# Diets?



## comperic2003 (Feb 4, 2008)

I understand that ultimatley the person who owns this site can do whatever the hell he or she wants, but I do have a question regarding one of the rules. In a recently closed thread it was stated: 

"Em, there are many, many bulletin boards that are devoted to diet talk; in fact, it's hard to escape talking about diets in RL or online. I regret that discussion of diets are not allowed here.

One of the few no-no's that Conrad has here at Dimensions is that we refrain from diet talk. I am closing this thread to respect his wishes."

I am wondering, why is talk of diet not allowed here? It seems like a very relevant topic. 

thanks


----------



## love dubh (Feb 4, 2008)

comperic2003 said:


> I understand that ultimatley the person who owns this site can do whatever the hell he or she wants, but I do have a question regarding one of the rules. In a recently closed thread it was stated:
> 
> "Em, there are many, many bulletin boards that are devoted to diet talk; in fact, it's hard to escape talking about diets in RL or online. I regret that discussion of diets are not allowed here.
> 
> ...



It's contrary to size acceptance and makes the peeners of FAs cry?

Actually, it is because Dims should be a refuge from the influence of a thin-conscious society and weight-loss industry. Bringing in diet talk can endanger that.


----------



## comperic2003 (Feb 4, 2008)

But dimensions has a WLS thread. Is that not essentially the same thing? They are both lifestyle changes fueled by a desire to lose weight.

Also, I do not see how dieting is contrary to size acceptance. If someone is happier, or would be happier, at a smaller size, shouldn't we accept that?

Oh, and sure, this place should be a safe haven from the ills of society, but I don't think ignoring the real world is ever going to help people learn how to live in it. Sure the diet industry is crooked and misleading, but the word diet does not necessarily mean some radical or fad diet of the month. I just think an honest and open dietary thread would allow people, who wish to lose weight, to find safer and more productive alternatives to what the dietary industry has to offer.


----------



## Tina (Feb 4, 2008)

Here on the health board, we are allowed to discuss healthy eating and connected weight loss and related mobility and health issues, but no diet talk (Atkins and others, goal weights, etc).


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Feb 4, 2008)

Tina said:


> Here on the health board, we are allowed to discuss healthy eating and connected weight loss and related mobility and health issues, but no diet talk (Atkins and others, goal weights, etc).



Just FYI my post was a JOKE, m'K? With permission I will repost in the lounge or wherever is more appropriate. My bad, :doh:


----------



## Jon Blaze (Feb 4, 2008)

comperic2003 said:


> But dimensions has a WLS thread. Is that not essentially the same thing? They are both lifestyle changes fueled by a desire to lose weight.
> 
> Also, I do not see how dieting is contrary to size acceptance. If someone is happier, or would be happier, at a smaller size, shouldn't we accept that?
> 
> Oh, and sure, this place should be a safe haven from the ills of society, but I don't think ignoring the real world is ever going to help people learn how to live in it. Sure the diet industry is crooked and misleading, but the word diet does not necessarily mean some radical or fad diet of the month. I just think an honest and open dietary thread would allow people, who wish to lose weight, to find safer and more productive alternatives to what the dietary industry has to offer.



As Tina said: Most of the people here are fond of intuitive and healthful eating coupled with exercise, without the intent (Or mindset if you will) of weight loss. There actually was a thread about diets started by Tina awhile ago, but all it was only about healthy choices. So maybe it's just a semantics thing.

I don't personally think it goes against size acceptance necessarily (And since I'm non-exclusive: It doesn't make me peeny soft so easily ), but I'm not the standard.


----------



## comperic2003 (Feb 4, 2008)

Tina said:


> Here on the health board, we are allowed to discuss healthy eating and connected weight loss and related mobility and health issues, but no diet talk (Atkins and others, goal weights, etc).



This seems to be a question of semantics. When you say "diet" it seems as if you are strictly talking about "fad" diets like the atkins, south beach (which actually are pretty sound diets) etc. And when I say "diet" I am using the literal definition, what one eats on a regular basis.


