# Weight Loss in the SA Movement



## thatgirl08 (Mar 27, 2011)

Are weight loss and involvement in the SA movement mutually exclusive things? 

Is it possible for someone to be genuinely interested in both weight loss and SA? If so, how are those people perceived by others in the SA movement? Does losing weight make you less credible and/or make the overall movement less credible to the outside world? On the other hand, does staunch resistance to weight loss as a whole reduce the movements credibility to people not involved? 

Just thought it'd be interesting to see everyones opinions on this.


----------



## Dr. Feelgood (Mar 27, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> Is it possible for someone to be genuinely interested in both weight loss and SA?



It depends on whose weight loss they're interested in. After all, there's a Dimensions board for people who want to talk about weight-loss surgery; you've got to be pretty interested in losing weight to consider that. But as for people who are mainly interested in preaching weight loss to others ... I can't see that as fitting into size acceptance.


----------



## tinkerbell (Mar 27, 2011)

I think they can be part of the same thing, but I think its how a person goes about it. I think SA is an awesome thing. Learning to love yourself as you are is a great huge thing.

I don't post here often or consistently, but will lurk and read sometimes. 

I don't think that when anyone loses weight that they are selling out to outside pressure, and that its always a bad thing. I don't think it means they hate themselves, fat, or fat people. But I think as Dr F posted, pushing weight loss onto others wouldn't really fit into SA. 

I've lost weight myself, over the course of 4.5 years, and still am aiming to lose more. I certainly don't push it on others, or think that fat people need to lose weight. Its what *I* needed. I've also done it in a non flashy, slow, way. 

The whole concept of SA is definitely something that has helped me in my life and journey - though I doubt some would see it that way, since I'm losing weight. But I am interested in both. 

:happy: I dont know if that really answered your question!


----------



## 1300 Class (Mar 27, 2011)

I think we need to define what 'weight loss' actually is first. Is that actual weight loss, being strictly 'healthy diet' and exercise with the aim of not gaining weight but maintaining, dedicated weight loss efforts or even radical steps to that including surgery?

Part of the problem as I see it is its easy to fuse together the different concepts of 'being healthy (maintaining weight but improving for example fitness)' and 'dieting'(loosing weight) into the one idea, when its not necessarily the same thing.

I think if an individual decides to 'loose weight' for whatever reason and goes about it in a sensible manner, they should not be precluded from size acceptance. All because we accept something, doesn't mean we can't decide to change it.


----------



## Jes (Mar 27, 2011)

size acceptance should be just that: acceptance of all sizes. 100 lbs, 1000 lbs, whatever. Moreover, I think we can accept without going further; accepting doesn't mean liking, loving, wanting to be, thinking being is a great idea or anything else. It means accepting.

I don't think size acceptance and fat acceptance are the same thing.


----------



## BlueBurning (Mar 27, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> Are weight loss and involvement in the SA movement mutually exclusive things?



I would say not.




thatgirl08 said:


> Is it possible for someone to be genuinely interested in both weight loss and SA? If so, how are those people perceived by others in the SA movement? Does losing weight make you less credible and/or make the overall movement less credible to the outside world? On the other hand, does staunch resistance to weight loss as a whole reduce the movements credibility to people not involved?



Yes, and I think how they would be perceived would be different for every individual. I believe the SA movement is the most credible when it accepts individuals of all sizes. I think the SA movement already has a difficult time when it comes to credibility with those not involved so I do not think the movement can really risk excluding others if it wants to be taken seriously.


----------



## bigmac (Mar 28, 2011)

Jes said:


> size acceptance should be just that: acceptance of all sizes. 100 lbs, 1000 lbs, whatever. Moreover, I think we can accept without going further; accepting doesn't mean liking, loving, wanting to be, thinking being is a great idea or anything else. It means accepting.
> 
> I don't think size acceptance and fat acceptance are the same thing.



To my mind a 1000 pound man or woman and a 70 pound anorexic are similarly situated. In both cases full scale intervention is warranted. In both cases health consequences (including death) are imminent. Just like we wouldn't stand by and watch a 70 pound person starve themselves to death -- we shouldn't just stand by and watch/help/facilitate a 1000 pound person eating themselves to death.


----------



## LovelyLiz (Mar 28, 2011)

Here are a couple of ways to approach healthy lifestyle changes and/or weight loss:

1) I hate my body, so I am going to do these different things and lose weight.

OR

2) I love my body, and so I want to care for it in this different way and lose weight.

The spirit of #2 seems to be in line with SA in a way that #1 isn't. To me, it's really all about motivation. Is the person aiming to lose weight because she hates her body or because she loves it? It feels really different, and people talk about it really differently, when they are mostly coming from the second mindset (though I know it's not really that clean in real life, it's a distinction that has really helped me). So yeah, I do think weight loss can absolutely be a part of SA, but it needs to be always framed with body-positive talk and gracious language toward the body as it is at each step along the way.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Mar 28, 2011)

Great idea for a thread.

On a broad level, SA should mean not being biased or prejudiced against others due to their size and not projecting any personality or character traits against another due to size. While McBeth makes some good points about self acceptance and body positivity, I don't agree those things are at the core of SA. In other words if I work as a human resources director at a company, I should provide armless chairs for job applicants during an interview regardless of how I feel about my own body.

Somebody on here once pointed out that there is a difference between Size Accpetance and Fat Supremacy. If you confuse the two, than you're going to get angry and resentful about weight loss and you may feel that somebody has less credibility if they lose weight. 

So does "staunch resistance to weight loss" harm the overall promotion of the concept of SA"? I'd say it does. Additionally, I personally loathe the distinctions made on this board regarding weight loss. As in it's ok if it's for your health but not for other reasons. It's ok if you lose some weight but not too much. It's ok if you do it via one method but not another.


----------



## kioewen (Mar 28, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> Are weight loss and involvement in the SA movement mutually exclusive things?



----------Yes.


----------



## Jon Blaze (Mar 28, 2011)

In my opinion: Yes and No.

For me the personal element is other people. You can have whatever view you want of yourself. I'll advise against outright hatred of yourself because you're too xyz, but I am not in control.

On the other hand: If you have negative views of yourself, and with weight loss leads into negative views of others, then I feel they absolutely aren't compatible. 

The only problem with the first is that I realize that some people can simply be that way, but I feel over time for others it can lead to the latter. But not always of course. Positive body image is good for you physically, but it's something we struggle with all the time. There is a blurred line since we're all constantly going up and down. 

For those struggling to find a balance between both themselves and others: I suppose as long as there's an effort towards the end, then I don't see why it isn't. For those that really aren't interested in accepting others, I don't see why it's likely that they would go down the SA route at all.

I really feel this goes in both direction as far as weight go. Calling out people for being too thin for one's eyes isn't exactly size accepting either.


----------



## Jes (Mar 28, 2011)

bigmac said:


> mwe shouldn't just stand by and watch/help/facilitate a 1000 pound person eating themselves to death.



well that brings up an interesting point--does 'accepting' lead to supporting something? For me, it doesn't. I can accept that someone weighs, or wants to weigh, x number of lbs. That doesn't mean I support it or think it's a good thing or want to weigh the same. Hopefully, I just accept and then shut my mouth.


----------



## CastingPearls (Mar 28, 2011)

Jes said:


> well that brings up an interesting point--does 'accepting' lead to supporting something? For me, it doesn't. I can accept that someone weighs, or wants to weigh, x number of lbs. That doesn't mean I support it or think it's a good thing or want to weigh the same. Hopefully, I just accept and then shut my mouth.


What if it were your SO? Would that make a difference?


----------



## Jes (Mar 28, 2011)

CastingPearls said:


> What if it were your SO? Would that make a difference?



I'm...not sure what you mean, CP.


