 
> It's all well and good to be confident but adult website models DON'T represent the majority of fat people who are also confident, successful, well educated, and well spoken too!
> 
> ...



NO where in the OP message did she even IMPLY that paysite women are not intelligent.She uses words like JUST AS CONFIDENT..well spoken TOO.

Maybe, just maybe she was simply talking about wishing the panel had been more diverse.

I do not personally look to women who have paysites for tips on how to be a confident fat woman, but I also know that for some women, knowing that there are others who look like them and feel confident with themselves can be a bit of a boost..sometimes nothing more than that.I almost feel like there are some men here who ONLY really see the paysite women and not ALL the women who make up our group here at Dims.(no, I am not talking about complimenting all women)

But yeah, I did not get the feeling that the OP was bashing women who happen to do the paysite thing.


----------



## Ivy (Nov 18, 2006)

mossystate said:


> NO where in the OP message did she even IMPLY that paysite women are not intelligent.She uses words like JUST AS CONFIDENT..well spoken TOO.



Right, but by assuming that having a paysite is the only job that any of the webmodels has puts down the women who have them. As if we can't do anything else to make money because we just don't have anything going for us aside from the fact that we know how to use a camera and put on sexy clothes. 

Now, I am fully aware that this is being above and beyond sensitive and reading into it entirely, but in my experience anyone who has assumed that having a paysite is a webmodels only source of income also assumes that we have a website because we are stupid. I can not tell you how many men and women who have assumed that my paysite is my only source of income have followed up after the initial shock of finding out that I do have a real job as well as most all of the other girls with sites make a comment later in the conversation like, "You know, you're a whole lot smarter than I expected!" The people who don't assume it/dont bring it up/ask what else I do outside of my site for income/hobbies rarely make comments like this. I don't know if its just some weird coincidence, but either way it causes you to jump to a lot of conclusions when a person says something that might, for what ever reason, trigger the thought and feeling that youre being judged and being looked at like youre stupid.


----------



## Friday (Nov 18, 2006)

> Right, but by assuming that having a paysite is the only job that any of the webmodels has puts down the women who have them. As if we can't do anything else to make money because we just don't have anything going for us aside from the fact that we know how to use a camera and put on sexy clothes.



Nobody here thought that or even remotely implied that, but would you want to bet your self respect on whether or not that is what exactly John Q Public thought?


----------



## moonvine (Nov 18, 2006)

> Personally, I'd like to think that paysite girls have done more for fat acceptance than NAAFA has done in the several years they've been around (PS where were THEY during the taping?).



I have to disagree with this, just like I'd disagree if you said that African American web models have done more for African American people than the NAACP or mature web models have done more for mature people than the AARP. Yes, NAAFA is not as powerful as those other two organizations, but that is because fat people keep trying to make themselves into thin people and don't want to associate themselves with a group fighting for the rights of fat people.

As far as where they were during the taping, who knows. Perhaps they were not invited (not everyone reads the Dim boards) or perhaps they have certain stipulations that have to be met with regards to their participation in talk shows. I don't think this one was meant to be about fat acceptance; apparently it was about being fatabulous. NAAFA representatives are more likely to appear on something like Good Morning America than they are a talk show. 

I do know that they have been out there for years trying to get legislation passed that will improve the lives of all fat people, as have people like Elizabeth Fisher Very different from web models (and Ms. Fisher could be a web model as well, I have no idea) but the web modelling wouldn't have anything to do with the work she's done for fat acceptance. They are completely different issues. 

Just my opinion, and I expect we will have to agree to disagree on this, which is fine.


----------



## SamanthaNY (Nov 18, 2006)

> NAAFA is not as powerful as those other two organizations, but that is because fat people keep trying to make themselves into thin people and don't want to associate themselves with a group fighting for the rights of fat people.


Absolute nonsense. Naafa is impotent for many reasons - but not those.


----------



## moonvine (Nov 18, 2006)

SamanthaNY said:


> Absolute nonsense. Naafa is impotent for many reasons - but not those.




Well, clearly we disagree. What a shocker. Since I've heard those exact words coming from the mouths of an awful lot of people (I'm just "temporarily" fat, I don't really want to associate myself with a group of fat people" or "I'm losing weight and don't intend to stay fat, so I have no need for a fat acceptance organization") I maintain that the reasons I stated are quite valid.


----------



## EbonySSBBW (Nov 18, 2006)

UncannyBruceman said:


> Once again, before the age of fat paysites, there were simply homepages. Anyone who was a Dimensions regular before 2002 will know exactly what I'm referring to. Most of the women you see with paysites were here, posting regularly, with free sites with plenty of resources and inspirational material for fat girls and FA's alike.
> Even before that, in 1992, at the age of 13, I remember watching an episode of Geraldo and seeing none other than our very own Heather Boyle. I don't remember much about whoever else was on the panel...all I knew was that Heather, who didn't have a paysite in 1992, exemplified everything I could ever seek in a woman. Class, confidence, sex appeal...it was all there. She was out there setting an example LONG before any of you heard of this place, and today, I am honored to be able to call her a friend. So, if you're asking me to site an example, look no farther than her.



Ummm...I'm not sure which post you were responding to because you didn't answer the questions put forth in mine. Again, you're talking about how paysite models have inspired other fat girls and FA's. That is true. However, that's not advancing the fat acceptance movement, destroying stereotypes and advocating against fat prejudice and discrimination. And I've been coming to Dimensions since 1999 so I'm aware of what it used to be like around here. I agree that Heather has definitely done work in the fat acceptance movement but separate from being a paysite model. Like you said, she was doing things BEFORE the paysite existed. You still have not provided information to back up your statement of..."Personally, I'd like to think that paysite girls have done more for fat acceptance than NAAFA has done in the several years they've been around (PS where were THEY during the taping?)." I guess the keyword in what you said was *think*. You can continue to think what you want but that won't make it true.


----------



## EbonySSBBW (Nov 18, 2006)

BBWDesire said:


> actualy I do not earn my living as an adult web model I do it for fun as many of the other web models this is our creative out let. I am an anthropologist whit a ba and I am working on my ma. I am the average fat girl and I am truy offended by the way you choose to judge us by outward apperances. I think you have a right to your opnion but dont not bash and judge me when you DONT KNOW ME or anything other then what you see on the show and the fourms. I think to judge any one of us is wrong. I feel all the web models I interact with are smart funny pretty and have talent. I am sry if you feel intimidated by us because we live our dream and enjoy life. I feel very sorry you felt the need to attack us in the manner you did so now let me ask you ae you an MD or PHD doctor laywer? guess what that doesnt matter to me I dont know you . After reading your ignorant words I dont want to know you. I just hope you are never judged by the same standards you have judged me with
> Desire



Desire, I think that you did a great job on the show. You were very well spoken and expressed yourself very well. I just have a question for you. When you were reading your list of myths to the audience, why didn't you include the fact that you are an anthropologist who is working on her masters degree? Wouldn't that have fit in perfectly as an example after you read the myth about fat people being lazy? If all of the guests had other jobs besides paysite modeling, why not tell about those too? Was it said on the show but edited out? I'm just curious...


----------



## EbonySSBBW (Nov 18, 2006)

moonvine said:


> I have to disagree with this, just like I'd disagree if you said that African American web models have done more for African American people than the NAACP or mature web models have done more for mature people than the AARP.




Yes, that is exactly what I was trying to get across to him...good examples.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 18, 2006)

EbonySSBBW said:


> Ummm...I'm not sure which post you were responding to because you didn't answer the questions put forth in mine. Again, you're talking about how paysite models have inspired other fat girls and FA's. That is true. However, that's not advancing the fat acceptance movement, destroying stereotypes and advocating against fat prejudice and discrimination. And I've been coming to Dimensions since 1999 so I'm aware of what it used to be like around here. I agree that Heather has definitely done work in the fat acceptance movement but separate from being a paysite model. Like you said, she was doing things BEFORE the paysite existed. You still have not provided information to back up your statement of..."Personally, I'd like to think that paysite girls have done more for fat acceptance than NAAFA has done in the several years they've been around (PS where were THEY during the taping?)." I guess the keyword in what you said was *think*. You can continue to think what you want but that won't make it true.



When I say that the paysite models have done more for this community than NAAFA, I'm referring to how they've inspired women to find their confidence and men to come to peace with their orientations. No, that's not exactly NAAFA's agenda, but why wouldn't someone from NAAFA want to make an appearance on Dr.Keith? It would have been nice to see a NAAFA rep appear to talk about the discriminations faced by fat men and women on that same episode. Even if the women on Dr.Keith had paysites, they still face the same size discrimination that the rest of you face, and I think that someone from NAAFA could have EASILY spoken well on the behalf of EVERYONE.

Not that I'm trying to pick a fight with you, Ebony, but it ultimately won't make an ounce of difference whether we get on the same page or don't. As stated, the talk shows of the 21st century DO NOT CARE about the accurate representation of ANY social group. They want ratings and they want packed audiences, and they'll put on whatever they think is going to draw. At the end of the day, once the footage has been "properly" edited, cut, and mixed and matched around so it makes for "good television", neither your sentiments or mine will mean anything. Take a look at Dan, the feeder boyfriend that preferred cupcakes over whips and chains. His girlfriend didn't have a paysite...and according to him, he put up plenty of good arguments that were simply cut from the broadcast. These TV personalities have their own agendas and they're ultimately going to showcase whatever they want, and any statements that contradict that agenda will just be cut out. That's the world of media that we're living in, so it's quite possible that the BEST way to represent fat America is to simply not participate in these talk shows.


----------



## moonvine (Nov 18, 2006)

UncannyBruceman said:


> When I say that the paysite models have done more for this community than NAAFA, I'm referring to how they've inspired women to find their confidence and men to come to peace with their orientations. No, that's not exactly NAAFA's agenda, but why wouldn't someone from NAAFA want to make an appearance on Dr.Keith? It would have been nice to see a NAAFA rep appear to talk about the discriminations faced by fat men and women on that same episode. Even if the women on Dr.Keith had paysites, they still face the same size discrimination that the rest of you face, and I think that someone from NAAFA could have EASILY spoken well on the behalf of EVERYONE.



Well, we don't even know if anyone from Dr. Keith's show asked anyone from NAAFA, so I'm not sure how we can make any judgements without knowing if anyone contacted them. NAAFA does have an official policy against feederism, so if there were feeders/ees there it would not make sense that NAAFA would be supportive in that instance (and I still have not seen the show, so I don't know if there were or not). 



> That's the world of media that we're living in, so it's quite possible that the BEST way to represent fat America is to simply not participate in these talk shows.



Now that is something I can get behind, and perhaps it is NAAFA's opinion also? (Not an official NAAFA spokesperson here, so anything I say that isn't officially published on their website is speculation on my part).


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 18, 2006)

moonvine said:


> Well, we don't even know if anyone from Dr. Keith's show asked anyone from NAAFA, so I'm not sure how we can make any judgements without knowing if anyone contacted them. NAAFA does have an official policy against feederism, so if there were feeders/ees there it would not make sense that NAAFA would be supportive in that instance (and I still have not seen the show, so I don't know if there were or not).



Feederism was really just one aspect of the show's topic. Why not have several? The involvement of a NAAFA spokesperson would have made that broadcast more diverse, and it just may have been what some of you are looking for.

On a sidenote, I highly doubt that anyone from the Dr.Keith show has ever heard of NAAFA. Don't forget, Leah33 came in here last month under the assumption that every woman was a feedee.