----------



## Dr. Feelgood (Feb 4, 2008)

comperic2003 said:


> This seems to be a question of semantics. When you say "diet" it seems as if you are strictly talking about "fad" diets like the atkins, south beach (which actually are pretty sound diets) etc. And when I say "diet" I am using the literal definition, what one eats on a regular basis.



Oh, we've got a place for that: you want the Foodee Board!


----------



## Emma (Feb 5, 2008)

I'd just like to say I understand why my thread was closed. 

It was actually supposed to be about me being more worried about the amount of weightloss rather than the diet. 

It is a bit of a shame that we can't talk about it in certain places on the board, because I always feel like on other sites people usually weigh less than my goal weight to start with. But it's not up to me what goes on on this board 

Have a nice day everyone and thanks for the suggestions on the other thread.


----------



## love dubh (Feb 5, 2008)

comperic2003 said:


> This seems to be a question of semantics. When you say "diet" it seems as if you are strictly talking about "fad" diets like the atkins, south beach (which actually are pretty sound diets) etc. And when I say "diet" I am using the literal definition, what one eats on a regular basis.



I'll give it to you for South Beach, but Atkins? You must be joking.



CurvyEm said:


> I'd just like to say I understand why my thread was closed.
> 
> It was actually supposed to be about me being more worried about the amount of weightloss rather than the diet.
> 
> ...



I think I understand where you're coming from, Em. Going to any run-of-the-mill diet forum will present you with loads of fat-bashing, self-abasement, and probably some very unsound tips. Here, though, it is known or assumed that even your goal weight is much higher than that found at a diet forum. People here genuinely understand your reasons for weight-loss (well, _some_ do). I believe you might find that sort of sincerity elsewhere, if you pick your forum carefully, but here it's a sure thing....until you make the peeners of FAs cry.


----------



## comperic2003 (Feb 5, 2008)

love dubh said:


> I'll give it to you for South Beach, but Atkins? You must be joking.


No, I am not kidding. I am a big fan of such diets. If you wish to discuss those types of diets I would love to, just in another thread.


----------



## Tina (Feb 5, 2008)

Em, I think the problem was you going into the specifics of the diet, and making what is essentially "diet talk," with the talk of packets, brand name, etc. Once those gates are open, then others follow and we might as well not have a no diet-talk rule.


comperic2003 said:


> This seems to be a question of semantics. When you say "diet" it seems as if you are strictly talking about "fad" diets like the atkins, south beach (which actually are pretty sound diets) etc. And when I say "diet" I am using the literal definition, what one eats on a regular basis.


Not semantics, really. Yes, the literal translation of "diet" means what one eats daily, but since the advent of corporations interested in destroying the self esteem of people (usually women) based upon body size, in order to make lots of profits, I think we can all tell the difference. And we also disagree about those diets you mentioned being "sound." They are not.

Conrad himself has said that he understands that sometimes we need to lose weight for our health. But we can all tell the difference between eating healthfully for our bodies and following some pre-set diet. Two different animals. One is allowed to be discussed here and another is not. We also do not want to hear about goal weights (which is part of the obsessive dieting cycle), or any of the usual crap that goes along with 'dieting.' It's something you'll have to accept, because if you do not, your time here will be short-lived. You should know that your offer to talk diets "in another thread," will have a short shelf-life, because it's not allowed. Conrad's boards, Conrad's rules, and I agree with him.


----------



## comperic2003 (Feb 5, 2008)

Tina said:


> It's something you'll have to accept, because if you do not, your time here will be short-lived.



Hmmmmm . . . I remember politely and plainly asking why dietary talk was not allowed here - and you have answered my question- but why all the hostility? It sounds like you are giving me an ultimatum.


----------



## Tina (Feb 5, 2008)

No hostility, just matter of factness.


comperic2003 said:


> No, I am not kidding. I am a big fan of such diets. If you wish to discuss those types of diets I would love to, just in another thread.



This is what you said to someone, which is in direct contrast to the rules, which is why I said what I said. I don't moderate this forum, so it's not a threat. It's just fact that if someone continues to break the rules after having been informed of them that they won't last long.