----------



## CastingPearls (Mar 28, 2011)

Jes said:


> I'm...not sure what you mean, CP.


I mean if you had a SO that revealed to you that they always had a fantasy to gain weight to whatever their goal is (let's use Bigmac's figure of 1000 lbs. although I really hate the magic numbers of fat) and they were going to embark on making their fantasy a reality, would you still accept it and shut your mouth?

I'm sincerely curious.


----------



## Artemisia (Mar 28, 2011)

Hi, I'm new to the board, but I've been in the Fatosphere for a while and this issue's come up a bunch of times. My take:

There is a lot of pressure to lose weight in Western society. So much so that nearly every woman you meet has been on some diet at some point in her life (and an increasing number of men). Also, weight loss is possible for most people - that is, temporary weight loss - so it's easy to get caught up in the fantasy that *this* time it's going to happen, that you're going to finally shed the massive burden of fatphobia, the expense of being fatter in a tiny/narrow/cheaply-engineered world, etc. And, finally, there's the chance at the Fountain of Youth promised to the 'normal' BMIs (that is, maximum health barring catastrophe). 

So am I surprised when people who loathe fatphobia, who themselves reject sizism, cave to those pressures? No. And I don't blame them, not entirely, though I have more respect for the intellectually consistent. Do I think one can lose weight and still be against sizist bigotry? Yes. Do I think they're doing size acceptance any favors by caving in? Hell no. They're making it harder for those of us who buck the pressure. 

It's a complex issue that's highly individual, IMHO. Hard to paint with a broad brush. I hope that all made sense 

(hope this posts, I've been wrestling with the moderation queue on other posts for some reason...)


----------



## Elfcat (Mar 28, 2011)

This has been raging quite a bit. Particularly in the era of Facebook, I know some people who have decided to lose weight, and after so deciding went into a habit of making it the subject of a daily drumbeat of postings concerning how many tenths of a pound gained or lost. For myself, worried that such a thing would not end well, but not wanting to rain on their parade (and the cheers they were getting from some others), I chose to say nothing. When one such person started saying that losing weight should not be just accepted but promoted in every BBW venue, I found I could not weigh in at that point, because for lack of commenting I was defriended. A little later the story involved the posting of a T-shirt reading "Nothing tastes as good as thin feels."

I'll accept that someone wants to do something I worry about. The problem is, it seems quite often that such people then turn right round and demand cheerleading as proof of acceptance. Those who turn especially to commercial weight loss methods seem often to adopt the mode of speaking which makes it a central topic of conversation, leaving those who wish not to cheerlead it with nothing to say, except to run the risk of looking non-accepting. It has lead some more ardent fat-acceptance partisans to be quite reticent about attending events where such conversations have a good chance of commencing. It has lead some others to accept being the black sheep (or black flag) in the crowd.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 28, 2011)

i think its very hard for weight loss to exist in the SA movement as it stands at the moment. mainly because many people who aren't quite comfortable with their fat body feel somehow admonished if someone loses or has lost some weight. on top of that so many voices in the SA movement tend to be admirers rather than actual fat people. so instead of fat being emotional and political i feel it ends up being an issue of personal aesthetics where it should not be. the S in SA is size. it doesn't say which size is best and it shouldn't. anyone at any and every size should be acceptable. having to be fat to be acceptable is just as bad as having to be thin to be acceptable. until people stop trying to get rid of people or exert prejudice toward people who weigh less or want to weight less there is no size acceptance. folks need to be free to be what they want to be and whats authentic for them and not have to adhere to ANYONE else's beauty standard for any reason. thats true SA. so all of the statements about "you would so pretty if..." and " it's a shame that..." or you are in denial about..." is all a load of crap that applies to both sides. leave people alone and appreciate them fat or thin and stop impressing your opinion on them. if they personally need cheerleading give it to them. it does not hurt to tell someone they are beautiful, even if they aren't someone who fits your exact specifications, since we all are anyway in many different ways. and if someone can't figure that one out they are wasting a good set of eyes.


i guess my short answer is that it does matter but i shouldn't


----------



## Artemisia (Mar 28, 2011)

^^Yes, the cookie-ing that goes along with weight loss is so widespread that saying nothing negative in particular but denying the dieter his/her cookie can be (is, in my experience) seen as rude. Weight loss as a social ritual is a fascinating phenomenon -- and weight loss within the size acceptance community takes on another dimension entirely, like the individual losing weight is somehow rebelling against big bad fat acceptance whilst conforming to mainstream pressure to lose weight.

That isn't to say I've seen this happen a lot. My size activism has for the most part dwelled in the Fatosphere blogosphere and forums, and Big Bad Fat Acceptance Denying Dieters Moral Cookies bubbles up as a topic from time to time. When it comes down to it there are no gods of fat acceptance excluding anyone from the movement, and allies come in a variety of shapes, sizes, and intentions. What matters most to me is the answer to this question -- are you helping fat acceptance more than you're hurting it? If the answer is yes, you're in. We can sort out issues of ideological purity *after* we've toppled mainstream fatphobia


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 28, 2011)

but what does it say about us if we are thin phobic? it says we lack real belief in ourselves in the face of thinness. we fear it. we can't talk about it. we shouldn't even admit it if its something we want. weight loss on others threatens us somehow. thats what it says.

i don't think that bodes well for real acceptance. and if we stuff down the need for some people to be thin and aren't supportive it says we are not comfortable enough within our fatness to even allow some of us to want to be thin.

ex fat folk still care about fat issues and people. they are still that same fat person with the same experiences inside. they are valuable allies with the thin world we need to convince. a lot of them think fat people are wonderful and beautiful but they personally couldn't handle it. why waste thin people who already love us and understand us and can bring that message to the other side. it is a waste if we don't utilize people so passionately for us.

people want cookies for any steps they take toward a personal goal, it can be getting fatter, thinner, taller, smarter, richer, what have you. give em a cookie. be generous with them. life is short. we are always withholding from people for some political reason. why are we so miserly with something that won't kill us? if it makes us feel bad that somebody is dropping poundage, that they want to, and is feeling happy about it we need to examine why we feel threatened and deal with that. its not their fault. its coming from something inside of us we need to adjust.


----------



## geekybibabe (Mar 28, 2011)

I agree with the ideas already mentioned that:

* It matters why an individual wants to lose weight. Wanting to lose weight because you hate your fat is the antithesis of size acceptance. 

* It's obnoxious to spend a lot of time talking about your weight loss journey in size acceptance circles. There are 20 million places where talking about weight loss is the thing to do. If you want to lose weight, go for it. Just don't make me listen to you talk about it all the d*mn time.

* I support anyone's right to do whatever they want with their own body. But don't tell me what to do with mine. (Well, unless I give you permission... ;-)


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 28, 2011)

geekybibabe said:


> I agree with the ideas already mentioned that:
> 
> * It matters why an individual wants to lose weight. Wanting to lose weight because you hate your fat is the antithesis of size acceptance.
> 
> ...




so is it also against SA if someone makes the same kind of statements about gaining? also is SA just for fat folks?


----------



## geekybibabe (Mar 28, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> so is it also against SA if someone makes the same kind of statements about gaining? also is SA just for fat folks?



I really have no idea. I'm primarily interested in encouraging fat people to accept themselves, and don't have much of an opinion about anything else.


----------



## Jes (Mar 28, 2011)

CastingPearls said:


> I mean if you had a SO that revealed to you that they always had a fantasy to gain weight to whatever their goal is (let's use Bigmac's figure of 1000 lbs. although I really hate the magic numbers of fat) and they were going to embark on making their fantasy a reality, would you still accept it and shut your mouth?
> 
> I'm sincerely curious.