----------



## moonvine (Nov 18, 2006)

UncannyBruceman said:


> Feederism was really just one aspect of the show's topic. Why not have several? The involvement of a NAAFA spokesperson would have made that broadcast more diverse, and it just may have been what some of you are looking for.
> 
> On a sidenote, I highly doubt that anyone from the Dr.Keith show has ever heard of NAAFA. Don't forget, Leah33 came in here last month under the assumption that every woman was a feedee.



Eh? Who is Leah33?

I think most people have at least heard of NAAFA. They have been around since 1969. They issue press releases, their convention is in the news every year, etc. They have (or had) trained media representatives to do interviews. My mother has heard of NAAFA and she hates fat people. 
If they hadn't heard of NAAFA, any sort of cursory research at all would dig it up, and I would hope they would at least do that before doing a show about a topic. I guarantee you more people in the general public have heard of NAAFA than they have Dimensions, and they managed to find Dimensions.

I expect the composition of the show was up to the show's producers, so as far as the "why not have several topics" thing I would think they would better be able to answer that than I.

If fat people are going to be on my TV being interviewed, I'd much rather see them on say...Nightline, Larry King, something like that, something that at least pretends to be serious. I don't get excited about fat people on talk shows and I'm not sure that they do any more to promote fat acceptance than the little people Maury Povitch so loves promotes acceptance of little people. Going on a show designed to turn a group into a freak show (rather or not said show is succesful in turning said group into a freak show in any one person's mind) does not seem to be a very smart move to me, if one is interested in promoting acceptance of that group. I mean, I don't think the "Who's My Baby's Daddy" shows give everyone a great impression of teen mothers. The difference is that those women probably don't want to promote acceptance of teen mothers - they probably just want to be on TV. Which is fine too.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 18, 2006)

moonvine said:


> Eh? Who is Leah33?



She is the representative from the Dr.Keith show who initially came to Dimensions to rally up a panel.


----------



## Tina (Nov 18, 2006)

I just have to addres this. My fear is that all of the words I use may be construed to be my own opinion, when in fact, I think I can see this conflict clearly and would like to elucidate it so that we may further understand each other and stop with the bad feelings.

_"Ignorant."_ Many use the word as an epithet, but it is really a descriptor.

Fact is, most people are ignorant when it comes to paysites, and therefore, paysite models and modeling. There is only one way I can talk about this subject and that is honestly. It might offend some, but please keep in mind that that is not my aim; my aim is to further understanding.

Here are some myths just off the top of my head -- though they are certainly not all of them -- and keep in mind that I am not saying I believe these things (though I _do_ wonder how much a person generally earns with a paysite):
_
Paysite models earn so much money from their modeling that they don't have to have a job in the outside world. _ (Not that you aren't smart enough to, but more that you don't _have_ to. Most people have no clue how much you earn with your site, but when they see nice clothes and surroundings, it is easy to assume. Most people would not work their jobs if they do not have to, so the logical conclusion is if you are making so much money at paysite modeling, a career apart from it isn't necessary.)

_Paysite models are totally confident._ (We can suss out the hype, and those who try too hard to put across that view. We also know that this is patently untrue in many cases)

_Paysite models are sluts only next to prostitutes. _(Some are. That is fact. Some are not, and that is fact, too.)

_Paysite models don't use their brains. _(This is ridiculous, and I think that most people really do know better.)

_All paysites and paysite models are the same._ (There is nothing on this earth that is "the same" as everything else. Another ridiculous stereotype)

It is a truism that the only way to counter ignorance is with information.

Keep in mind that much of this is subjective and a matter of opinion for each person. Also, paysites, for many (and especially women), are The Great Unknown. I personally have never really seen one. I have seen some models online who seem slutty and some who do not, and I don't think that automatically having a paysite qualifies one as being a slut. I personally would feel very uncomfortable with my honey being part of a camshow, and belonging to some paysites. Others I would be okay with.

Fact is, the Ablow show did not mention that any of the women really have other careers; that was not the focus. I don't know if that is because the women didn't mention it, or if it was edited out when they did. I tend to believe that if they did it was edited, as such shows have their own agendae and it's not usually to show how multi-facted fat girls are. 

Beyond that, two women who act like ditzy Paris Hilton clones, and women who want to gain weight as feedees, do not represent most fat women, whether the guests are paysite models or not. It sounds like there is judgement in the first part of my sentence and there might be. I detest when women purposely act stupid and vapid. Who can then be blamed when they believe the act, girls? As for feedess: live and let live. Not my thing; not the thing of most fat women. So right there, we see a disconnect between most of the guests and us fat women on the other side of the TV screen.

Also, we do not get to know most of you paysite girls personally here, and we have no idea what else you do. Tell us -- let us get to know you as something other than cheescake. If some have that opinion of you, is it really their fault, or do they suffer from a lack of information? This is (even though we have many members and many lurkers) a small community compared to the world at large, no? And yet, we have no idea who most of you are, and vice-versa, unless you lurk and read our posts and get to know us that way, but we do not have the same ability to do so, unless it is a post hawking your website. Those are advertisements and they do not let us know who you are. Only you can do that. The problem lies in the fact that your clients will also be reading, and maybe you don't want to give so much away at times? Dunno -- there is another area of ignorance, but if it is true, then there is already a wall up, see? Only through knowing you for the intelligent, funny, involved person you are, can we make you more than paysite girls in our minds. Even if we figure there must be more to you, we only get to see the sexual side of most of you.

Let us look at the larger picture of paysites being considered as porn. It is a fact that a lot of women resent their guy's porn habits. This is just fact, and so when you say you are a paysite model, because of their own baggage with their relationship/s and the guy's viewing habits in relation to how much attention they are getting, you've got resentment (do not mistake that for jealousy, though), right from the get-go.

When the average person hears the word "paysite," they generally think, "porn." Know that this is true, and know the social implications of it. If you want to be thought of differently, it is upon you to present something different to the world to balance negative or stereotyped perceptions. Whether that is fair or not I do not know, but it is the truth. When a woman goes into this line of work, it must be with one's eyes open, and fully immersed in reality, and a plan to be viewed differently than the average paysite girl, if that is your goal.

All of this to say: acknowledge reality (and I say this to everyone, not just those who model on paysites!). The reality is that not all paysite girls are vapid, pandering idiots (and please, if you're on TV don't portray yourself as one!); many have good jobs where they use their education and brains. Paysite girls are women with the same feelings, hopes and dreams as the rest of us, but it would be nice if we could get to know that through knowing you. If you do not allow us to know you, can you blame people for forming their own perceptions? 

Giving each other a chance. Remove a few walls. Paysite girls: be willing to show the world, and Dimensions, other facets of yourself that go beyond sex and titillation. Those without paysites: be willing to change your perspective, and be ready to put judgement aside and see these women as something other than cheesecake. And within the realm of paysites, maybe even give a few women a week trial, to see what you do. I believe it takes both sides of the street here, though I also believe the onus is on the paysite girls to reach out and to let others get to know you as something other than what you portray to posters here.

There was a real lack of honesty on that television show, and most of us know it. It generally had to do with claims of not overeating, and claims that the person is eating and gaining healthfully. Don't we all know that building enough fat to weigh 500 lbs isn't healthy no matter how it's done? Can't we all figure out that if a person has very little mobility they are not healthy at a higher weight no matter what? And haven't we seen right here with our own eyes some of the food that is eaten to do so? Those in the outside world might not see it (though they are not stupid and to make certain claims only serves to misinform and put up walls by alienating those who smell a rat), but we here see it. We see someone who says that the doctor has said she has to lose weight and is all freaked out, and then a couple of days later, all of a sudden she "loves her [sic] fat!" and is not going to lose weight, and instead is eating all kinds of crap in pictures, for pay.

I think that some real honesty, and some real efforts to communicate and really understand each other, along with a good dose of tolerance and willingness to put judgement aside for a while (on both sides), is the only way things will change. Maybe some don't want change, but I bet some do. I am always in favor of getting real in conversation, and in communicating to further understanding, no matter what the subject. It's kinda my thing.

Problem is, a lot of the guys here are in fantasy mode and they don't always want to know the truth. And let's acknowledge that the women know this and so they tread lightly. What to do?

These are some of the web models I have gotten to know a bit and am either fond of, or am getting that way:

Buffie (she knows I love her!)
AnnMarie (smart and soulful)
Goddess Patty (will return your communications and answer questions helpfully and very nicely). Same with Diedrababe, too!
Cindy (very literate and funny, and obviously a good person)
Sasha (independent, smart and someone you want to hang with)
Ivy (the ultimate retro-indie grrl -- smart and cute)
Melissa -- largenlovely (Very kind and I can tell she has heart)

This is what I know, or have gleaned, but there is so much more that I don't know.




Ivy said:


> Right, but by assuming that having a paysite is the only job that any of the webmodels has puts down the women who have them. As if we can't do anything else to make money because we just don't have anything going for us aside from the fact that we know how to use a camera and put on sexy clothes.
> 
> Now, I am fully aware that this is being above and beyond sensitive and reading into it entirely, but in my experience anyone who has assumed that having a paysite is a webmodels only source of income also assumes that we have a website because we are stupid. I can not tell you how many men and women who have assumed that my paysite is my only source of income have followed up after the initial shock of finding out that I do have a real job as well as most all of the other girls with sites make a comment later in the conversation like, "You know, you're a whole lot smarter than I expected!" The people who don't assume it/don’t bring it up/ask what else I do outside of my site for income/hobbies rarely make comments like this. I don't know if it’s just some weird coincidence, but either way it causes you to jump to a lot of conclusions when a person says something that might, for what ever reason, trigger the thought and feeling that you’re being judged and being looked at like you’re stupid.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 18, 2006)

moonvine said:


> If they hadn't heard of NAAFA, any sort of cursory research at all would dig it up, and I would hope they would at least do that before doing a show about a topic. I guarantee you more people in the general public have heard of NAAFA than they have Dimensions, and they managed to find Dimensions.



Just for the hell of it, I Googled "feeders" and this is what came up... http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=feeders&btnG=Google+Search

Just in case this link doesn't work, the Dimensions Weight Board is the fourth website listed from the top...the three above it are links to information regarding bird and fish feeders. It's not crazy to believe that this is exactly what the Dr.Keith producers might have done in their "research", especially when the taping was scheduled two weeks after it was brought to all of our attention.

Even if they DID know who NAAFA was, the show was originally strictly feederism...and like you said, NAAFA has a policy against it.


----------



## EbonySSBBW (Nov 18, 2006)

UncannyBruceman said:


> When I say that the paysite models have done more for this community than NAAFA, I'm referring to how they've inspired women to find their confidence and men to come to peace with their orientations.



Bruce, you didn't say that they did more for this community, you said that they had done more for fat acceptance. There is a difference. I understand what you're trying to say but I just think that you got things a bit confused and that is why I pointed it out.



UncannyBruceman said:


> That's the world of media that we're living in, so it's quite possible that the BEST way to represent fat America is to simply not participate in these talk shows.



I agree with this and that is why I would not participate in such a talk show. There are a few hosts out there that I would consider but not many.


----------



## EbonySSBBW (Nov 18, 2006)

Tina said:


> I just have to addres this. My fear is that all of the words I use may be construed to be my own opinion, when in fact, I think I can see this conflict clearly and would like to elucidate it so that we may further understand each other and stop with the bad feelings.
> 
> _"Ignorant."_ Many use the word as an epithet, but it is really a descriptor.
> 
> ...