----------



## TheSadeianLinguist (Feb 5, 2008)

comperic2003 said:


> I understand that ultimatley the person who owns this site can do whatever the hell he or she wants, but I do have a question regarding one of the rules. In a recently closed thread it was stated:
> 
> "Em, there are many, many bulletin boards that are devoted to diet talk; in fact, it's hard to escape talking about diets in RL or online. I regret that discussion of diets are not allowed here.
> 
> ...



Point blank: I don't particularly wish to hear about a less than healthful way of eating, when we know we simply should be eating more whole, fresh foods, just to induce rapid weight loss to reach a more "acceptable" size. 

"Well, ignore the thread."

Frankly, no one should have to ignore a thread about something that implies they are not perfectly valid human beings exactly as they are and exactly as they are not. It's the mindset behind commercial diets that makes them especially disgusting.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 5, 2008)

comperic2003 said:


> Hmmmmm . . . I remember politely and plainly asking why dietary talk was not allowed here - and you have answered my question- but why all the hostility? It sounds like you are giving me an ultimatum.



Because your posts come off as confrontational and you went fourth as if you intended to discuss the topic anyway even though it is against the rules. I'm sure she was just trying to make matters more clear. 



YOU said:


> No, I am not kidding. I am a big fan of such diets. If you wish to discuss those types of diets I would love to, just in another thread.


----------



## fatchicksrockuk (Feb 5, 2008)

TheSadeianLinguist said:


> Point blank: I don't particularly wish to hear about a less than healthful way of eating......just to induce rapid weight loss to reach a more "acceptable" size.



I don't think anyone is wanting to post here about dieting/eating healthy to reach a more acceptable size...its all about wanting to improve health and mobility..thats the major difference between here and a "diet" board. A 500 lbs person wanting to lose 100 lbs to get around better is completely different from a 250 lbs person wanting to be 120 lbs. I think there should be a safe place for this sort of weight loss talk, maybe like the supersize issues forum. That way, only people interested in it could see it.


----------



## Miss Vickie (Feb 5, 2008)

TheSadeianLinguist said:


> Point blank: I don't particularly wish to hear about a less than healthful way of eating, when we know we simply should be eating more whole, fresh foods, just to induce rapid weight loss to reach a more "acceptable" size.
> 
> "Well, ignore the thread."
> 
> Frankly, no one should have to ignore a thread about something that implies they are not perfectly valid human beings exactly as they are and exactly as they are not. It's the mindset behind commercial diets that makes them especially disgusting.



You know I love you, and I agree with your sentiment wholeheartedly. But you know, I have to ignore a whole area of Dimensions for this very same reason, although from the flip side. To me, the idea that someone would be "better" (read: more attractive) if they _gain_ weight is no different than saying they're not good enough unless they _lose_ weight. Two sides of the same f'd up coin, in my opinion.

So in a very real way I have to ignore the Weight Board, and get a little upset by the weight gain-related threads, comments, etc that naturally spread to the rest of the board. Why is that okay but it's not okay to ask someone to ignore a diet thread?

Please understand I'm in no way saying that we should have threads promoting a certain diet plan, etc. I'm just wondering why "goal weights" at the high end are a-okay, but goal weights at the low end aren't. Each of them trigger unhealthy eating, in my opinion. And I'm not asking this specifically to you, but rather using your post as a jumping off point for a point I've wanted to make for some time.

Again, I wholeheartedly support size acceptance, but I also think we need to be realistic. Fat folks will want to lose weight from time to time (some of us will) for health reasons, or even *gasp* for vanity. I think that supporting each other in sane ways of doing this is an awesome idea and should be part of size acceptance. I'm not sure, though, how to do that without all the "rah rah you lost 10 pounds, GO YOU! You're a better person now!" rhetoric.

'tis a fine line, isn't it? I'm sure glad I'm not a moderator. :wubu:


----------



## LoveBHMS (Feb 5, 2008)

Miss Vickie said:


> You know I love you, and I agree with your sentiment wholeheartedly. But you know, I have to ignore a whole area of Dimensions for this very same reason, although from the flip side. To me, the idea that someone would be "better" (read: more attractive) if they _gain_ weight is no different than saying they're not good enough unless they _lose_ weight. Two sides of the same f'd up coin, in my opinion.
> 
> So in a very real way I have to ignore the Weight Board, and get a little upset by the weight gain-related threads, comments, etc that naturally spread to the rest of the board. Why is that okay but it's not okay to ask someone to ignore a diet thread?
> 
> ...