Ah. Well, I think we owe it to people to accept them and their desires. That doesn't mean I want to be with someone who wants to weight 1,000 lbs or smokes weed every day or wants to take a second wife or whatever. Like I said, acceptance isn't the same as agreeing that something sounds like a swell idea, it just means that I accept that you say that's what you want and I don't necessarily try to change your mind about it. I accept that it's your choice and I validate your existence as a human being. Does that make more sense?


----------



## CastingPearls (Mar 28, 2011)

Jes said:


> Ah. Well, I think we owe it to people to accept them and their desires. That doesn't mean I want to be with someone who wants to weight 1,000 lbs or smokes weed every day or wants to take a second wife or whatever. Like I said, acceptance isn't the same as agreeing that something sounds like a swell idea, it just means that I accept that you say that's what you want and I don't necessarily try to change your mind about it. I accept that it's your choice and I validate your existence as a human being. Does that make more sense?


Yep


----------



## Artemisia (Mar 28, 2011)

^I like to think of size acceptance as more of people recognizing their is no inherent moral value in being one size or another. And to be logically consistent there can't be size limits in size acceptance, naturally! 

I think weight loss is a very morally-charged activity in much of western society, however. Bodies have been equated to personify particular virtues and vices and weight loss isn't just a personal choice, it's a social activity that makes a social statement, whether one likes it or not. 

Weight gain is a social statement, too. My first boyfriend was very light, so much so that if he fell ill he worried about not having enough 'padding' to get through it safely. At one point he actively tried to gain, and it was very difficult. But being a very light man, he got compliments when he gained. I thought he looked great at any weight and there was no pressure from me in this respect, but he got it from elsewhere. 

Since size is tied to moral value and seen as reflective of traits like character, personality, work ethic, and intelligence, weight loss can feed into this culture, and work against "too"-fat people who don't want to lose weight. But I think that's just a side-effect of bigotry, not the problem, at bottom. 

Fat isn't equated to a moral vice because some fat people are losing weight (or some thin people are gaining it). Rather, fatness being seen as a moral vice provides incentive for people to engage in body hatred by means of weight loss. And certainly, not all people who lose weight hate their bodies, are caving into fatphobia, are cowards, or hate people who choose to remain fat. But fatphobia and self-hatred are significant driving forces for many who do choose to lose weight, which in turn makes those forces more powerful (to the detriment of those who remain fat, or the dieters who inevitably regain).

Ideally, body size would just be some morally arbitrary physical characteristic, attractive to some and not others, useful for doing some things better than others, different and amazing and unique and part of that lovely equation that is being *human*. That's the goal of size acceptance. The foe of size acceptance is the drive to assign moral value to body size.

(yikes, that was long. I should get back to my poor, neglected short story! :blush


----------



## Tracyarts (Mar 28, 2011)

In the end, it's important to remember that it's about fat people, not fat bodies. People are going to do what they feel they need to do in order to receive some kind of positive benefit. Sometimes that means losing (or gaining) weight. I don't think that Size Acceptance (or advocates thereof) has any business playing body police and making any kind of weight maintinence demands on people who adhere to the principle of "all are equal and worthy no matter what their size their body happens to be". 

Principle and choice are two different things. There are many things I agree with and advocate for in principle, but for various reasons do not wish to choose for myself. If you step outside of the "fat box" it's a bit easier to understand that it's about people in general, not any single person (or their choice).

Tracy


----------



## kioewen (Mar 29, 2011)

geekybibabe said:


> It's obnoxious to spend a lot of time talking about your weight loss journey in size acceptance circles. There are 20 million places where talking about weight loss is the thing to do.



This. This is the key point. There is no shortage of places where being thin is promoted and where weight loss is promoted. There are almost zero places where being full-figured is promoted rather than being thin. Since practically the whole media is thin-supremacist, and almost all communities reproduce this indoctrination, then I'm for there being at least a_ few_ places for the opposite.


----------



## Miss Vickie (Mar 29, 2011)

Tracyarts said:


> In the end, it's important to remember that it's about fat people, not fat bodies. People are going to do what they feel they need to do in order to receive some kind of positive benefit. Sometimes that means losing (or gaining) weight. I don't think that Size Acceptance (or advocates thereof) has any business playing body police and making any kind of weight maintinence demands on people who adhere to the principle of "all are equal and worthy no matter what their size their body happens to be".
> 
> Principle and choice are two different things. There are many things I agree with and advocate for in principle, but for various reasons do not wish to choose for myself. If you step outside of the "fat box" it's a bit easier to understand that it's about people in general, not any single person (or their choice).
> 
> Tracy



I *heart* this. This is exactly what I would have hoped to have written but would have spent pages of verbiage and never come close.

Excellent insight, Tracy. I agree wholeheartedly.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 29, 2011)

geekybibabe said:


> I really have no idea. I'm primarily interested in encouraging fat people to accept themselves, and don't have much of an opinion about anything else.



i understand what your saying. so maybe we need to change size acceptance to fat acceptance just to clarify. otherwise we might come off as being one sided and that won't help us out there very much.

i'm not sure if i even like the word acceptance attached to anything to do with human rights or fat rights. for me it sounds like a grudging movement toward trying to like something thats hated. its like there is really an inbuilt prejudice toward yourself and an understandable or expected prejudice from the outside. maybe one day we can think of something else that actually sounds more self affirming. i personally prefer things dealing with fat rights, and fat political action because i don't always and in every case end up feeling as if i'm dealing with people who are struggling not to hate their bodies or something that rests on the assumption of always not being approved of.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 29, 2011)

Tracyarts said:


> In the end, it's important to remember that it's about fat people, not fat bodies. People are going to do what they feel they need to do in order to receive some kind of positive benefit. Sometimes that means losing (or gaining) weight. I don't think that Size Acceptance (or advocates thereof) has any business playing body police and making any kind of weight maintinence demands on people who adhere to the principle of "all are equal and worthy no matter what their size their body happens to be".
> 
> Principle and choice are two different things. There are many things I agree with and advocate for in principle, but for various reasons do not wish to choose for myself. If you step outside of the "fat box" it's a bit easier to understand that it's about people in general, not any single person (or their choice).
> 
> Tracy



perfection


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 29, 2011)

Lot's of good points in here, a very good idea for a thread. I think McBeth's comments, or at least how I read them, reflect my own view most succinctly.

But, at the risk of offending some, I think it all means that weight loss and Size Acceptance are inextricably tied. That is, each depends as greatly on the other, as can neither can really exist independently...

Moreover, it's sort of funny to me that we actually have a thread on WLS, but outside of that it seems like weight loss is even more of a taboo. I understand why. But it's just kind of strange how it works out that way...


----------



## Lamia (Mar 29, 2011)

This is something I am dealing with right now. I started a weight loss program recently with the intent of just eating healthier and giving myself more structure. I'm conflicted by a desire to lose some weight, yet afraid of losing my identity in the process. 

Plus, having to deal with everyone wanting to offer advice because they're so "GLAD I am finally doing something about my weight". I know they have good intentions, but it pisses me off. It makes me feel guilty for wanting to hit them when they're talking. 

Mostly this comes in the form of my father. His first words to me everytime he sees me is "How much weight have you lost?" which makes me want to stuff a cupcake in my mouth in front of him just to spite him. 

It's always been this way and it's why I am fat in the first place. It's twisted and childish. I am trying to overcome that more than anything else this secret desire to hurt my father by eating, but mostly just to force him into accepting me as I am. 

That's really at the heart of it. This need to be accepted at any size and feeling guilty for wanting to be smaller and feeling like it's giving in to society and my dad.


----------



## Dolce (Mar 29, 2011)

bigmac said:


> To my mind a 1000 pound man or woman and a 70 pound anorexic are similarly situated. In both cases full scale intervention is warranted. In both cases health consequences (including death) are imminent. Just like we wouldn't stand by and watch a 70 pound person starve themselves to death -- we shouldn't just stand by and watch/help/facilitate a 1000 pound person eating themselves to death.