Wow! That was quite a post, Tina. You made some really excellent points and I hope that others will take the time to read it. Whenever this topic comes up on the board, we always seem to dance around it and not really get at it. Well, you have definitely faced it head on and I appreciate that. It always seems to divide us but I hope that we can all work towards understanding and appreciating one another. Thank you for taking the time to post it.


----------



## Tina (Nov 18, 2006)

Thank you for your kind words, Ebony. I think that is one of my longest posts ever, but I just hate to see these divisions, and if he helps even a little bit, then I'm glad.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 18, 2006)

EbonySSBBW said:


> Bruce, you didn't say that they did more for this community, you said that they had done more for fat acceptance. There is a difference. I understand what you're trying to say but I just think that you got things a bit confused and that is why I pointed it out.



Fair enough. Fat acceptance and the Dimensions community have always been hand-in-hand to me, which is pretty much why I said what I said.


----------



## Donna (Nov 18, 2006)

EbonySSBBW said:


> Wow! That was quite a post, Tina. You made some really excellent points and I hope that others will take the time to read it. Whenever this topic comes up on the board, we always seem to dance around it and not really get at it. Well, you have definitely faced it head on and I appreciate that. It always seems to divide us but I hope that we can all work towards understanding and appreciating one another. Thank you for taking the time to post it.



I concur. :bow:


----------



## mossystate (Nov 18, 2006)

Ivy said:


> Right, but by assuming that having a paysite is the only job that any of the webmodels has puts down the women who have them. As if we can't do anything else to make money because we just don't have anything going for us aside from the fact that we know how to use a camera and put on sexy clothes.
> 
> Now, I am fully aware that this is being above and beyond sensitive and reading into it entirely, but in my experience anyone who has assumed that having a paysite is a webmodels only source of income also assumes that we have a website because we are stupid. I can not tell you how many men and women who have assumed that my paysite is my only source of income have followed up after the initial shock of finding out that I do have a real job as well as most all of the other girls with sites make a comment later in the conversation like, "You know, you're a whole lot smarter than I expected!" The people who don't assume it/dont bring it up/ask what else I do outside of my site for income/hobbies rarely make comments like this. I don't know if its just some weird coincidence, but either way it causes you to jump to a lot of conclusions when a person says something that might, for what ever reason, trigger the thought and feeling that youre being judged and being looked at like youre stupid.



Ivy, I do understand how some of you who have paysites would feel sensitive when it appears(or is fact) that someone is implying you are less than fully human.I also think it is fairly human to assume that if you see someone advertising what appears to be their job, you pretty much think that is what they do for a living.If I see someone wearing a vest that has 'Walgreens' stitched on it, I might think that is what the person does for a living.I would not then make any jump to how smart I think the person is, any more than I would do for someone 'advertising' that they work for any other company.Like I said in my previous post, there might be many men who suscribe to paysites who are thinking less than nice thoughts about the women in the pictures they drool over.They might bend over backwards to compliment, but who knows how many of THEM really respect the women as...fully human..hmmmmm.The men who only go to the paysites..how is it they give a damn about how fat women have it on this planet.

Trust me, I know what its like to feel judged.I also know that I have to take a deep breath and try to see what is and what is not being said, when I feel hurt.*s*


----------



## largenlovely (Nov 18, 2006)

I think what you've done here is laid out some things honestly from the other perspective in hopes that we might understand the other side of the coin and give reasons for why we *aren't* hookers or whatever lol (was that said too bluntly  hehe) On one side, it bothers me that i would have to defend myself yet on the other i can see your point. 

I, personally, have been around quite a while at this point. I chat in dimensions chat regularly and posted here on the boards before i got a website as well. So i'd like to think that people know that i'm not just some picture whore. I have 150 hours of college education behind my belt in a few different areas of study, particularly in music education. I taught music in Mobile at 2 different schools and plan on doing the same here since i've moved to Atlanta. Though..i think most people know these things about me and i feel like i'm putting a resume out there lol.

I do like how you said "whether the guests are paysite models or not" i think that is important. If you didn't like the way the girls reprsented that's one thing, but basing it solely on them being webmodels, to me, is something else entirely. 

There are webmodels who put themselves out there and try to make friends and such but it can be a hard road to travel. For instance, years ago when i first went to dims chat, I was seriously ignored by the women. It took a lot of work, patience and time on my part to even be spoken to by the other women. A lot of them assumed things about me that just weren't true. I eventually made friends but it took a VERY long time. I now have some very close friends in there and we've spoken about this topic and i hear "yeah Melissa, but you're not REALLY a paysite girl" LOL but i AM...and i think if people took the time to let down their guard concerning the subject then they'd see that we really are just your average fat girls. I'm sitting here in some gawd awful purple cotton nightgown with my hair in a bun and no makeup on...it don't get much more real than that lol 

I will say though, that i just don't feel like it's *our* fault that people make all these wild assumptions. If people would just take the time to let others in without pre-judging so harshly and so quickly then they'd see that we *are* the average fat girl. 

btw...thank you for the sweet comment  i do appreciate that.

I also have to respond to what fat girls have done for acceptance/community. I also lump them all together, because if someone isn't reaching out to the fat girls then there is no community and there can be no acceptance...and believe it or not we do a VERY large part in helping out fat girls. I have a myspace page and my blogs have become relatively popular. I talk about accepting ourselves and enjoying ourselves as fat women. I can't even begin go TELL you how many women have written me and said that i have helped changed their entire perspective on themselves. I've had letters that have flat out made me cry. I had a 16 year old girl write me who had cancer and lost her eye write me. She said that after she overcome the cancer she started putting on weight and it depressed her and that my blogs have helped...i've had girls with serious body image problems write to me and tell me that i've helped them....really, i can't even begin to tell you how many women have written me saying that i have helped them. So this isn't all about making money or what have you. To me, while i enjoy my site for personal reasons, this is also about the cause. You might say i'm a bad role model, but i think a lot of people can look at us girls and say "wow she is sexy and maybe *i'm* sexy too" without thinking they have to run out and get a paysite to do it. Fat women have always been told that we're the opposite of sexy and that people should love us for the inside...well ya know what? I want to be sexy too and i DO want someone to love my body. I want them to love me for *both* and i honestly believe i can have that.

Ok, i'm gonna stop lol...i promised myself i wouldn't do this, but ...well...there it is lol



Tina said:


> whether the guests are paysite models or not.
> 
> Also, we do not get to know most of you paysite girls personally here,
> 
> ...


----------



## PrettyFatGirl4U (Nov 18, 2006)

BBWDesire said:


> actualy I do not earn my living as an adult web model I do it for fun as many of the other web models this is our creative out let. I am an anthropologist whit a ba and I am working on my ma. I am the average fat girl and I am truy offended by the way you choose to judge us by outward apperances. I think you have a right to your opnion but dont not bash and judge me when you DONT KNOW ME or anything other then what you see on the show and the fourms. I think to judge any one of us is wrong. I feel all the web models I interact with are smart funny pretty and have talent. I am sry if you feel intimidated by us because we live our dream and enjoy life. I feel very sorry you felt the need to attack us in the manner you did so now let me ask you ae you an MD or PHD doctor laywer? guess what that doesnt matter to me I dont know you . After reading your ignorant words I dont want to know you. I just hope you are never judged by the same standards you have judged me with
> Desire



No Desire, I NEVER judged anyone, in fact I went out of my way to include webmodels in EVERY aspect as equals in my original post unlke you who have judged and bashed ME shamelessly! I NEVER indicated I felt that webmodels were worthless or unintelligent, just that they don't represent the MAJORITY of fat women! 

And if your interests are so many and varied, why didn't you make that fact known to the audience? You did discuss your paysite, aren't your other achievements equally as worthy for discussion of who Desire is? Or wouldn't they have served to dispel your laundry list of myths?

No Desire, it is *you * who bashed *me* and called me ignorant which is hardly the case...
It's a good thing I'm not the vindictive type cause if this post is indicitative of your academic prowess and achievements your lack of sentence structure and multitude of spelling errors certainly speaks louder to ingnorance than I ever could 

Mossy, Anne Marie, Samantha, Ebony, Tina, Friday, JoyJoy, Moonvine, Donna, -X- , KoraBara, Ella, Etobiecoke and Tarella....thanks for helping me clarify and thanks for your support!


----------



## Tina (Nov 18, 2006)

PrettyFatGirl4U said:


> Mossy, Anne Marie, Samantha, Ebony, Tina, Friday, JoyJoy, Moonvine, Donna, -X- , KoraBara, Ella, Etobiecoke and Tarella....thanks for helping me clarify and thanks for your support!


First, let me make it clear that I do not support you any more than I support the other women and men in this thread. Also, my efforts didn't really have anything to do with helping you to clarify, but more to put across my own feelings and to try to find some common, or at least middle, ground between what feels like two polarized groups of women.


largenlovely said:


> I think what you've done here is laid out some things honestly from the other perspective in hopes that we might understand theother side of the coin and give reasons for why we *aren't* hookers or whatever lol (was that said too bluntly  hehe) On one side, it bothers me that i would have to defend myself yet on the other i can see your point.


Thank you for stepping back from your irritation at having to defend yourself, and instead let us get to know you a bit better. In doing that, maybe it's not so much a defense as it is an exchange? And thank you for seeing what I was trying to do here. Factions are natural, but I hate to see divisions where they do not necessarily need to be.



> I, personally, have been around quite a while at this point. I chat in dimensions chat regularly and posted here on the boards before i got a website as well. So i'd like to think that people know that i'm not just some picture whore. I have 150 hours of college education behind my belt in a few different areas of study, particularly in music education. I taught music in Mobile at 2 different schools and plan on doing the same here since i've moved to Atlanta. Though..i think most people know these things about me and i feel like i'm putting a resume out there lol.


Yeah, but it's good to do. For instance, I've been around these parts for over eight years, but because it's been a long time since I've heard what you do for a living, I had forgotten. (what grade level do you teach?) Also, we have a lot of new people who have never heard anything about you other than what you write on your paysite board posts, or little posts here and there elsewhere on the boards here.


> There are webmodels who put themselves out there and try to make friends and such but it can be a hard road to travel. For instance, years ago when i first went to dims chat, I was seriously ignored by the women. It took a lot of work, patience and time on my part to even be spoken to by the other women. A lot of them assumed things about me that just weren't true. I eventually made friends but it took a VERY long time. I now have some very close friends in there and we've spoken about this topic and i hear "yeah Melissa, but you're not REALLY a paysite girl" LOL but i AM...and i think if people took the time to let down their guard concerning the subject then they'd see that we really are just your average fat girls. I'm sitting here in some gawd awful purple cotton nightgown with my hair in a bun and no makeup on...it don't get much more real than that lol


You know, I'm not convinced that had to do with your paysite experience, Melissa. I think that it can be difficult to 'break in' to an established group, whether it's chat or on a board. It took me a while to make friends in chat _years _ago, and even then I became the subject of innacurate highschool-like gossip, for things I didn't even do, so I quit chatting. But hey, maybe it _was_ your modeling that did it, I don't know, I just know that established groups can feel cliquish even if they don't try to.

BTW, I am in my nightgown, nothing else, with wet hair from the shower. Let's have a slumber party!  