This bothers me too.

Weight GAIN for nothing more than sexual excitement is ok.

Weight LOSS is not.

It's fine to post about plans to get fatter, but not smaller.

Encouragement regarding an increase in size is applauded. A decrease in size means you are a manipulated sheep.

Hmmm.


----------



## comperic2003 (Feb 5, 2008)

Miss Vickie said:


> You know I love you, and I agree with your sentiment wholeheartedly. But you know, I have to ignore a whole area of Dimensions for this very same reason, although from the flip side. To me, the idea that someone would be "better" (read: more attractive) if they _gain_ weight is no different than saying they're not good enough unless they _lose_ weight. Two sides of the same f'd up coin, in my opinion.
> 
> So in a very real way I have to ignore the Weight Board, and get a little upset by the weight gain-related threads, comments, etc that naturally spread to the rest of the board. Why is that okay but it's not okay to ask someone to ignore a diet thread?
> 
> ...



Wow, we actually agree on something for a change. That's kinda nice. Maybe there is hope for the human race after all.


----------



## Tina (Feb 5, 2008)

Miss Vickie said:


> I'm just wondering why "goal weights" at the high end are a-okay, but goal weights at the low end aren't. Each of them trigger unhealthy eating, in my opinion.


Hi Vick. Just giving my own opinion, what I know from just being around, and the rule I go by when moderating diet talk on the WLS board.

The reason why it's not okay to have diet talk-related goal weights is that those of us who grew up fat had "goals" imposed upon us since childhood. I was put on my first public diet (public being meetings and such) when I was 10. It was Weight Watchers. It was all about the numbers, weight, goal weight, calories, etc. The final meeting I went to I passed out because I hadn't had enough food. I've never been one to pass out. Goal weights have always been some impossible standard we were supposed to meet or be failures. Goal weights just personally make me crazy. Having one would make me feel like a failure before I even got started.

I won't go to Curves for my own reasons, but I got a voucher for a free week one time and thought I'd try it just to see what it's about. One of the first things the woman talked to me about was a goal weight. I told her I don't have one and will not discuss the issue. My only aim was improved strength, mobility and health. She backed down and didn't mention it again. For me, and for many, "goal weight" is a trigger and a strong one.

As for goal weights when it comes to weightgain, this is Fat Central. It's like Alice's looking glass or something. Because The Cause was always Fat Acceptance, and not really even Size Acceptance, which is more of a PC term that is more commonly used today, Dimensions has always been a safe haven for those who have been discriminated against, who have had diets imposed on them, and also against a society who wants to eliminate fat entirely. This place, really, in some ways is a place to revel in fatness. Is intentional weight gain of large amounts of weight healthy? No. And personally, I avoid the weightgain threads, as someone whose 450 lb weight made my life one of misery and 24/7 pain. I can't abide it and reading how some young woman wants to be 500 lbs brings out a side of me that wants to tell her that you can gain, but you may not be able to then lose if you 'decide' to. That over time health will deteriorate, mobility will be lost and pain will follow. But it's not up to me to tell her that. People are allowed to do what they want, healthy or not, and it's none of my business to try and stop them, unless, maybe they are my friend. Even then it's ultimately their choice.

So, Dimensions is not a health site, which is the reason for what you perceive to be an imbalance. It's a safe place from hearing diet talk, and some don't even want to hear about weight loss at all, so that this board even exists is somewhat revolutionary compared to the old boards, and certainly to NAAFA. Hope I answered in the way I meant to. I've been doing three things while writing this and am admittedly distracted, but wanted to answer you.


----------



## Webmaster (Feb 5, 2008)

There is systematic, relentless pressure on fat people in all aspects of life. Fat people are attacked, ridiculed, devalued, pressured, and discriminated against. The diet industry cashes in on this huge, hurtful pressure by stealing billions of dollars from fat people, on top of robbing fat people of dignity, self confidence and a sense of self worth. 