Okay bigmac... first of all my experience in nursing has taught me something. Many, not all, but many people who weigh over 400 lbs. do not sit around eating all day. I have cared for people in their homes who are practically bed-bound and they eat very little compared to what I would eat as an active person. I can go into the hormonal and chemical imbalances that can occur if you would like me to. Secondly, good luck staging full scale interventions for people. You can only help people who want to be helped.


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 30, 2011)

Dolce said:


> ...my experience in nursing has taught me something. not all..people who weigh over 400 lbs...sit around eating all day. I have cared for people in their homes who are practically bed-bound and they eat very little compared to what I would eat as an active person. I can go into the hormonal and chemical imbalances that can occur if you would like me to.



So, basically, you're saying that past a certain point, the situation takes on whole new dimension, from something most people possibly expect to be able manage to a scenario that would seem overwhelming to most people?



Dolce said:


> ...You can only help people who want to be helped.



I have to admit that I agree with that. But it begs the question as how a person can reasonably decide that they want to be helped unless they actually believe help is possible? How would they believe that's possible until it was demonstrated on some level? Do we just leave them to their own devices as to what they may or may not understand?


----------



## Elfcat (Mar 30, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> i understand what your saying. so maybe we need to change size acceptance to fat acceptance just to clarify. otherwise we might come off as being one sided and that won't help us out there very much.



There is, in fact, one very stark instantiation of one-sidedness in the back and forth that happens.

There are ways of pursuing optimal health which prioritize thinness and, for the fat, weight loss. And there are ways of doing this which do not.

I would ask you this. Has anyone here ever heard of someone choosing the way which does not prioritize thinness and weight reduction, or their supporters in such endeavor, saying to those choosing reduction, "You're upset because you're envious of someone who is - in bold, italic and underlined capitals - _*DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT"?*_


----------



## bigmac (Mar 30, 2011)

Dolce said:


> Okay bigmac... first of all my experience in nursing has taught me something. Many, not all, but many people who weigh over 400 lbs. do not sit around eating all day. I have cared for people in their homes who are practically bed-bound and they eat very little compared to what I would eat as an active person. I can go into the hormonal and chemical imbalances that can occur if you would like me to. Secondly, good luck staging full scale interventions for people. You can only help people who want to be helped.



Points taken -- but I still think my main point is valid. A 70 pound anorexic on the verge of death is likely to be provided intensive medical and psychological services. Equally intensive services should be available to the super-obese as well.


----------



## bigmac (Mar 30, 2011)

Yakatori said:


> ...
> 
> But it begs the question as how a person can reasonably decide that they want to be helped unless they actually believe help is possible? How would they believe that's possible until it was demonstrated on some level? Do we just leave them to their own devices as to what they may or may not understand?



Excellent point. Especially since so many super-super-sized people live rather isolated lives.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 30, 2011)

bigmac said:


> Points taken -- but I still think my main point is valid. A 70 pound anorexic on the verge of death is likely to be provided intensive medical and psychological services. Equally intensive services should be available to the super-obese as well.



actually depending on who you ask they are even more intensive.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 30, 2011)

Artemisia said:


> ^I like to think of size acceptance as more of people recognizing their is no inherent moral value in being one size or another. And to be logically consistent there can't be size limits in size acceptance, naturally!
> 
> I think weight loss is a very morally-charged activity in much of western society, however. Bodies have been equated to personify particular virtues and vices and weight loss isn't just a personal choice, it's a social activity that makes a social statement, whether one likes it or not.
> 
> ...



a lot of great points here. but i find that for me there is a conflict between taking the moral judgment out of being fat and then insisting that size acceptance is mainly to be oriented toward the fat alone assumes a judgment that we don't agree with--that fat must always by necessity be the least desirable thing to be. isn't it possible that by changing our own assumptions and negative expectations of our orientation in the world that we can influence other people to look at the issue differently? i mean, orienting ourselves as the only victims within size oriented prejudice might be a barrier when it comes to coming together. and why can't we say to thin people who are made to feel fat, as though its such an awful thing, " so what if you were fat? you are very beautiful even if you are." can't we just take the pejorative out of being fat altogether for everyone? 

i think some of the abuse fat people suffer is from the fear other people have that they might get fat and that they might be the derided outsider. they fear they'll be that stereotype they have in their heads of the lives of fat people, excluded, miserable, unwanted and undesirable. someone said once that people hate the thing most that mosts resembles them. i think a lot of thin people fear their appetites getting away from them. a lot are working against their bodies in unnatural ways and they know its a losing battle. what if we could do something to take the fear away. what if we can make them as well as ourselves finally understand that fat is not the worst thing you could be. its not ugly. its not alien. it doesn't condemn you to a life of quiet desperation. its a comfortable luxurious thing. its lovely. its desirable. it can also be quite healthy if someone pays attention to their own personal health--just like with any other size. but if we continually set ourselves aside as the worst , the only, the most unwanted...? if we did that and made everyone's size okay then no one of any size would find it necessary to diet just for size alone. and shouldn't that be what size acceptance is really about--getting rid of all of the body dysmorphia for everyone. i think it would help anyone of any size who has had their minds enslaved by business interests trying to sell diet aids when it comes to their own image,


----------



## PeanutButterfly (Mar 30, 2011)

Lamia said:


> This is something I am dealing with right now. I started a weight loss program recently with the intent of just eating healthier and giving myself more structure. I'm conflicted by a desire to lose some weight, yet afraid of losing my identity in the process.
> 
> Plus, having to deal with everyone wanting to offer advice because they're so "GLAD I am finally doing something about my weight". I know they have good intentions, but it pisses me off. It makes me feel guilty for wanting to hit them when they're talking.
> 
> ...



I'm going to admit right off the bat that I briefly skimmed the thread so if someone else brought this up before me, my apologies.

But I felt Lamia's post sums up my opinion on weight loss and size acceptance. Others have posted that there are various places to discuss weight loss, this is true. But having been a member of Dims for years and a part of the size acceptance community weight loss is a conflicting and confusing topic for me. I can't talk to my thin friends or non-size accepting friends about it because they wouldn't understand that idea of loss of identity. To them weight loss is always desired and never looked at as more than a way of bettering themselves. For me, and I'm sure for many other BBWs on this board, its a complicated roller coaster where part of you wants to be healthier, find clothes easier, fit into rides at amusement parks but the other part of you wants to stay fat and happy and give society the big middle finger for all it's years of judgment and discrimination. 

I guess I'm kind of rambling. My point is I do think SA and weight loss can go hand in hand. And sometimes I wish we could talk about weight loss here because the women on these boards are the only other people I can think of who would understand the emotional struggles that someone in the SA faces when they try to lose weight.


----------



## geekybibabe (Mar 30, 2011)

A couple of people have commented about the specific issues related to losing weight within the context of the SA movement, and since I was vocal about my views on weight loss talk, I wanted to say:

I love talking about the specific issues we, as members of the size acceptance movement, face when we choose to lose weight. I think I've even posted about that here before. What I don't think is appropriate is remarks like:

"I'm having a good day - I only ate XYZ calories at lunch."
"Wow, you look terrific, have you lost more weight?"
"Do you think it's OK to have this [food item] on the XYZ diet?"
"Oh, I really shouldn't [eat that food]."

Basically, the kind of diet-related talk you hear constantly in mainstream society, the kind that assumes everyone wants to lose weight, that eating is a moral minefield, and that dissects the latest diet fads. Drives me nuts!


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 30, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> ..orienting ourselves as the only victims within size oriented prejudice might be a barrier when it comes to coming together..