> I will say though, that i just don't feel like it's *our* fault that people make all these wild assumptions. If people would just take the time to let others in without pre-judging so harshly and so quickly then they'd see that we *are* the average fat girl.


I prefer not to assign blame or fault here but would rather look at causes. Think about how there is so much mis-information about fat women. Can we blame a person for pre-conceived notions if they haven't been exposed to many fat people? Once they have had the chance to see both sides, if they still adhere to stereotypes, then they have made their decision, and if they choose to be willfully rude and whatnot, then we see them for what they are. It is much the same with paysite girls, too, I think. One cannot be involved in this business and not know there are minsets out there, and lots of painting with broad brushes, no? Right or wrong, it happens. We all pre-judge to one degree or another, even if we don't mean to be nasty about it. So I think a lot of people would be wililng to let others in, but one has to make the effort to be a part in the first place (as you did with chat). If there is no effort from either side, it's just more of the status quo and judging and mis-communications, and polarized fighting and hard feelings, IMO.


> I've had letters that have flat out made me cry. I had a 16 year old girl write me who had cancer and lost her eye write me. She said that after she overcome the cancer she started putting on weight and it depressed her and that my blogs have helped...i've had girls with serious body image problems write to me and tell me that i've helped them....really, i can't even begin to tell you how many women have written me saying that i have helped them.


See here, that was more about you just being yourself than you being a paysite model, Melissa. But I agree that it can open eyes and sometimes be the start of a very positive journey towards self-acceptance and a more positive self-perception. I found that when I did my Dimensions Mag feature. It helped me to conquer some fears, but it also was an important part of my own journey, and it gave me some of what I needed at the time, and laid the foundation for some of the writings I have done that have (evidently) helped some women who were finding themselves also. This sort of thing can come from many places, and I think that fatgirl cheesecake poses can certainly be one of them.


> Fat women have always been told that we're the opposite of sexy and that people should love us for the inside...well ya know what? I want to be sexy too and i DO want someone to love my body. I want them to love me for *both* and i honestly believe i can have that.


I'm in full agreement, Melissa. And I feel certain that not only _can_ you have that, but that you _will_ have it. I think men are often susceptible to falling into the same traps as women when it somes to web models and widely-held perceptions and stereotypes. Women, so much more than men, have to live up to these standards of 'goodness' that really are ridiculous. Just as an example, I would like to point out this post by ripley. The woman was not believed, and why? Because she was dressed sexily. We are either madonnas or whores to many men, and right or wrong (_wrong!!_) it is another ignorance-driven, perception-based mindset that one has to work to overcome sometimes. But there are guys out there who don't trouble themselves with that stuff, and who don't mind that kind of attention for you. Everything in its own time, which can be darned frustrating...  

Again, thank you for seeing my motivation here, and I encourage our paysite girls to become more active in letting us get to know you as people, and not only paysite models.


----------



## BBWDesire (Nov 18, 2006)

I stated my side and how I felt I dont find the need to explain why anger leads to bad typing and grammer. I dont belong to naafa and I never said I was your average fat girl IM NOT .Im pretty and I have a social life I dont sit home and bitch about my weight.I live a wonderful charmed life I have a site work travel and my sister is my roommate and best friend. I am not a paris clone Im hotter nor was I vapid on the show it was about being fat and fab and I am both it was fun I was not representing you or anyone but me as for my personal life its personal. I dont want to be a role or spokes model. I have said all I will say im not here to make friends guess what I have friends, Im here to promote myself and my site and from now on for the dim boards I will stick to pic post updates . Besides no matter what people say if they dont agree with you they are wrong. I dont bow down I am srong and stand firm in who I am and what I stand for so please if you reply know its for everyone else to read but i wont.


----------



## PrettyFatGirl4U (Nov 18, 2006)

Tina said:


> First, let me make it clear that I do not support you any more than I support the other women and men in this thread. Also, my efforts didn't really have anything to do with helping you to clarify, but more to put across my own feelings and to try to find some common, or at least middle, ground between what feels like two polarized groups of women.



Tina, my original post was meant as a positive one. I only thanked you and some of the other posters as people who chose to see it as such and stating your feelings helped me to clarify and reiterate mine, nothing more. I never implyed that you were more on "my side" than any other as I don't think there should be sides. I'm the first one to say if something feels right to an individual and doesn't cause harm, go for it! I've also said that while having a website is not for me, I would defend to the death anyone else's right to have one at any size, color, gender, orientation, whatever!

That being said, I would *still* like to see a broadcast with a more diverse representation of the general population showing people of size living well and enjoying life from *all *walks of life and *every *profession!


----------



## Tina (Nov 18, 2006)

Desire, we are all allowed our opinions. I don't know you, or who you are IRL, but was responding to what I saw. Also, I had to edit out your signature, as you are not allowed to promote your paysite on boards other than the paysite board.

PFG4U, I would like to see that, too.


----------



## ripley (Nov 18, 2006)

PrettyFatGirl4U said:


> Tina, my original post was meant as a positive one.
> 
> That being said, I would *still* like to see a broadcast with a more diverse representation of the general population showing people of size living well and enjoying life from *all *walks of life and *every *profession!



Your original post, to me, was not a positive one. I don't have a paysite, don't view paysites, and have no other vested interest in them. What bothered me was the Monday-morning quarterbacking. The producers asked for volunteers, and these are the people who stepped up, and took the risk. Now that we all see that it wasn't a total train wreck of a fat-bashing show, why...darn it, wouldn't it have been nice if there were classier fat people on there? You can say all you want about "diversity" but that is really what you're saying...you don't want to be 'represented' by a porn peddler. These people made the decision to go on this show. They did NOT do it to represent you, me, or anyone else. They did it to represent themselves. If you wanted to be represented, if you wanted diversity, you should have taken the risk yourself, and volunteered to go on the show.




EbonySSBBW said:


> I agree with this and that is why I would not participate in such a talk show. There are a few hosts out there that I would consider but not many.



Exactly. So why imply that the people who did go weren't good enough, or diverse enough? We ALL had the opportunity to go on this show. Why bemoan the lack of diversity after the fact, when every single one of us had the chance to go?






I guess it just bugs me, the vibe I feel in this thread. It bothers me that people thought they were too good to go on a talk show, then complain about the ways the people who did risk, who did take the chance, lacked. 

Couch it in "diversity" if you want, but I'm going to call bullshit on that one.


----------



## mossystate (Nov 18, 2006)

Ripley, my take on it is that some people saw many people here tout this as some huge step in the direction of size acceptance, and so they got a bit irritated..just like some of the paysite women got irritated....soooooo...yeah..ok...the Ablow show was just a chance to see some folks who post and chat here at Dimensions.Maybe no 'side' should see it as more than that...?


----------



## ripley (Nov 18, 2006)

I'll call bullshit on that one, too...it's a talk show, for pete's sake, not a global summit meeting, lol.


----------



## mossystate (Nov 18, 2006)

ripley said:


> I'll call bullshit on that one, too...it's a talk show, for pete's sake, not a global summit meeting, lol.




Yup...*L*..


----------



## PrettyFatGirl4U (Nov 18, 2006)

And I'm countering you on YOUR negativity and "bullshit" Ripley!!

I don't visit this site daily and I don't cling to every word posted here like apparently some people do! The first I heard of this broadcast was when Nikki and Rhonda had already been to the broadcasting! 

Had I known previously, yes I would have contacted the show to ask that a more diverse sampling be interviewed!

And if you can step away from you negative prosletyzing for a moment and look at my original post I did address it to both Dr. Ablow and Leah so before you judge me, get your facts straight!

I stand by my opinion because it is just that, MY opinion and only I know in what spirit it was meant...that it was simply an opinion and not meant to slam anyone! 

In addition it is satisfying to know that so many agree with me both in this thread and in my PM messages.




ripley said:


> Your original post, to me, was not a positive one. I don't have a paysite, don't view paysites, and have no other vested interest in them. What bothered me was the Monday-morning quarterbacking. The producers asked for volunteers, and these are the people who stepped up, and took the risk. Now that we all see that it wasn't a total train wreck of a fat-bashing show, why...darn it, wouldn't it have been nice if there were classier fat people on there? You can say all you want about "diversity" but that is really what you're saying...you don't want to be 'represented' by a porn peddler. These people made the decision to go on this show. They did NOT do it to represent you, me, or anyone else. They did it to represent themselves. If you wanted to be represented, if you wanted diversity, you should have taken the risk yourself, and volunteered to go on the show.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## ripley (Nov 18, 2006)

PrettyFatGirl4U said:


> And I'm countering you on YOUR negativity and "bullshit" Ripley!!


 Show me my negativity and bullshit, then. So far, you're missing the mark.



PrettyFatGirl4U said:


> I don't visit this site daily and I don't cling to every word posted here like apparently some people do! The first I heard of this broadcast was when Nikki and Rhonda had already been to the broadcasting!


 
Well, you sure found my post quickly enough.  



PrettyFatGirl4U said:


> Had I known previously, yes I would have contacted the show to ask that a more diverse sampling be interviewed!


 

But would you have volunteered yourself? 




PrettyFatGirl4U said:


> And if you can step away from you negative prosletyzing for a moment and look at my original post I did address it to both Dr. Ablow and Leah so before you judge me, get your facts straight!
> 
> I stand by my opinion because it is just that, MY opinion and only I know in what spirit it was meant...that it was simply an opinion and not meant to slam anyone!


Negative proselytizing? I stand by my opinion because it is just that, MY opinion.  




PrettyFatGirl4U said:


> In addition it is satisfying to know that so many agree with me both in this thread and in my PM messages.


All I can say to that is  .


----------



## Donna (Nov 18, 2006)

PrettyFatGirl4U said:


> Mossy, Anne Marie, Samantha, Ebony, Tina, Friday, JoyJoy, Moonvine, Donna, -X- , KoraBara, Ella, Etobiecoke and Tarella....thanks for helping me clarify and thanks for your support!



PLEASE do not construe my agreeing with what Tina and Ebony contributed to this thread as support for your negativity.


----------



## EbonySSBBW (Nov 18, 2006)

ripley said:


> Exactly. So why imply that the people who did go weren't good enough, or diverse enough? We ALL had the opportunity to go on this show. Why bemoan the lack of diversity after the fact, when every single one of us had the chance to go?



Do you remember the original post from Leah? I honestly didn't think that anyone from this community would participate, there was a lot of controversy over it. The next time I heard anything, some women had signed up (only two that I had known of) and there were threads talking about how they were representing our community. After the show, there were threads assessing how the show had gone and I simply stated my opinion. I think that I'm entitled to do that. You certainly have the right to disagree with me. It was a talk show, that's it. It should have never been made out to be more than that. 

And yes, I guess you're right. I do think that I'm too good to go on Jerry Springer or any other show that would seek to exploit me for it's own purposes. I will not apologize for that.

Edited to add: I bet if the show had not had members from this community participating, threads would have been started about it and there wouldn't have been any of these problems. I've seen critiques on many other fat related shows....why should this one be any different?