Freedom from weight loss talk is therefore a policy decision that has stood since the dawn of the FA-SIG in 1984, and that is not going to change. This is a size-positive community, one of not very many, and certainly one of the very few with a broad spectrum of forums and discussion areas. However, weight loss diets is not among them, and won't be. There are thousands of weight loss sites out there where such discussion is welcome. It is not here.


----------



## Miss Vickie (Feb 5, 2008)

LoveBHMS said:


> This bothers me too.
> 
> Weight GAIN for nothing more than sexual excitement is ok.
> 
> ...



*baaaa aaaaaaa aaaaa*

(That's sheep code for "Thanks for agreeing with me. You Rawk!")



comperic2003 said:


> Wow, we actually agree on something for a change. That's kinda nice. Maybe there is hope for the human race after all.



Hey, you and I actually agree more than we disagree nutritionally and philosophically speaking. I actually agree with more of what you say than most anyone here would (and have actually defended Dr. Atkins if you can believe it). I just think that maybe you carried it a bit too far is all. I've gotten a lot more conservative in my elder years. 



Tina said:


> The reason why it's not okay to have diet talk-related goal weights is that those of us who grew up fat had "goals" imposed upon us since childhood. I was put on my first public diet (public being meetings and such) when I was 10. It was Weight Watchers. It was all about the numbers, weight, goal weight, calories, etc. The final meeting I went to I passed out because I hadn't had enough food. I've never been one to pass out. Goal weights have always been some impossible standard we were supposed to meet or be failures. Goal weights just personally make me crazy. Having one would make me feel like a failure before I even got started.



I know, and I COMPLETELY agree with you. That's why when I visit my WLS sites, my profile doesn't have a goal weight and I've never really discussed it in terms of a goal weight -- a rare thing.



> As for goal weights when it comes to weightgain, this is Fat Central. It's like Alice's looking glass or something.



I know, but it still doesn't make it right or any less objectification of women because it mean we can eat MORE cream puffs, not LESS. I don't mind it -- I mostly just avoid the Weight Board 'cause I know it'll piss me off.  I figure those who dislike talk of "diets" (and by that I mean not the boxed crap people talk about but rather healthy eating with or without a goal of weight loss) can do the same.

That way we can all just get along. *insert kumbayah song*

I know that the weight gain stuff makes you uncomfortable. As any of us who HAVE been caused physical and emotional pain by our size, how could it not? Again, though, I appreciate you taking the time to answer.

And Conrad, I totally understand your point and support now -- and have always supported -- your right to run Dimensions as you see fit. But I did want to point something out as someone of the XX chromosome variety, since you talk about that relentless pressure, pressure as a fat person I have experienced. However, I just have to also point out that as women, sometimes we get sick and tired of being judged by how we look and by being objectified by men, used for their sexual gratification. I do not exist to look cute on some man's arm, and my value is way way way way way beyond how I look (thank God). So in a way, women feel the kind of pressure you talk about to be "good enough", physically speaking, and for some of us the pressure to be "fat enough" is just part of that whole objectification thing. 

An example of this in the political realm is that Huckabee's weight has been AAAALLLLLLLL over the map, even during the last few weeks of the campaign. Has anyone mentioned a word about it in the media? No, but they sure love to mention how Hillary dresses, her hair, etc. It's a little crazymaking because whether you like the woman or not, who gives a rat's patootie whether she wears a pantsuit or hot pants?

Again, I'm not asking you to do anything differently, and I know that a lot of the women here don't agree with me and that's okay. But the feminista in me just had to check in. For a moment.


----------



## Tina (Feb 6, 2008)

Miss Vickie said:


> I know, but it still doesn't make it right or any less objectification of women because it mean we can eat MORE cream puffs, not LESS. I don't mind it -- I mostly just avoid the Weight Board 'cause I know it'll piss me off.  I figure those who dislike talk of "diets" (and by that I mean not the boxed crap people talk about but rather healthy eating with or without a goal of weight loss) can do the same.