Though clearly, we are the biggest victims of the most size-oriented prejudice. Short guys have some hardships. Taller women can be marginalized as well, but only beyond a certain range. And neither with anything approaching the sort of moral implications assigned to fat. Thin people are really only discriminated against beyond an extreme range, and then it's much more like a kind of perverse-sympathy than the type of derision and naked hostility we deal with. But if you are just _a little-bit_ fat, as much 30lbs beyond the standard derivation, it informs your status, it frames all of your behavior in a different context. 



superodalisque said:


> i think some of the abuse fat people suffer is from the fear other people have that they might get fat and that they might be the derided outsider.



Yeah, it's likely connected to very primal fears of any kind of associations with morbidity as well. Like when children of a certain age freak-out at the sight of someone using a wheel-chair or with a missing or deformed limb. I would agree that people can be desensitized to that kind of thing, but not without some persistence and a compelling underlying reason, one that's somehow grounded in their original predisposition. So you can either work on people's hard-wired feelings about death -or- you can approach them like this. While I certainly wouldn't discount either approach, I think it's easy to see where more of us could could more directly engage in being the change we seek.


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 31, 2011)

I know it seems unrelated, but does anyone in here speak & write Spanish fluently?


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 1, 2011)

I've been super busy the last couple of days and haven't had a chance to read through the thread until now. Lots here to reply to, and I don't have the time (or energy - I'm battling a wicked cold right now!) to do so individually right now, but I wanted to make some brief initial comments. 

The first thing I want to clarify is that I was only talking about weight loss on oneself, not trying to encourage others to do so which clearly goes against the spirit of SA.

Whoever said that there is a difference between fat & size acceptance (I think this was Jes?), I completely agree with you. I hate to make generalizations but fat acceptance seems a lot more limited .. both in terms of acceptance of thin people/anybody not considered "fat enough" and also in palatability to the outside world. There seems to be a general consensus amongst supporters of fat acceptance that fat is better in some way. I don't really agree with that. Another time this similar discussion came up someone on here (I want to say Tooz but don't quote me on that) said that to her, size acceptance was about taking size out of the equation when evaluating the worth of the person. I liked that a lot, and ultimately it sums up how I feel. Fat isn't bad.. but it's also not good.. it just is. To me, the ultimate sign of true size acceptance is not being seen as a fat person (good or bad) but to just be seen as a person.

I'll add more when I have a chance!


----------



## Artemisia (Apr 1, 2011)

^I have to disagree, I've been in fat acceptance for a while and I don't think this 'general consensus' that fat is better in some way actually exists. If there are any general consenses in fat acceptance, they are: 

1. Fat does not necessarily mean unhealthy
2. Fat bias and shame will not make fat people thinner
3. It's nearly impossible to make a naturally fat person permanently thinner. 
4. The 'obesity epidemic' is a moral panic, with all the frightening social implications thereof
5. Thin privilege exists in Western society, and is spreading rapidly around the globe. (there was a very recent study out about this, actually)

I've heard lots of _other_ people outside fat acceptance try to claim that fat activists discourage or disparage thin allies, but nowhere on any major fat acceptance blog, book, or article have I seen this actually reflected. It's a strawman argument used to disparage fat acceptance.

Most people in fat acceptance consider themselves, first and foremost, size acceptance activists. However, fat acceptance is a subset of size acceptance in that it focuses more on the issues having to do with the stigma, discrimination, and so on levied against fat people in particular. It's the focus of its energies, and doesn't mean whatsoever that fat acceptance activists exclude thin people from also focusing on issues of fat bias. 

Size acceptance, more broadly, spreads energies between issues inherent to _many different_ sizes -- how naturally underweight people are discriminated against (told to "just eat a sandwich" and so on), how smaller men are discriminated against in many areas of life, how very tall women are seen as intimidating, how women of 'average' size often have the hardest time finding clothing of nearly any size, how plane seat widths are uncomfortable for most women, even thin women with broad hips, and many men, and so on and so forth. 

Fat acceptance doesn't deny any of those things are problems and, in fact, we do talk about them in the general context of size discrimination. However, our focus is on fat issues, fat stigma, and fat bias. Why is that? Because there's a greater stigma -- note I said greater, not attempting to claim stigma on the other end doesn't exist -- being a fat person in Western society at this moment in history, than being a thin person in Western society at this moment in history. 

Could it change? Yes. Does it look like it's going to change anytime soon? No, it looks like it's getting worse (FDA approval of lowering BMI cutoff for Lapband, "Let's Move!", airlines getting bolder with two-seat policies, countries like NZ outright banning people over a particular BMI from immigrating, BMI standards being put in place for certain surgeries, BMI standards being put in place for adoption, I could go on...). Does thin privilege exist? Yes. These are all the issues inherent to fat acceptance that, while still a part of size acceptance, aren't focused on in particular by general size acceptance activists. 

In short, I've never met a serious fat acceptance activist who wasn't a size acceptance activist that chose to focus on fat issues in particular. Mischaracterizing fat acceptance doesn't advance the general cause of size acceptance, btw. We're all allies, and this infighting just stalls progress.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 1, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> I've been super busy the last couple of days and haven't had a chance to read through the thread until now. Lots here to reply to, and I don't have the time (or energy - I'm battling a wicked cold right now!) to do so individually right now, but I wanted to make some brief initial comments.
> 
> The first thing I want to clarify is that I was only talking about weight loss on oneself, not trying to encourage others to do so which clearly goes against the spirit of SA.
> 
> ...




i have to say that i am often disappointed at the open hostility aimed at people who were once fat or are still fat and have lost weight by the so called size acceptance community. its one thing that makes me distrust a lot of people in it. it also makes me feel more unlikely to participate if i have to share space with people who want acceptance for themselves but deny it to others. its not something i can't easily reconcile.


----------



## Emma (Apr 1, 2011)

I don't think you have to be fat to want fat people to be accepted for who they are. Therefore I think that it is perfectly fine to want fat acceptance but to be losing weight. You've got to be happy with who you are but I don't think that makes a difference to your views.


----------



## Artemisia (Apr 1, 2011)

CurvyEm said:


> I don't think you have to be fat to want fat people to be accepted for who they are. Therefore I think that it is perfectly fine to want fat acceptance but to be losing weight. You've got to be happy with who you are but I don't think that makes a difference to your views.



Completely agreed. I know a few (not many, but a few) very solid fat acceptance allies who are currently either dieting to lose weight or are maintaining a lower weight than their setpoint. 

They're still awesome advocates. Weight loss -- and what goes into it -- was their own choice. They still understand how weight loss and not losing while fat is often moralized and tied into our apparent worth as people, and they appreciate that moralization of weight loss or refusal to lose weight is wrong. 

That being said, we don't live and make choices in a vacuum. And when a fat person chooses to lose weight that can be, and often is, seen as a reflection of something good about them and something bad about people like me who don't choose to lose weight. That's because of fatphobia, however; in the relative absence of fatphobia weight changes would be as morally charged as changing the color of one's hair.

I don't think people shouldn't lose weight if they want to *because* we live in a fatphobic society. I just think it's important to note that 

1) Creating spaces that are, unlike 90% of the rest of the internet, clear of weight loss talk is not bigoted. People who want to lose weight can certainly participate in a no-diet-talk community by simply refraining from talking about their diet. Most fat acceptance spaces aren't "no dieters," they're "no diet talk." It's a different thing. 

2) Observing that many people choose to lose weight because fatness is seen as disgusting, unhealthy, or indicative of some moral failing, doesn't mean the person making that observation hates people who lose weight, or desires to exclude dieters from their space.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 1, 2011)

Artemisia said:


> ^I have to disagree, I've been in fat acceptance for a while and I don't think this 'general consensus' that fat is better in some way actually exists. If there are any general consenses in fat acceptance, they are: ...*SNIPPED*... We're all allies, and this infighting just stalls progress.