----------



## ripley (Nov 19, 2006)

EbonySSBBW said:


> Do you remember the original post from Leah? I honestly didn't think that anyone from this community would participate, there was a lot of controversy over it. The next time I heard anything, some women had signed up (only two that I had known of) and there were threads talking about how they were representing our community. After the show, there were threads assessing how the show had gone and I simply stated my opinion. I think that I'm entitled to do that. You certainly have the right to disagree with me. It was a talk show, that's it. It should have never been made out to be more than that.
> 
> And yes, I guess you're right. I do think that I'm too good to go on Jerry Springer or any other show that would seek to exploit me for it's own purposes. I will not apologize for that.
> 
> Edited to add: I bet if the show had not had members from this community participating, threads would have been started about it and there wouldn't have been any of these problems. I've seen critiques on many other fat related shows....why should this one be any different?



Ebony....I don't think I ever stated that people weren't entitled to their opinions. And I never said you should apologize for not wanting to go on a talk show.

But *I* will not apologize for standing up for people that I think are getting put down. I've been put down a lot in my life, and it strikes a chord with me when I see things I perceive as putting others down. Especially the hypocrisy of saying "It would have been better if it would have been more diverse" when each and every one of us had the chance to go, to make it more diverse, and didn't. It appears rude to me.


----------



## EbonySSBBW (Nov 19, 2006)

ripley said:


> Ebony....I don't think I ever stated that people weren't entitled to their opinions. And I never said you should apologize for not wanting to go on a talk show.
> 
> But *I* will not apologize for standing up for people that I think are getting put down. I've been put down a lot in my life, and it strikes a chord with me when I see things I perceive as putting others down. Especially the hypocrisy of saying "It would have been better if it would have been more diverse" when each and every one of us had the chance to go, to make it more diverse, and didn't. It appears rude to me.



Ripley, I could also aspire to be president of the United States and try to do my best to be elected but I don't plan on doing that. Does that mean that I can't critique the person who does aspire and is elected? Nope. 

I'm sorry that you are taking this so personally. We will just have to agree to disagree.

By the way, I think that most of us here have experienced what it is like to be put down. I've been judged not only for my weight but for the color of my skin. But you can damn well bet if the topic of the show had been about being black and fabulous and I didn't feel that it was fair representation, I would say so.


----------



## Buffie (Nov 19, 2006)

Tina,

You're a remarkable individual and I wish you lived closer. 

Thank you for making some excellent points, asking some thought-provoking questions, inviting discussion and attempting to promote understanding. 

I missed the show but hopefully I'll catch a rerun. 

Frankly, there's an entire CHANNEL devoted to just about every faction of society. I might be stereotyping a little here, but this is just what I observe... There are channels for men (Spike, Speed), channels for women (Oxygen, Lifetime (yuk)), channels for kids, channels for news-junkies, channels for cooking, nesting, comedy, sports, pets and even a channel for celebrity gossip. So when do I get my FAT CHANNEL??? Quit throwing me the occasional (and often highly questionable) bone and just give me the whole damn enchilada. A size-related topic on a talk show every now and again isn't enough. I want my FatTV. Now. 

With an entire channel devoted to size, there would be time and space for representation of almost every member of this community. Now if only we could accept each other, then maybe the rest of the world would follow.


----------



## ripley (Nov 19, 2006)

I'm throwing in the towel. 

http://www.dimensionsmagazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14092


----------



## Tina (Nov 19, 2006)

Buffie, thank you so much, you dear woman, you. A channel like that would be worth paying for cable service! (I don't have it now, except for internet) :kiss2:


----------



## mossystate (Nov 19, 2006)

Hey, I KNOW I don't accept all people..*L*..it's like when I hear someone say they like all people..bullshit... 




yes, that was meant as part humor..part truth...heh


----------



## Miss Vickie (Nov 19, 2006)

UncannyBruceman said:


> When I say that the paysite models have done more for this community than NAAFA, I'm referring to how they've inspired women to find their confidence and men to come to peace with their orientations.



As a fat woman I take exception to this. Actually, it's average women -- like Tina, like Sandie S-R, like Rainyday, like a dozen other gorgeous women who don't have pay sites who were around in the late 90's when I was struggling -- who were holding my virtual hand while I was figuring out size acceptance. I wanted to see myself as a beautiful, dignified woman who happened to be fat, and it was their examples (particularly Tina because we've been so close for so long) who led me along. I have nothing against pay site models but I have nothing in common with them either (other than size) and so therefore they weren't really an inspiration to me. I hold no judgment about how they spend their time, but I think we're belittling the very important role that the other wonderful fat women here have played in helping the rest of us along on our journeys.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 19, 2006)

Miss Vickie said:


> As a fat woman I take exception to this. Actually, it's average women -- like Tina, like Sandie S-R, like Rainyday, like a dozen other gorgeous women who don't have pay sites who were around in the late 90's when I was struggling



Vickie, quite a number of today's paysite stars had G-rated homepages at that very same time period. Even if they chose to show a little skin and make a little money, it's still wrong to disregard them.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 19, 2006)

PrettyFatGirl4U said:


> I never implyed that you were more on "my side" than any other as I don't think there should be sides.



Yet, you're satisfied in knowing how many people agree with you in postings and private messages...


----------



## largenlovely (Nov 19, 2006)

There's really no reason to be offended by that...it is the paysite girls role in the community that came into question not those without one. There's no doubt that back then the women who were (and are still) making the difference were without paysites. Most bbw paysites have only recently started popping up all over the place. The topic at hand has been what do the paysite girls contribute...and we have contributed quite a bit as well. 



Miss Vickie said:


> As a fat woman I take exception to this. Actually, it's average women -- like Tina, like Sandie S-R, like Rainyday, like a dozen other gorgeous women who don't have pay sites who were around in the late 90's when I was struggling


----------



## EtobicokeFA (Nov 19, 2006)

It is amazing how this is become such of a debate. 

Yes, webmodels have do alot for NAAFA! Look at all the work they did at the last convention! And, that is just one example. 

All that we are trying to say is that we might want to show people that fat people don't need to run a paysite to be happy, healthy and successful!


----------



## MisticalMisty (Nov 19, 2006)

BBWDesire said:


> I dont belong to naafa and I never said I was your average fat girl IM NOT .Im pretty and I have a social life I dont sit home and bitch about my weight.


Am I the only person who took offense to this statement. As a fat woman, I'm appalled that you would imply that the average fat woman is 
A. not pretty
B. doesn't have a social life
and C. spends her life sitting at home bitching about their weight.

How are we supposed to slay those negative stereotypes with the general public when we have fat women who believe in them?

I haven't seen the show so I don't feel that I can comment about what's taken place. However, even if it may not be advancing size acceptance, it is letting John. Q Public know that fat women are sexy and there are men who find them incredibly so. I actually had a 2 hour conversation about this with my friends last night. They were shocked as I explained FAs, Feeders, Bashes..etc..It was great to be able to educate them. I think they have a more positive perspective of me now and don't see me as poor, fat Misty. They realize that I'm confident as is and they better get used to seeing it.


----------



## JoyJoy (Nov 19, 2006)

largenlovely said:


> . The topic at hand has been what do the paysite girls contribute...and we have contributed quite a bit as well.


 I truly did not feel that this was what was being asserted to in the OP, and the only reason for my response was that I felt I could attempt to help with what I percieved as a misunderstanding. I never intended to step on any toes, Melissa, especially yours, since we have been friends for such a long time and I know you to be a highly intelligent, gifted person. While I do still stand by the statement that it would be nice to see another show with non-paysite women (NOT a statement toward the validity/worthiness of paysite girls, but one of a desire for variety), I regret that the negativity that has resulted from this thread, both here and in PM. There have been some excellent points made in the thread, especially by Tina, but I find it sad that some people chose to be so ugly about the debate (mostly in PM).


----------



## Tina (Nov 19, 2006)

Thank you, Vick. :kiss2: 

It is true that a lot of the paysite girls were around back then. But maybe it can be acknowledged that it wasn't necessarily just posing for pics that have helped some (though the pics are a factor, too, as there have been many women who come here who see the pictures and think "she looks beautiful like this; maybe I can, too."). While Melissa has a paysite, it sounds to me that she has done far more important work just being her fat, fabulous self on her MySpace page. That is independent of modeling. A woman is generally far more than her paysite,



> BBWDesire said:
> 
> 
> > I dont belong to naafa and I never said I was your average fat girl IM NOT .Im pretty and I have a social life I dont sit home and bitch about my weight.
> ...



Yeah, I saw it, Misty. And I gave it the attention it deserves, as I see it as someone who really doesn't feel as confident as she projects, or she wouldn't have to make such posts. A message board form of whistling in the dark, which is kind of sad, because true confidence does not need shoring up with nastiness.


----------



## moonvine (Nov 19, 2006)

UncannyBruceman said:


> Just for the hell of it, I Googled "feeders" and this is what came up... http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=feeders&btnG=Google+Search
> 
> Just in case this link doesn't work, the Dimensions Weight Board is the fourth website listed from the top...the three above it are links to information regarding bird and fish feeders. It's not crazy to believe that this is exactly what the Dr.Keith producers might have done in their "research", especially when the taping was scheduled two weeks after it was brought to all of our attention.
> 
> Even if they DID know who NAAFA was, the show was originally strictly feederism...and like you said, NAAFA has a policy against it.




Yes, I'm sorry, I think we may have been discussing two different things.

I think the average person has heard of fat acceptance, and NAAFA. 

I don't think the average person has heard of feederism. I don't doubt that one of the first sites that comes up with a Google search on feeders/feederism is the Dimensions site. There are very few feeder sites.
If you Google fat acceptance, the first site that comes up is NAAFA's.

You were talking about paysite girls advancing the fat acceptance movement, not feederism, if I am not mistaken. If you are talking about paysite girls advancing feederism, I have no argument with that.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 19, 2006)

moonvine said:


> You were talking about paysite girls advancing the fat acceptance movement, not feederism, if I am not mistaken. If you are talking about paysite girls advancing feederism, I have no argument with that.



Feederism had nothing to do with it, really...not all paysite women are into it. Quite a few of today's paysite superstars do more for fat acceptance than just take their shirts off, though, and I can't help but feel as if they're not being credited for it. 
EtobicokeFA pointed out that this year's NAAFA convention was coordinated entirely by paysite girls, and by the way, not a single one of them made a dime off of it. I was there for half of it and I can tell you that Heather and the Big Cuties crew did a bang-up job. 
There's not much more you can do for fat acceptance beyond volunteering for NAAFA.


----------



## Miss Vickie (Nov 19, 2006)

largenlovely said:


> There's really no reason to be offended by that...it is the paysite girls role in the community that came into question not those without one. There's no doubt that back then the women who were (and are still) making the difference were without paysites. Most bbw paysites have only recently started popping up all over the place. The topic at hand has been what do the paysite girls contribute...and we have contributed quite a bit as well.



My feelings are my feelings. I don't *think* I need your permission to feel them, do I?


----------



## Miss Vickie (Nov 19, 2006)

Tina said:


> Thank you, Vick. :kiss2:
> 
> It is true that a lot of the paysite girls were around back then. But maybe it can be acknowledged that it wasn't necessarily just posing for pics that have helped some (though the pics are a factor, too, as there have been many women who come here who see the pictures and think "she looks beautiful like this; maybe I can, too.").



Exactly. Your spread for Dimensions was a boost to my confidence, and just watching women like you, like Rainy and Sandie and others who've been around for awhile really helped boost my self esteem. Like I said, I don't have a problem with pay sites but for me, personally, knowing that other fat women are out there making money from posting racy pictures just doesn't do it for me, self esteem-wise. If it has worked for them, then brava. But the implication is that they helped all of us build self esteem and, well, I'm not in that crowd I guess.