"Right" isn't the point, though, it just is what it is. I ignore part of the site and don't read it at all, which includes most of the library, just because it isn't my thing, either. Objectification is a whole different subject, though. Is it objectification if a woman says she wants to gain? Who is objectifying her? If you're talking about the paysite board, that's a different matter. Dimensions has always had cheesecake, and I was a part of it. Paysites are here to stay and if they're going to be advertised here, I like that Conrad has standards about what can be posted, both in photos and terminology. I'm not a proponent of porn, you know that, but no one will stop objectification. I just couldn't see, even if Conrad wanted us to, us having to moderate the language of every person who objectified another (and let's face it, we now have boy threads where the women get to oggle, too). I guess I'm not sure where I'm going with this except that I'm a feminist, too, and while there are certainly some things here that I have found deeply disturbing, I find enough other things here that have value way beyond the things I don't care for.


> An example of this in the political realm is that Huckabee's weight has been AAAALLLLLLLL over the map, even during the last few weeks of the campaign. Has anyone mentioned a word about it in the media? No, but they sure love to mention how Hillary dresses, her hair, etc. It's a little crazymaking because whether you like the woman or not, who gives a rat's patootie whether she wears a pantsuit or hot pants?


Well, yeah. Been discussing that dynamic for years on feminist boards. Unfortunately, I don't see the concentration on women's looks and bodies above anything else changing any time soon.


----------



## JerseyGirl07093 (Feb 7, 2008)

Miss Vickie said:


> You know I love you, and I agree with your sentiment wholeheartedly. But you know, I have to ignore a whole area of Dimensions for this very same reason, although from the flip side. To me, the idea that someone would be "better" (read: more attractive) if they _gain_ weight is no different than saying they're not good enough unless they _lose_ weight. Two sides of the same f'd up coin, in my opinion.
> 
> So in a very real way I have to ignore the Weight Board, and get a little upset by the weight gain-related threads, comments, etc that naturally spread to the rest of the board. Why is that okay but it's not okay to ask someone to ignore a diet thread?
> 
> ...



I couldn't rep you, so I'll say it here...good post Miss Vickie!


----------



## Miss Vickie (Feb 7, 2008)

Tina said:


> Is it objectification if a woman says she wants to gain? Who is objectifying her?



Your question gave me pause. I had to think about it a bit, but it seems like if a woman is gaining it's usually for an audience of some sort -- a boyfriend, a potential boyfriend, or the whole paysite thing, which I don't want to get into 'cause I don't think we should open THAT whole can o' worms.

I suppose there are people who want to gain because it feels good to them (I can't relate but whatever) and obviously that's them taking control of their own bodies, which is understandable. I think they'll potentially pay for it in the same way you and I and others have when we "outgrow" ourselves, but that's their choice.

But given a lot of the "I want someone to feed me!" posts, that screams objectification to me. And yeah, who am I to judge "right" and "wrong". But as a feminist, it bugs the hell out of me.

Back to the topic at hand, as you say, you ignore what doesn't work for you. I do the same. I understand the pressure we get societally to lose weight; I've lived it. I also know this isn't your rule, so I'm not asking you specifically but more asking out loud. In that vein, why can't those who don't want to hear about diets, or WLS, or whatever do the same? Are we so sensitive that we can't take it? I don't see this place being taken over by dieting fanatics, but I think what we have here -- discussing healthy weight loss in this spot -- is working well. I'm not sure, I guess, how the threads which were closed crossed the line. Was it a mention of goal weight? Not being a goal weight kind of gal, I think they're silly but for some people, they need or want that motivation to help them stay on track.

Anyhow, this isn't directed at you. I'm just, as usual, thinking about loud. 



> Well, yeah. Been discussing that dynamic for years on feminist boards. Unfortunately, I don't see the concentration on women's looks and bodies above anything else changing any time soon.



The Abster asked me a question yesterday that stopped me in my tracks. We were talking about the election and she asked me if I thought we were more sexist as a country (and by that I mean the US - I can't speak to other places) or more racist. We talked about it for awhile and I told her that I thought we were more sexist because it's so ingrained that we don't even think about it; but that the racism that still exists is more dangerous because it denies people jobs, places to live, freedom, etc. It was an interesting conversation, though.