I really appreciate this post. My main experiences with fat acceptance have come from within this site.. maybe this has given me a narrow point of view on it. I think I tend to believe that most people on Dims are here because they, in some way, support fat acceptance.. but I guess that's not necessarily true.. this site is about sexuality first and foremost. I'm not saying that thats a bad thing.. just that its probably not the best judge of the cause in general.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 1, 2011)

bigmac said:


> To my mind a 1000 pound man or woman and a 70 pound anorexic are similarly situated. In both cases full scale intervention is warranted. In both cases health consequences (including death) are imminent. Just like we wouldn't stand by and watch a 70 pound person starve themselves to death -- we shouldn't just stand by and watch/help/facilitate a 1000 pound person eating themselves to death.



The problem with this line of thinking is that life is never that black and white. It's easy to say 1000 pounds because most people are not healthy, comfortable or happy at that weight. But what if someone isn't 1000 pounds but still isn't healthy, comfortable or happy? What if they're 950? They don't need intervention? So, lets say we then decide anyone 950+ needs an intervention.. what about someone who is 700 but only 5 foot and therefore experiencing similar mobility & health issues.. do they need an intervention to? It's a slippery slope. 

Who exactly is "we," who is staging the "interventions"? SA supporters? Or the general populace? I'm pretty sure the general population would cite the intervention cut off much lower than most of us would.. 300 pounds probably.. maybe 400. & we know plenty of happy & healthy 300 or 400+ people. Playing the numbers game is always a lose lose situation because people and situations are all different.

But, this is all besides the point because SA isn't about encouraging or intervening.. it's about acceptance and respect. Who are we to say what people should and shouldn't weigh? That, right there, goes against the very spirit of what size ACCEPTANCE is all about. I don't have any desire to stage an intervention for anyone. I hope that resources are made available so that if the 70 pound and/or 1000 pound individual (or anyone in between) is dealing with a food issue they can get the help they need, but it's not my place.. or yours either.. to tell them they shouldn't weigh what they do.


----------



## Jon Blaze (Apr 1, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> The problem with this line of thinking is that life is never that black and white. It's easy to say 1000 pounds because most people are not healthy, comfortable or happy at that weight. But what if someone isn't 1000 pounds but still isn't healthy, comfortable or happy? What if they're 950? They don't need intervention? So, lets say we then decide anyone 950+ needs an intervention.. what about someone who is 700 but only 5 foot and therefore experiencing similar mobility & health issues.. do they need an intervention to? It's a slippery slope.
> 
> Who exactly is "we," who is staging the "interventions"? SA supporters? Or the general populace? I'm pretty sure the general population would cite the intervention cut off much lower than most of us would.. 300 pounds probably.. maybe 400. & we know plenty of happy & healthy 300 or 400+ people. Playing the numbers game is always a lose lose situation because people and situations are all different.
> 
> But, this is all besides the point because SA isn't about encouraging or intervening.. it's about acceptance and respect. Who are we to say what people should and shouldn't weigh? That, right there, goes against the very spirit of what size ACCEPTANCE is all about. I don't have any desire to stage an intervention for anyone. I hope that resources are made available so that if the 70 pound and/or 1000 pound individual (or anyone in between) is dealing with a food issue they can get the help they need, but it's not my place.. or yours either.. to tell them they shouldn't weigh what they do.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 2, 2011)

Elfcat said:


> There is, in fact, one very stark instantiation of one-sidedness in the back and forth that happens.
> 
> There are ways of pursuing optimal health which prioritize thinness and, for the fat, weight loss. And there are ways of doing this which do not.
> 
> I would ask you this. Has anyone here ever heard of someone choosing the way which does not prioritize thinness and weight reduction, or their supporters in such endeavor, saying to those choosing reduction, "You're upset because you're envious of someone who is - in bold, italic and underlined capitals - _*DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT"?*_



i get where your coming from. and it IS a bad assumption for people to make that someone is upset because someone is doing something about it, meaning their weight. i'm with you on that. but unfortunately there is something to that. i hate it but most fat folk i know just don't like being fat very often. they may want acceptance and self love but they'd still rather be thin at least thinner because of all of the prejudice and other inconveniences they might associate with it for themselves. lets face it fat is NOT for everybody. unfortunately some folks often think they are powerless and are always going to be that size anyway. so sometimes for them acceptance is like some kind of consolation prize. otherwise why WOULD it be so upsetting that someone else lost weight if they wanted and they are still the same person and still supportive of folks who are still fat. i have quite a few friends who have or are working on losing and they get a lot of hostility when people notice a change. they also expect it because they've heard the talk about others before they started losing. they were often even a part of it. 

i don't think its a good enough answer to say that we can't be size positive toward smaller people because people aren't size positive toward us. i'm not sure size acceptance should be a one size fits all thing. i don't think thin people should make it that and i don't think fat people should make it that either because either way you support some kind of intolerance if you do.


----------



## Tracyarts (Apr 3, 2011)

" This. This is the key point. There is no shortage of places where being thin is promoted and where weight loss is promoted. There are almost zero places where being full-figured is promoted rather than being thin. Since practically the whole media is thin-supremacist, and almost all communities reproduce this indoctrination, then I'm for there being at least a few places for the opposite. "

The problem is exactly that. THIN is being promoted. 

Not all fat people who want to lose weight have any desire to become thin. My goal weight is still within the "morbidly obese" category. Finding support from people (especially healthcare and fitness professionals) who can wrap their minds around the fact that a fat person may not be interested in striving towards thin is extremely difficult to find. Because it takes somebody who *is* size accepting to understand that somebody can be happy to remain fat, but just wish to become less so.

Tracy


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 3, 2011)

Tracyarts said:


> " This. This is the key point. There is no shortage of places where being thin is promoted and where weight loss is promoted. There are almost zero places where being full-figured is promoted rather than being thin. Since practically the whole media is thin-supremacist, and almost all communities reproduce this indoctrination, then I'm for there being at least a few places for the opposite. "
> 
> The problem is exactly that. THIN is being promoted.
> 
> ...



i agree with that totally, but that doesn't make it SA. its Fat Acceptance only. Size Acceptance would promote all sizes equally no matter what the past had been and put them all on an equal footing. by necessity when you say that fat people need special promotion, which i personally agree that they do, you are saying that the inherent equality thats supposed to be the basis of Size Acceptance is not and will not be there. my point is there needs to be a space of equality and i think SA is it. Fat acceptance is something for people having a hard time of it being fat in a thin world. for me SA is a kind of ideal place where we create and practice the reality we want. i don't feel its really possible that we can do that if we already project ourselves as somehow being less than someone who is thin when it comes to SA.


----------



## Miss Vickie (Apr 3, 2011)

Tracyarts said:


> " This. This is the key point. There is no shortage of places where being thin is promoted and where weight loss is promoted. There are almost zero places where being full-figured is promoted rather than being thin. Since practically the whole media is thin-supremacist, and almost all communities reproduce this indoctrination, then I'm for there being at least a few places for the opposite. "
> 
> The problem is exactly that. THIN is being promoted.
> 
> ...



This. Yes. I've recently had a health scare that can only tangentially be related to my size, pseudotumor cerebri, which is more common in women in their 30's and 40's who carry "excess" weight. My neuro is funny because she knows I've had WLS and lost a lot of weight and says, "I don't understand why you didn't have this when you were over 300 pounds. Why NOW???" which I can easily answer -- the stress of working full time and going to graduate school, dealing with my brother's death, problems with my teenage daughter, and the list goes on. The stress level I experience on a daily basis is astounding.