----------



## Miss Vickie (Nov 19, 2006)

UncannyBruceman said:


> Vickie, quite a number of today's paysite stars had G-rated homepages at that very same time period. Even if they chose to show a little skin and make a little money, it's still wrong to disregard them.



I'm not disregarding them. It's you who, I feel, was disregarding the contributions of the "average women" (who are in no way, average but you know what I mean). My point is that you don't have to show lots of skin to inspire women to live their lives to the fullest and not apologize for being fat.


----------



## Santaclear (Nov 19, 2006)

moonvine said:


> You were talking about paysite girls advancing the fat acceptance movement, not feederism, if I am not mistaken. If you are talking about paysite girls advancing feederism, I have no argument with that.



I assume you're being sarcastic.

I DO believe paysite girls advance the fat acceptance movement, in that they get the message out there that not only are fat women the sexiest, most beautiful creatures on Earth (and I'm not saying that sexiness is any kind of ideal or "place" that women should have; but I do feel there's power in it, not the only power one can use but it is power) and that there is an audience for them, and that enough people feel that way to keep the paysites in business. 

It's not in any way that they represent all fat women or that fat women should be objectified or limited to being "sexy", but like "...and we do THIS too! Deal with it if you don't like it, pal!" I feel the women who produce their own work (or maybe to a slightly lesser degree have a major hand in it, such as in the smaller multi-woman but not-yet-corporate sites like Big Cuties, Redhotphatgirlz or BBWPinups) represent this best.

(edit: Writing is convoluted but I gotta leave for work!)


----------



## largenlovely (Nov 19, 2006)

wow...pardon me...I was merely trying to explain why the non-paysite girls contributions never came into question. i wasn't rude in my post to you and i certainly didn't expect you to come back and be that way. 



Miss Vickie said:


> My feelings are my feelings. I don't *think* I need your permission to feel them, do I?


----------



## EbonySSBBW (Nov 19, 2006)

largenlovely said:


> wow...pardon me...I was merely trying to explain why the non-paysite girls contributions never came into question. i wasn't rude in my post to you and i certainly didn't expect you to come back and be that way.



Actually, you told her that there was no need for her to have her feelings...that was kind of rude.


----------



## largenlovely (Nov 19, 2006)

i'm not sure when anyone ever said that those were the requirements for a happy fat girl...the problem is the condescending negative tone towards the women with paysites



EtobicokeFA said:


> All that we are trying to say is that we might want to show people that fat people don't need to run a paysite to be happy, healthy and successful!


----------



## largenlovely (Nov 19, 2006)

well that wasn't my intention



EbonySSBBW said:


> Actually, you told her that there was no need for her to have her feelings...that was kind of rude.


----------



## Miss Vickie (Nov 19, 2006)

largenlovely said:


> wow...pardon me...I was merely trying to explain why the non-paysite girls contributions never came into question. i wasn't rude in my post to you and i certainly didn't expect you to come back and be that way.



Telling me what I should and shouldn't feel gets my dander up; even if you can't understand why I feel a certain way, there's no reason for you to tell me that I shouldn't feel that way.

If you weren't saying "There's really no reason to be offended by that..." then why did you write that?

To me, that was rude. Hence my response.


----------



## Miss Vickie (Nov 19, 2006)

largenlovely said:


> well that wasn't my intention



Intention or not, it's what you accomplished.


----------



## EbonySSBBW (Nov 19, 2006)

UncannyBruceman said:


> EtobicokeFA pointed out that this year's NAAFA convention was coordinated entirely by paysite girls, and by the way, not a single one of them made a dime off of it. I was there for half of it and I can tell you that Heather and the Big Cuties crew did a bang-up job.
> There's not much more you can do for fat acceptance beyond volunteering for NAAFA.




Some awesome women, who happen to have paysites, organized the NAAFA convention. The fact that they have paysites had nothing to do with it. Those conventions are the things that help advance the fat acceptance movement. Here are some words that I found on a website that was created to advance fat acceptance, "*The fat acceptance movement seeks to dispel myths and promote facts about fatness, and fights unfair discrimination on the basis of size or weight*." That is what it means to me. I think it is much more than posing on a website because the ones who usually see those pictures are men who already like fat women or other fat women...those paysites aren't made to reach out to the general public who have stereotypes or prejudices against people of size. Maybe that's the reason why not much work is being done to advance the movement...no one really understand what it means.


----------



## mossystate (Nov 19, 2006)

I would like to know how many MEN out here have better hearing when they are looking at pictures of scantilly clothed women.If so, this is really no different from men in the 'mainstream' and THAT might be one of the problems women who do not show pictures like that...might have with some of what we are talking about in this thread.Like I have stated, there are many men out here who say very few positive things about fat women, if she does not have a paysite or does not show flirty pictures.Let's not make this only about woman V. woman.

I am watching the door, boys, don't try sneaking out.


----------



## largenlovely (Nov 19, 2006)

well then please accept my apology..but if you had just pointed out that i'd said something offensive rather than come back with another rude remark then it would've been solved much sooner. As i said, my intention wasn't to offend but point out that the non-paysite girls contributions never came into question 



Miss Vickie said:


> Intention or not, it's what you accomplished.


----------



## Miss Vickie (Nov 19, 2006)

largenlovely said:


> well then please accept my apology..but if you had just pointed out that i'd said something offensive rather than come back with another rude remark then it would've been solved much sooner. As i said, my intention wasn't to offend but point out that the non-paysite girls contributions never came into question



Stating my feelings -- that I have the right to feel how I feel, without judgment -- is hardly rude. If that's your yardstick for rudeness, then does it bother you when other people speak their truth as well? All I said -- ALL I said -- was that I have the right to feel what I feel and that I don't need your permission. Period. Believe me, I could have been much ruder, given what you said.

What's rude, by the way, is telling me that I have no right to feel a certain way. THAT is RUDE. I appreciate your apology, though. Perhaps next time you'll be more careful when responding to people's sincere sharing of their feelings. 

And yes, you're right -- the contributions made by women who have elected not to sell their image never came into question. Which was *exactly* my point, thank you very much.


----------



## largenlovely (Nov 19, 2006)

well now i'm just plain confused. I thought your initial reason for being offended was because you claimed it did come into question...and now you're saying it never did come into question. 

and i have no problems with the truth ....but there's a way to say everything nicely. I didn't realize that i was being offensive when i said what i did, which is why i apologized, and i have no qualms in apologizing for things that i might say to hurt someone's feelings because it's never intentional. 



Miss Vickie said:


> Stating And yes, you're right -- the contributions made by women who have elected not to sell their image never came into question. Which was *exactly* my point, thank you very much.


----------



## Miss Vickie (Nov 19, 2006)

largenlovely said:


> well now i'm just plain confused. I thought your initial reason for being offended was because you claimed it did come into question...and now you're saying it never did come into question.



I'm sorry I'm being confusing. Let me state it more clearly. Here's the original post.



> Originally Posted by UncannyBruceman
> When I say that the paysite models have done more for this community than NAAFA, I'm referring to how they've inspired women to find their confidence and men to come to peace with their orientations.



I think it's insulting to NAAFA, and to the average women here who are not pay site models, to say that pay site models have done MORE for the size acceptance community than NAAFA and to make no mention of the others here who have inspired women quietly and without fanfare. What Bruce said is that... well, his words are right there. I think his comment was belittling the very real contributions that others have made to the movement -- by living their lives, and being an example to women who want to live in dignity and beauty *without* selling their image. I was offended by what he said, and said as much. You told me I had no reason to be offended. That pissed me off, because it completely invalidated my feelings. You're welcome to disagree with me, but please don't tell me whether I should or shouldn't feel a certain way. That's uncool.



> and i have no problems with the truth ....but there's a way to say everything nicely. I didn't realize that i was being offensive when i said what i did, which is why i apologized, and i have no qualms in apologizing for things that i might say to hurt someone's feelings because it's never intentional.



Intentional or not, your comment irritated me. When I'm irritated by someone who has completely belittled my feelings, I don't feel the need to be nice, or sweet, or speak in a soft voice. I didn't call you names. I spoke MY truth -- with strength and confidence. I'm sorry you find that not nice, but I spent the first 40 years of my life being "nice" so as not to rock the boat. Those days are over. I will not belittle your feelings, or invalidate your point of view. I expect the same from the adults I converse with, online and off.


----------



## largenlovely (Nov 19, 2006)

I think there was a miscommunication because this is more clear to me than your previous posts and i can see how you might would read into that but i really don't think that's what Bruce was saying. I never saw any thread that discounted non-paysite girls contributions and i don't think Bruce was doing that either. I would think it was obvious that they very well have inspired a lot of women, myself included. 

I think the main problem of this thread is the judgemental and condescending tone people use towards women who have paysites. Our contribution has come into question and we do a lot more than people give us credit for. 





Miss Vickie said:


> think it's insulting to NAAFA, and to the average women here who are not pay site modeIls, to say that pay site models have done MORE for the size acceptance community than NAAFA and to make no mention of the others here who have inspired women quietly and without fanfare.


----------



## Friday (Nov 19, 2006)

Then color me confused too because this...



> Originally Posted by UncannyBruceman
> When I say that the paysite models have done more for this community than NAAFA, I'm referring to how they've inspired women to find their confidence and men to come to peace with their orientations.



...made me feel like I'm being told that the paysite girls have some how set me free and while I have no doubt that they have given Bruce and his...compatriots many a warm and fuzzy feeling they have done absolutely zero for me. Nor did their skinnier counterparts liberate me when I was a size 7.



> I think the main problem of this thread is the judgemental and condescending tone people use towards women who have paysites. Our contribution has come into question and we do a lot more than people give us credit for.



I have been neither judgemental nor condescending. I'm sorry that some of the paysite girls are hurt/insulted by the fact that some of us don't see what they do as being of any benefit to those of us that aren't into such things, but then again, I hardly think that any benefit to me/others was what was in their minds when they decided to get paysites. I don't care who has paysites. I don't look at paysites, not even those that have/did belong to friends. Ain't my thing. If it makes a person feel good about themselves, more power to them. But don't kid yourself about who's benefiting from them. And don't get insulted because I'm not going to throw myself at your feet and thank you for saving me.


----------



## largenlovely (Nov 19, 2006)

He never said ALL women were inspired by paysite girls and he never said that the non paysite women/people have done nothing. It's his own opinion if he says they have done more, but he never said paysite girls inspired every single fat girl alive to be more confident in themselves. That's where i feel more was being read into what he was saying than he actually said.

Just because paysite girls haven't inspired some of you, doesn't mean we haven't influenced other lives in a very positive way and furthered the cause of fat acceptance...and I am *not* kidding myself. That is my entire point and i've posted examples to back this up earlier in this thread. 

I never asked for anyone to fall at my feet..i was just asking for the same amount of respect the "average" (as y'all would say) woman gets and not be denied what little part i (or any other paysite woman) played in my/our role in trying to help people of the community just because we have a paysite

I'm not going to point any fingers when i say this thread has contained a judgemental and condescending tone towards paysite models but it is more than obvious from those who have. 

Anyway, i give up...y'all will think what you want regardless of any proof or examples that are posted. So i will leave this thread where it is. I feel like i've said what i needed to say




Friday said:


> And don't get insulted because I'm not going to throw myself at your feet and thank you for saving me.