JerseyGirl07093 said:


> I couldn't rep you, so I'll say it here...good post Miss Vickie!



Thanks!  I appreciate that, especially since it was kind of a "hit and run" kind of thing.


----------



## TheSadeianLinguist (Feb 7, 2008)

Miss Vickie said:


> You know I love you, and I agree with your sentiment wholeheartedly. But you know, I have to ignore a whole area of Dimensions for this very same reason, although from the flip side. To me, the idea that someone would be "better" (read: more attractive) if they _gain_ weight is no different than saying they're not good enough unless they _lose_ weight. Two sides of the same f'd up coin, in my opinion.
> 
> So in a very real way I have to ignore the Weight Board, and get a little upset by the weight gain-related threads, comments, etc that naturally spread to the rest of the board. Why is that okay but it's not okay to ask someone to ignore a diet thread?
> 
> ...



Agreed completely. If you're struggling at your size in any sense, physically, emotionally, I don't mind if you say, "Well, guys, I'm going to drop twenty or two hundred lbs." It boils down to a philosophy for me of, "Your body. Your choice." Same goes with gaining. I 100% support people living a life they love. I may fundamentally disagree with someone's reason for a weight shift, but I trust them to take their own next right action, just as I want people to trust me.

What I insist on not seeing is how great X diet plan is. If someone says, "I drink four shots of Sauza a night," fine. I don't really want hear, "I'm drinking this because I know I'll be in a better mood and therefore a better person; I've known other recreational drinkers and they're all more fun people." Do I make any sense?


----------



## Tina (Feb 7, 2008)

Miss Vickie said:


> Your question gave me pause. I had to think about it a bit, but it seems like if a woman is gaining it's usually for an audience of some sort -- a boyfriend, a potential boyfriend, or the whole paysite thing, which I don't want to get into 'cause I don't think we should open THAT whole can o' worms.


But I cannot presume that. I have read posts by female members who have said that they have wanted to be fatter since childhood. That's independent of any sort of relationship. 


> I suppose there are people who want to gain because it feels good to them (I can't relate but whatever) and obviously that's them taking control of their own bodies, which is understandable. I think they'll potentially pay for it in the same way you and I and others have when we "outgrow" ourselves, but that's their choice.


Yes, it is. Some fat people live to a ripe, old age and do not have mobility problems, or really many health problems, either. They are the minority, but they do exist. I think that everyone has a weight in which it is past the point of no return, where even if you are able to lose weight to regain health, you can never go back to how you were before you gained weight. Some years ago, at the same weight I am now, I had much better mobility, stamina and health than I do now. But after going up to 450, that all changed for the worse when it comes to physical health and well-being. I went over my limit, evidently. Age accounts for it, too, of course. 


> But given a lot of the "I want someone to feed me!" posts, that screams objectification to me. And yeah, who am I to judge "right" and "wrong". But as a feminist, it bugs the hell out of me.


Well, some of it is just plain pandering, and if a woman wants to do that, it's up to her, too. I believe in choice. Some of it is for some guy, yeah. We women tend to do a lot of things for our guys, and some aren't so healthy. I think that knowing oneself and developing a more positive self-perception and just plain coming to refuse to put up with bullshit generally takes care of at least most of that.  But I also know that _some_ of those posts are made by guys pretending to be women, posting single-handedly... 


TheSadeianLinguist said:


> Agreed completely. If you're struggling at your size in any sense, physically, emotionally, I don't mind if you say, "Well, guys, I'm going to drop twenty or two hundred lbs." It boils down to a philosophy for me of, "Your body. Your choice." Same goes with gaining. I 100% support people living a life they love. I may fundamentally disagree with someone's reason for a weight shift, but I trust them to take their own next right action, just as I want people to trust me.
> 
> What I insist on not seeing is how great X diet plan is. If someone says, "I drink four shots of Sauza a night," fine. I don't really want hear, "I'm drinking this because I know I'll be in a better mood and therefore a better person; I've known other recreational drinkers and they're all more fun people." Do I make any sense?


And now I'll have to say that I agree with you completely, Casey.


----------