But I'm also seeing an acupuncturist/PT who is justifying her treatment with my insurance company based on my "need and desire" to lose weight. She, the alternative practitioner, made the decision that I needed to lose weight (without talking to me) even though I feel as though I'm at the end of a long haul to lose the amount of weight that I wanted to lose. But because I'm still "obese" or "overweight" by the charts, I "must" desire to lose more weight. I think that's total crap but it is, sadly, a common attitude both in medicine and in our culture. 

For many of us, we desire to lose only enough weight to manage our comorbidities and regain some mobility, nothing more. That leaves us little in common with most of the dieting culture who wants to be a size 2. We're often at the "before" end of the spectrum, whereas for many of us, we consider ourselves the "after".


----------



## CastingPearls (Apr 3, 2011)

Tracyarts said:


> Not all fat people who want to lose weight have any desire to become thin. My goal weight is still within the "morbidly obese" category. Finding support from people (especially healthcare and fitness professionals) who can wrap their minds around the fact that a fat person may not be interested in striving towards thin is extremely difficult to find. Because it takes somebody who *is* size accepting to understand that somebody can be happy to remain fat, but just wish to become less so.
> 
> Tracy





Miss Vickie said:


> For many of us, we desire to lose only enough weight to manage our comorbidities and regain some mobility, nothing more. That leaves us little in common with most of the dieting culture who wants to be a size 2. We're often at the "before" end of the spectrum, whereas for many of us, we consider ourselves the "after".



THIS is exactly where I stand right now. I have no desire to be thin. I must lose to improve symptoms from a pre-existing condition and also for more personal reasons but I've never hated my fat, my body or fat on other bodies. I love my body in its entirety. 

I feel isolated and judged by fat people who think or intimate that I am betraying them and myself, and I feel approval (which I deeply resent) from people who think 'I'm on the right path', or 'taking charge of my health' or the worst of all, 'good girl', etc. which is just as isolating because in both senses, I feel my own personal power is diminished because of the pressure of approval or disapproval from others.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 4, 2011)

The last three posts more or less sum up why I started this thread. I didn't want to make this thread about my personal ax to grind, so I apologize in advance if it seems that way.. I'm just trying to open up the discussion.

I don't know.. I find the whole thing very frustrating and ultimately counterproductive. I mean.. I get it.. I wouldn't want to come on here* and see posts about the grapefruit diet or Ally pills or anything either.. but it's the resistance to healthy change I don't really get. It doesn't seem to fit into the spirit of SA at all, in my opinion.. and clearly, a lot of people agree with me, so why is it that its still so hush hush? I think a lot of it has to do with most fat sites being sexuality driven as opposed to activism driven but that doesn't stop me from resenting it.

In our everyday lives we have to face the thin = better attitude, but is community really any different? When we log on here we are constantly bombarded by bigger = better. In our 'real lives' nothing short of starvation is acceptable, but here everything except gleeful gluttony is looked down upon. It's just the other side of the same shitty coin. Yes, it's a breath of fresh air.. but that gets old after awhile.. where do we go when that honeymoon is over? Where's the happy medium? Where can we be 100% up front about our size, our feelings and our health without being laughed at, hushed, ignored or encouraged in another direction? 

Over the course of the last year I've started making healthier eating & exercise choices and as a byproduct of that, have lost about 40 pounds. I didn't hate myself at 350, I don't hate myself at 308, and I don't think I'll hate myself if/when I lose more weight. I do feel physically better though.. I can walk up a flight of stairs without getting winded, I can stand at work for 8 hours without my feet hurting, I don't have to worry about my blood sugar skyrocketing or dipping down too low anymore, etc. But, I still have work to do.. I'd like to be able to jog a mile, I'd like to learn to cook healthier meals, I'd like to lower my resting heart rate, etc. It's really not about looking a certain way for me.. it's about living a long and healthy life. I didn't feel comfortable or healthy at 350 pounds, and I don't feel entirely comfortable or healthy at 308 either. I don't want to be 120 pounds, but I would love to be 250 again.. that's the last time I remember really feeling like I was in pretty good shape. But, what do you think my doctor would say if I told her that my goal was 250? That's about 90-130 pounds more than is considered 'healthy' for my height. Or what do you think my friends would say if I wanted to be a size 22? To most of them being a size 14+ is a fate worse than death. As it stands, I don't see a single place.. IRL or online, that is truly, 100% accepting of people regardless of their past, current & potential future size. It's always seen as being positive or negative in some way, and there's always some sort of morality attached to it. We're either lazy and gluttonous pigs who can't control themselves or we're traitors to the cause. When does all the body politics stop? Where's the body neutrality? When will character and appearance be fully separated? When do we get to feel connected and positive about our bodies in a way that isn't attached to our sex appeal? To quote myself from this thread (I think?) when do we get to be seen as people, not FAT (negative - or positive) people?

*here = all online fat community sites, not just Dims


----------



## butch (Apr 5, 2011)

One thing about your post above confuses me, you say it is about all of the fat online world, yet it doesn't describe the fat online world I know at all-it isn't mostly about sex, it isn't all about rejecting weight loss talk, and it isn't about bigger is better and gluttony all the way.

I don't even spend all that much time at the various sites, but I know you can go to the fierce, freethinking fatties site if you want support for talking about being a FA supporter and someone losing weight. I know you can go to the Fat Nutrionist blog if you want to hear about being healthy in terms of food choices and the rest. There's a fat athlete blog, if you want to know how to improve your fitness level. The fat community online is as varied as the people who come to this site and debate what SA should be.




The SA/FA world I live in, both online and off, is never as monolithic as it often gets presented in these debates. Plus, it is still a grassroots movement, since NAAFA does not have anywhere near the reach of the NAACP or the Human Rights Campaign, for example, so I don't quite understand why people don't just do their own thing in SA/FA, and create the kind of size acceptance they believe we should have. There is no cabal of fatties and FAs that will stifle your voice, and keep you from finding other like-minded folks who want to share the good news about size acceptance as you see it. If people continue to believe the equation that Dimensions=the #1 source for Size Acceptance, you will continue to think that there is a very narrow idea of what SA/FA is. If people get out there and see the variety of blogs, tumblr accounts, message boards and the like, then they can see that the movement has space for fatties who want to lose weight, non FA-allies, and the like, regardless of how some folks in the movement feel about it.

It will only be what people make of it, so if you want something, go out and make it what you want. Nobody in SA/FA has the power to stop you.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 5, 2011)

I'm genuinely glad to hear that it's not the SA/FA world you live in.. that's a wonderful thing! But, that doesn't discount the fact that some of us - a lot even - don't see that type of thing on this site or others. Maybe it's the sites we've found or are choosing to use, but it doesn't make it less of our reality. Dimensions IS one of the main fat sites on the internet.. maybe it's not a good place to judge SA from, but a lot of people do because it draws so many members and its been around so long. As far as starting our own group or whatever, there actually have been a few attempts at starting FB groups, message boards, new websites, etc. by members here and none of them seem to take off.. it's like without the draw of the paysite world and sexuality aspect, there seems to be very few interested people. The only exception I've really found to that is with the fat fashion blogs which also tend to be about very little except the fashion. But, don't mistake this for purely criticism of Dims or other sites.. its about the general attitude of people involved that I've found to be frustrating.. and if you look up thread, I'm not the only one. But, I didn't start this thread to bitch.. I started it to open a conversation. I want to hear other peoples opinions, and suggestions are certainly welcome too.. but I think just saying "make it what you want" is a cop out.. maybe SA needs an overhaul?


----------



## LovelyLiz (Apr 5, 2011)

But then the question still remains, if SA needs an overhaul, who is going to do the overhauling? And then we're back to butch's point that SA is what we all make it (and the "we" is meant very broadly).