----------



## Eclectic_Girl (Nov 19, 2006)

UncannyBruceman said:


> EtobicokeFA pointed out that this year's NAAFA convention was coordinated entirely by paysite girls, and by the way, not a single one of them made a dime off of it. I was there for half of it and I can tell you that Heather and the Big Cuties crew did a bang-up job.



Not strictly true, Bruce. Of the people who did the lion's share of the behind-the-scenes work, maybe 3 of them have paysites. Heather was in charge of the whole shindig, yes, and AnnMarie and Deeds did their usual fabulous job handling the auction, but the people responsible for registration, hospitality, and the workshops are not Big Cuties. Cute, yes; big, definitely! But not paysite models.


----------



## Santaclear (Nov 19, 2006)

Miss Vickie said:


> As a fat woman I take exception to this. Actually, it's average women -- like Tina, like Sandie S-R, like Rainyday, like a dozen other gorgeous women who don't have pay sites who were around in the late 90's when I was struggling -- who were holding my virtual hand while I was figuring out size acceptance. I wanted to see myself as a beautiful, dignified woman who happened to be fat, and it was their examples (particularly Tina because we've been so close for so long) who led me along. I have nothing against pay site models but I have nothing in common with them either (other than size) and so therefore they weren't really an inspiration to me. I hold no judgment about how they spend their time, but I think we're belittling the very important role that the other wonderful fat women here have played in helping the rest of us along on our journeys.



These issues have been hotly debated on these forums in the past. It does no good to point and say "YOU have not influenced me! SHE has, but you have not!" That does no one any service really.

It's my view that in the world of BBW paysites, when they're done right, they serve as subtle propaganda and make inroads into people's psyches as to what is beautiful and what is not. 

One might say, "well, I don't join them! So they don't influence me!"  And sure, that might be true. But I think the fact those sites are out there and successful and sends a positive message that there is interest. (There used to be no such sites.) And drumming up that interest and serving examples (such as CarrieBBW, who's had such a positive influence on the whole BBW paysite scene) of strong intelligent independent women doing whatever the hell they want, is how I think they've had a good influence.

Women like Tina, Sandie S-R, and Rainyday are not "average" - they're extraordinary and that's part of why we love them. I think ALL these women (and you, Vickie, and all the other great women of Dimensions) are having an influence, not just one or the other. :wubu: 

(Damn, the smiley is hokey but it's true.)


----------



## AnnMarie (Nov 19, 2006)

Donnaalicious said:


> PLEASE do not construe my agreeing with what Tina and Ebony contributed to this thread as support for your negativity.




:nods :


----------



## Friday (Nov 19, 2006)

Where did _anyone_ in this thread say that paysites/girls were bad? Or that there has been _no_ benefit from them? All that was ever said to begin with was that those of us who are not paysite girls do not feel that paysite girls as a group are representative of all fat girls. No single fragment of any group is representative of the whole by virtue of whatever difference they may have than other, equally different members of a group. Since a large majority of the female posters here do not have paysites, simple mathematics tell you that paysite owners are not representative of the majority of us.

No original insult was intended and this has been blown to asinine preportions. If you find insult where none was offered (in any situation), then that insult is coming from within yourself. This applies to every one of us.


----------



## ThatFatGirl (Nov 19, 2006)

Santaclear said:


> Women like Tina, Sandie S-R, and Rainyday are not "average" - they're extraordinary...



I thought Santa's words were worth repeating and would add to this list (as women who inspired and helped me feel better about myself when I first stumbled upon the BBW/FA community): Cat, AnnMarie, BoteroesqueBabe, BBWMoon. 

Sorry I don't have anything else to contribute to this thread. I haven't watched my tape of the Dr. Ablow show yet. I am looking forward to it though.  I expect to be entertained. I do not expect to see any great strides made in SA. I do commend the women who went on the show with what sounds like some very good intentions.


----------



## Santaclear (Nov 19, 2006)

Friday said:


> Where did _anyone_ in this thread say that paysites/girls were bad?



I did. They're hussies!  (All women are hussies nowadays tho so who can blame 'em? Better to blame TV or somethin'.)  

And you, Friday, are bad. :smitten:


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 19, 2006)

Miss Vickie said:


> I'm not disregarding them. It's you who, I feel, was disregarding the contributions of the "average women" (who are in no way, average but you know what I mean).



I know what you mean, and I think we've got two different arguments here. I know plenty of people from this community who've promoted size acceptance without having a paysite. We've got Miss Janie and the Big Moves crew, and a friend of mine is filming a size-positive documentary. So I'm not really discrediting anyone without a paysite. Still, though, some of the photo spreads in Dimensions still had sexual tones to them. Well, maybe "sexual" isn't the best word to use, but the photo spreads featured the women in revealing clothing. So, it seems hypocritical to acknowledge the spreads and disregard a paysite. Both were designed to show the sex appeal of a fat girl, the only difference is that you get to see a little more if you pay for it on a paysite. Some of the paysite girls have more than just pictures, too, by the way. Some sites have blogs and FAQs that let us get to know a little more about the woman and where she stands on size-discrimination, etc.

Taking your clothes off and making some money may inspire a few girls to find their confidence but it doesn't necessarilly advance size acceptance altogether. HOWEVER, many of the girls who do this are contributing to Dimensions, to NAAFA, blogging on myspace, whatever. There's so much more that they do aside from eating cakes and struggling into tight clothes on camera and I'm not entirely sure if they're being acknowledged for it.


----------



## Santaclear (Nov 19, 2006)

UncannyBruceman said:


> There's so much more that they do aside from eating cakes and struggling into tight clothes on camera and I'm not entirely sure if they're being acknowledged for it.



There are many politicians and lawmakers whom I'd rather see eating cakes and struggling into tight clothes than hear about them making laws or whatnot. (Well, I wouldn't wanna see it but hearing about it would be a slight relief.)


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 19, 2006)

Eclectic_Girl said:


> Not strictly true, Bruce. Of the people who did the lion's share of the behind-the-scenes work, maybe 3 of them have paysites. Heather was in charge of the whole shindig, yes, and AnnMarie and Deeds did their usual fabulous job handling the auction, but the people responsible for registration, hospitality, and the workshops are not Big Cuties. Cute, yes; big, definitely! But not paysite models.



Far be it from me to disregard your contributions, Carla...very sorry about that! Maybe I should rephrase it and say "NAAFA was coordinated by paysite girls as well as a few good women who have the looks and the class to run a successful site of their own if they so chose".


----------



## Friday (Nov 19, 2006)

> "NAAFA was coordinated by paysite girls as well as a few good women who have the looks and the class to run a successful site of their own if they so chose".



Now THIS is offensive. Apparently only 'good looking' fat girls are worthy. :doh:


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 19, 2006)

Friday said:


> Now THIS is offensive. Apparently only 'good looking' fat girls are worthy. :doh:



This is really a compliment to my lovely and highly intelligent friend Carla. She's very beautiful and she's EXTREMELY classy, and she's a perfect role model for fat acceptance without having a paysite. I don't know how you could possibly take any offense to a compliment that was intended for another person.


----------



## Friday (Nov 20, 2006)

Maybe because you assume... 



> "NAAFA was coordinated by *paysite girls as well as a few good women who have the looks* and the class to run a successful site of their own if they so chose".



You obviously weren't aware of who ran it or you wouldn't have assumed it was only paysite girls in the first place. Now you've been magnanimous enough to add in the ones that qualify_ in your opinion_ looks wise to run a paysite if they wanted. How generous of you. I guess those of us that don't meet your standards for looks will have to settle for meaningless lives.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 20, 2006)

Friday said:


> I guess those of us that don't meet your standards for looks will have to settle for meaningless lives.



Actually, people who can't come to grips with their own insecurities and come here to pick fights with strangers can settle for meaningless lives. I don't know who you are, but the fact remains that the NAAFA board did very little to put this year's convention together aside from showing up and giving themselves plaques. Some of them monitored the vendors and hospitality rooms, but as far as putting the workshops together and hosting the events, that goes to the credit of Eclectic Girl and the Big Cuties family. 
They made NAAFA a wonderful experience for me. Not all of them have paysites but they're still gorgeous, noble, and all role models for fat acceptance in my opinion.
I didn't see too much of Eclectic Girl that weekend and it was my mistake to not credit her at first. I'm merely trying to apologize for that and you're trying to get personal.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 20, 2006)

Friday said:


> Where did _anyone_ in this thread say that paysites/girls were bad?



The wording of the original post seems to have bothered a few people here. No two people are the same and everyone has different ideals, so in actuality, there will NEVER be a 100% perfect representative.

Not a single person here has ANY right to be a Monday morning quarterback and say that paysite girls weren't the best choice of guests for the Dr.Keith show. That's what the original post was suggesting...tell ya what, though, the woman who posted it and the men and women who agreed could have just as easily contacted that ridiculous fuckin' TV show and say "I want to be a part of this". No one did it because of the basic fear that a TV show can spin you around until you're dizzy and totally warp whatever your message is. You all sat out and used the paysite girls as human shields, and here you all are, saying that they don't represent you. If you want to be represented, then YOU contact Dr.Keith and YOU tell him that you want to be on his show. It's as easy as that.

I'm not gonna bother going through this again. You all fight amongst yourselves and have a nice day.


----------



## Santaclear (Nov 20, 2006)

Um, Bruce, you're being so overdramatic. Human shields? Points were made, ideas have been stated (I missed the show btw and Dr. Keith isn't even on my radar aside from it being a hot topic at Dim.) Why not cool down a bit?


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Nov 20, 2006)

I'll cool down. It just bothers me that people supported the girls who appeared on the show and are now basically saying "I could have done that better". It's arrogant and it's insulting.

This will be my last post (I mean it this time  ), but before I go back to the Weight Board and speak of more pleasant things, may I suggest that we all refrain from mentioning that Lex Luthor-look-alike's TV show ever again? He's been nothing but poison for Dimensions since his producers contacted us and we've been clawing at each other like wild animals ever since...


----------



## Friday (Nov 20, 2006)

You need to quit making your own damn off the wall interpretions of what every one said.



> It just bothers me that people supported the girls who appeared on the show and are now basically saying "I could have done that better".



Nobody said this. Nobody. I meant exactly what I said. No more, no less. I have no desire to make myself the victim of cheeseball editing. But whether you like it or not, a group of women, fat though they may be, that are all involved in one activity that I am not involved in are not representative of me. I don't care if they're nuns, pre-school teachers, doctors or politicians. Just as I don't know exactly what they deal with in relation to their issues, they can't tell anyone (even without cartoon editing) what others have been through. If you can't see why showing a one dimensional face is not a help, that's your problem.

And you're the one who said that all of the people that put together the bash in Vegas must be good looking, not me. I mentioned NAAFA not at all. I'm just disgusted by the attitude that we're only here to be looked at or treated as objects.


----------



## Eclectic_Girl (Nov 20, 2006)

The way I see it, a person's personal expression of size acceptance can take many forms, some more public than others. And that's a good thing, because we want the message of loving yourself to get to as many people as possible. Some get hooked because of reading Cheri Erdman's "Nothing to Lose"; some get inspired by hearing Marilyn Wann speak; some see AnnMarie's ass in some frilly panties and say, "Damn it, girls like me can be hot, too!" And some of us rack up the cellphone minutes and frequent flyer miles to give people an opportunity to be immersed in an environment of acceptance and community for one week a year.

Trying to rank who's doing more on an individual level to win hearts and minds to the cause is counter-productive. It's not like we get a toaster for every 25 fatties that we sign up.

However, I understand the OP's frustration that the general public is more interested in the "Fat people have sex?!" aspect of our subculture than "Fat people have trouble getting health insurance". Sex sells, in every corner of our culture, because people who make a living off of ratings points or website hits or general buzz don't have the time or nuance to appeal to anything more complex than the most instinctive drives: food, sex, money, power. It's the fundamental nature of the media beast - we know the scorpion is a scorpion when we get on its back. Sometimes we choose not to get on its back, and sometimes we risk getting stung for the greater good.


----------



## moonvine (Nov 20, 2006)

Santaclear said:


> I assume you're being sarcastic.
> 
> I DO believe paysite girls advance the fat acceptance movement, in that they get the message out there that not only are fat women the sexiest, most beautiful creatures on Earth (and I'm not saying that sexiness is any kind of ideal or "place" that women should have; but I do feel there's power in it, not the only power one can use but it is power) and that there is an audience for them, and that enough people feel that way to keep the paysites in business.
> 
> ...



No, I wasn't being sarcastic at all.

Let's face it, there is an audience for anything and everything on the Internet. There are people who like amputees, people who like "mature" women, people who like pregnant women, people who like women who are in the act of urination or defecation, etc etc etc. I'm not sure how that proves anything other than "someone somewhere liked this enough to pay money for it." I think they are a net neutral to the fat acceptane movement, except when they do stuff like play into other people's stereotypes and preconcieved notions by doing things like taking pictures of them stuffing themselves with food. Which is part of what the fat acceptance movement is trying to convey, that we DON'T all sit around all day with gravy dripping off our chins. 

I don't think you CAN get the message out there that fat women are sexy to someone who is doesn't believe that to begin with. Let alone that they are the "sexiest, most beautiful creatures on God's earth." If, as most men do, a man finds Jennifer Anniston to be 100% more attractive than any fat girl, shoving naked pictures of fat women in his face is not going to do anything to disabuse him of that notion. If it would, then a lot more than 10% of the male population out there that liked fat women and there would be a lot fewer fat women spending their lives alone. Just like FA's can't change their orientation, neither can men who like thin women. Shrug.


----------



## moonvine (Nov 20, 2006)

Eclectic_Girl said:


> However, I understand the OP's frustration that the general public is more interested in the "Fat people have sex?!" aspect of our subculture than "Fat people have trouble getting health insurance".




They know we have sex - we're all whores, remember? And sluts. 

I've never figured out how we can all be whores and sluts if no one wants to have sex with us, but there you have the stereotype.


----------



## Eclectic_Girl (Nov 20, 2006)

moonvine said:


> They know we have sex - we're all whores, remember? And sluts.
> 
> I've never figured out how we can all be whores and sluts if no one wants to have sex with us, but there you have the stereotype.



Oh, that one's easy (no pun intended):
The slut/whore thing is less about frequency of sex than it is about lack of selectivity in partners, e.g., "she'll sleep with anything with a pulse". If fat women are generally considered unattactive by the mainstream of society, then we have to "take what we can get", so the stereotype is that we end up having indiscriminate sex with other people on the margins of societal approval or drunk frat boys. And since we obviously don't have the willpower to say no to a second helping of pie, how are we going to say no to an offer of sex?

Of course, on the Madonna side of the stereotype, your only choice is chaste selflessness, so that's not much fun, either.


----------



## Friday (Nov 20, 2006)

> If fat women are generally considered unattactive by the mainstream of society, then we have to "take what we can get",



And god help you if you turn down a guy who thought you'd be an easy mark because it may get ugly.  



> However, I understand the OP's frustration that the general public is more interested in the "Fat people have sex?!" aspect of our subculture than "Fat people have trouble getting health insurance". Sex sells, in every corner of our culture, because people who make a living off of ratings points or website hits or general buzz don't have the time or nuance to appeal to anything more complex than the most instinctive drives: food, sex, money, power. It's the fundamental nature of the media beast - we know the scorpion is a scorpion when we get on its back. Sometimes we choose not to get on its back, and sometimes we risk getting stung for the greater good.



Thank you. You are the voice of calm reason and said it much better than I did. I get so tired of people who get their jollies gaping at other peoples sex lives and don't really understand why others are willing to be targeted.


----------



## Buffie (Nov 21, 2006)

mossystate said:


> Hey, I KNOW I don't accept all people..*L*..it's like when I hear someone say they like all people..bullshit...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I smell what you're stepping in... but my point (which was poorly stated) is that we don't have to like what we accept. We don't have to like each other in order to be tolerant toward each other. I'm just thinking we need to live and let live amongst ourselves a bit more. 

Eclectic Girl said it quite well, really. 

Again, when are we going to get FatTV? There's gotta be someone here with broadcast connections. Tina needs an excuse to get cable for crying out loud!


----------



## Jon Blaze (Nov 21, 2006)

Buffie said:


> I smell what you're stepping in... but my point (which was poorly stated) is that we don't have to like what we accept. We don't have to like each other in order to be tolerant toward each other. I'm just thinking we need to live and let live amongst ourselves a bit more.
> 
> Eclectic Girl said it quite well, really.
> 
> Again, when are we going to get FatTV? There's gotta be someone here with broadcast connections. Tina needs an excuse to get cable for crying out loud!


That FatTV would seriously be a good idea.. Hmmm.. They do have the Big Girls show is California. Let's get the channel across the US, and throw in 30 more shows!!!


----------



## EtobicokeFA (Nov 21, 2006)

Eclectic_Girl said:


> The way I see it, a person's personal expression of size acceptance can take many forms, some more public than others. And that's a good thing, because we want the message of loving yourself to get to as many people as possible. Some get hooked because of reading Cheri Erdman's "Nothing to Lose"; some get inspired by hearing Marilyn Wann speak; some see AnnMarie's ass in some frilly panties and say, "Damn it, girls like me can be hot, too!" And some of us rack up the cellphone minutes and frequent flyer miles to give people an opportunity to be immersed in an environment of acceptance and community for one week a year.
> 
> Trying to rank who's doing more on an individual level to win hearts and minds to the cause is counter-productive. It's not like we get a toaster for every 25 fatties that we sign up.
> 
> However, I understand the OP's frustration that the general public is more interested in the "Fat people have sex?!" aspect of our subculture than "Fat people have trouble getting health insurance". Sex sells, in every corner of our culture, because people who make a living off of ratings points or website hits or general buzz don't have the time or nuance to appeal to anything more complex than the most instinctive drives: food, sex, money, power. It's the fundamental nature of the media beast - we know the scorpion is a scorpion when we get on its back. Sometimes we choose not to get on its back, and sometimes we risk getting stung for the greater good.



I wish they would also be interested in the "Fat people are normal too" aspect of our subculture too. How about the "Fat people can have careers and run businesses as well." 

However, let me take the time to thank everyone in the SA that takes the time to sign up more fatties. While we might not be able to hand out toasters we should show our appreciation.

Why are we attacking webmodel over this?


----------



## EtobicokeFA (Nov 21, 2006)

Eclectic_Girl said:


> Oh, that one's easy (no pun intended):
> The slut/whore thing is less about frequency of sex than it is about lack of selectivity in partners, e.g., "she'll sleep with anything with a pulse". If fat women are generally considered unattactive by the mainstream of society, then we have to "take what we can get", so the stereotype is that we end up having indiscriminate sex with other people on the margins of societal approval or drunk frat boys. And since we obviously don't have the willpower to say no to a second helping of pie, how are we going to say no to an offer of sex?
> 
> Of course, on the Madonna side of the stereotype, your only choice is chaste selflessness, so that's not much fun, either.



Don't forget the FA side of it! The concept that we only go with fat people because we for whatever reason, we can't make it with thin people!


----------



## Chimpi (Nov 21, 2006)

To quote Eclectic, who happens to be very right...
*DAMN IT!!!* If AnnMarie's ass can fit in some frilly panties, I can say that girls like me can look good too!!! _Hell Fucking Yeah!_

:bow:


----------



## Santaclear (Nov 21, 2006)

moonvine said:


> No, I wasn't being sarcastic at all.
> Let's face it, there is an audience for anything and everything on the Internet. There are people who like amputees, people who like "mature" women, people who like pregnant women, people who like women who are in the act of urination or defecation, etc etc etc. I'm not sure how that proves anything other than "someone somewhere liked this enough to pay money for it." I think they are a net neutral to the fat acceptane movement, except when they do stuff like play into other people's stereotypes and preconcieved notions by doing things like taking pictures of them stuffing themselves with food. Which is part of what the fat acceptance movement is trying to convey, that we DON'T all sit around all day with gravy dripping off our chins.
> I don't think you CAN get the message out there that fat women are sexy to someone who is doesn't believe that to begin with. Let alone that they are the "sexiest, most beautiful creatures on God's earth." If, as most men do, a man finds Jennifer Anniston to be 100% more attractive than any fat girl, shoving naked pictures of fat women in his face is not going to do anything to disabuse him of that notion. If it would, then a lot more than 10% of the male population out there that liked fat women and there would be a lot fewer fat women spending their lives alone. Just like FA's can't change their orientation, neither can men who like thin women. Shrug.



I'm not talking about pictures of women with gravy dripping down their chin (nothing against that but it's not my subject here.) I mean good work (definition of which is totally subjective, of course) which speaks for itself and serves as propaganda and advertisement in myriad ways, just as all media and art does.

Nor am I saying BBW porn is "converting" the non-inclined to FA-ness. I'm saying it makes for a more diverse atmosphere, that fat women can do this too, that it's not taboo because they're fat, and....SURPRISE!...they look incredible. That's way better than it not existing. The fact that some people revel in it DOES send the message that it's ok to be fat LOL.

(I don't know or care who Jennifer Aston is.)


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Nov 21, 2006)

MisticalMisty said:


> Am I the only person who took offense to this statement. As a fat woman, I'm appalled that you would imply that the average fat woman is
> A. not pretty
> B. doesn't have a social life
> and C. spends her life sitting at home bitching about their weight.
> ...



What I found most amusing by Desire's post was that she was the one "listing and disspelling" myths about fat girls on the show - then gets on dims to knock most of them. Wow......

and I dont believe her for an instant when she said she wont read this thread again...... she just contradicted herself so why should I?


----------



## Mini (Nov 22, 2006)

1) Um, wow. Infighting. Gottaluvit.

2) I'll start this one with a disclaimer: Talk shows are entertainment, not enlightenment. High-minded concepts never win mass ratings unless they're accompanied by explosions. Hence: 

The show had the simple aim of showing fat women in a sexy light to people who may not have ever considered it. Simple aim, and, for the most part, the topic was broached successfully. (In my opinion, of course. I don't feel like getting bitched at by anyone who thinks that I'm daring to speak for anyone but myself.)

3) Question: Did any non-paysite women volunteer to do the show? Again, curious. It would speak to the "agenda" of the producers, not that it was ever in question anyway.

4) Y'know what I'd like to see? A community that doesn't cannibalise itself over a bloody misunderstanding. I read *no* hostility in the original post, nor do I believe any was intended. I feel her concern would be more valid, however, were the venue one staged to promote acceptance. Sorry, but we ain't there yet.

Blah. If that made sense, awesome! If not, I'll be in my room cutting myself all night. Feel free to tell me why you think I'm an idiot. I'll be sure to respond in kind.


----------