----------



## Artemisia (Apr 5, 2011)

^Agreed with *butch* and *mcbeth*. Social movements are best defined by the members, not by a subset on behalf of everyone else. There's the question of meaningfulness, of course -- there has to be *some* common ground on which we all can stand. In my experience in SA, this common ground is generally defined by the following points:

1) Sizism is wrong -- that is, size does not convey moral virtue or vice
2) You cannot tell if someone is healthy or unhealthy by the size of his/her body

Just that first statement alone is pretty powerful. It removes the most virulent 'shoulds' from the language about fat -- that is, the commandments that one 'should' lose weight to prove that he/she is a good person/lover/employee/daughter/student/teacher/etc. Rather, it removes the negative moral connotations of being a fat person/lover/employee/etc. 

The second statement covers the rest of the 'shoulds' -- for instance, a dieter/gainer can be SA, in a vacuum. But if they think their experience extends to others in a more general sense, both concluding others should change their size as a result and promulgating that belief -- they are not SA. That is, the non-SA might not think his/her fat neighbor is 'bad' for being fat, but may still think his/her neighbor 'should' lose weight for: health, community, family, future, country, etc.

Given this common ground, the boundaries of membership are broad and allow for much diversity of political thought, personal choices, and so on. Which makes for a good, strong social movement, IMHO. People of size are everywhere, and we are every kind of person. So SA should be everywhere, open to every kind of person, as long as we share that barest common ground without which SA is rendered meaningless.


----------



## butch (Apr 5, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> I'm genuinely glad to hear that it's not the SA/FA world you live in.. that's a wonderful thing! But, that doesn't discount the fact that some of us - a lot even - don't see that type of thing on this site or others. Maybe it's the sites we've found or are choosing to use, but it doesn't make it less of our reality. Dimensions IS one of the main fat sites on the internet.. maybe it's not a good place to judge SA from, but a lot of people do because it draws so many members and its been around so long. As far as starting our own group or whatever, there actually have been a few attempts at starting FB groups, message boards, new websites, etc. by members here and none of them seem to take off.. it's like without the draw of the paysite world and sexuality aspect, there seems to be very few interested people. The only exception I've really found to that is with the fat fashion blogs which also tend to be about very little except the fashion. But, don't mistake this for purely criticism of Dims or other sites.. its about the general attitude of people involved that I've found to be frustrating.. and if you look up thread, I'm not the only one. But, I didn't start this thread to bitch.. I started it to open a conversation. I want to hear other peoples opinions, and suggestions are certainly welcome too.. but I think just saying "make it what you want" is a cop out.. maybe SA needs an overhaul?



I was merely countering your statement that you intially said in your footnote that:
"*here = all online fat community sites, not just Dims" 

Glad to know that indeed you weren't making a blanket statement about the entire online fat world.

As to the rest, I'll have to concur with McBeth and Artemisia.


----------



## KHayes666 (Apr 5, 2011)

My g/f wants to lose 30 to 40 pounds to get ready for our Vegas Bash trip. I'm going to help her any way I can because I walked around in the 115-125 degree heat last year and it wasn't pleasant.

Just because she wants to lose weight doesn't mean she's against fat people or thinks her current size is disgusting.

So yeah, no shame in being apart of size acceptance and wanting to lose weight.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 5, 2011)

Artemisia said:


> ^Agreed with *butch* and *mcbeth*. Social movements are best defined by the members, not by a subset on behalf of everyone else. There's the question of meaningfulness, of course -- there has to be *some* common ground on which we all can stand. In my experience in SA, this common ground is generally defined by the following points:
> 
> 1) Sizism is wrong -- that is, size does not convey moral virtue or vice
> 2) You cannot tell if someone is healthy or unhealthy by the size of his/her body
> ...



I don't have much else to say other than I appreciate this post, and I definitely agree with everything you've said.. my point was more that it sometimes seems to me (and apparently others) that many people involved in SA don't hold this basic belief because it sometimes feels as though people intentionally losing or gaining are seen as being somehow "less than" those who are at their size unintentionally. I'm not saying its necessarily true.. I haven't polled everyone.. just saying that some people feel that way. I believe I actively promote the kind of SA you've just described on this board and in my everyday life, but I guess my ultimate question is.. how do we get other people (especially those who claim to already believe in SA) to agree on this basic definition and to stop marginalizing those who may challenge their idea of SA, such as those who are intentionally changing their body (whether it be gaining or losing)?



butch said:


> I was merely countering your statement that you intially said in your footnote that:
> "*here = all online fat community sites, not just Dims"
> 
> Glad to know that indeed you weren't making a blanket statement about the entire online fat world.
> ...



Sorry, I don't think I was clear.. I meant all the fat sites I'm personally involved in, not all fat sites that exist. I clearly haven't been to all of them, so I can't speak about those, just the ones I've been to. I was thinking about this thread today, and I've more or less come to the conclusion that most of the sites I've used extensively have been about sexuality, not SA, first and foremost, so maybe I have a skewed view of what SA really looks like. I'm not saying fat sexuality is bad in any way, just that it complicates the whole thing.. and then when you look at the fetishes that are often tied to the fat community, especially feederism, it makes it even less clear who is here for what and exactly who believes what, if that makes any sense.


----------



## Artemisia (Apr 5, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> I don't have much else to say other than I appreciate this post, and I definitely agree with everything you've said.. my point was more that it sometimes seems to me (and apparently others) that many people involved in SA don't hold this basic belief because it sometimes feels as though people intentionally losing or gaining are somehow "less than" those who are at their size unintentionally. I'm not saying its necessarily true.. I haven't polled everyone.. just saying that some people feel that way. I believe I actively promote the kind of SA you've just described on this board and in my everyday life, but I guess my ultimate question is.. how do we get other people (especially those who claim to already believe in SA) to agree on this basic definition and to stop marginalizing those who may challenge their idea of SA, such as those who are intentionally changing their body (whether it be gaining or losing.)



Thanks for your reply. I don't think we can make anyone believe in one basic definition of SA -- there are going to be some people who promote SA but actively denigrate intentional weight loss/gain because they strictly adhere to 'size acceptance' = 'accepting one's natural size (whatever that might be, but isn't controlled through intentional gain/loss but rather intuitive eating/moderate exercise)'. 

There are also going to be people who define 'size acceptance' = 'accepting the size you want to be/got to intentionally.' 

I think we all inhabit the common ground mentioned in my post above, but there are many in size acceptance who cite studies which claim that weight is 77% hereditary, weight-related conditions are predominantly genetic, dieting has a long-term failure rate of 95%, and HAES can produce improvements in health that aren't tied to significant weight loss/gain. Hence why some believe that buying into the diet culture in any sense -- aesthetically, or in the name of health -- is futile at best, often harmful to the individual, and harmful to the community at worst. Size acceptance is, to them, about rejecting size bigotry, but also about coming to reality with regards to bodysize. 

There's no problem with people adopting a subset ideology of the common ground we all share. As long as we have the rejection of size-related bigotry at heart, we're on the same team.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 5, 2011)

mcbeth said:


> But then the question still remains, if SA needs an overhaul, who is going to do the overhauling? And then we're back to butch's point that SA is what we all make it (and the "we" is meant very broadly).



I sort of addressed this in the other post I just wrote, but I guess I don't really have a complete answer for it. I feel like I already promote the kind of SA we're talking about.. the basic belief that any/all sizes are acceptable.. but how do we make others in this community believe and promote THAT kind of size acceptance? I don't know.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 5, 2011)

It sounds like we're all more or less trying to make the same point.. I apologize for the confusion and for coming off bitchy.. certainly wasn't my intention. I'm glad that we're able to have these discussions on here. Also, if you guys wouldn't mind, I'd love a PM with some links to the SA sites you guys have mentioned.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 6, 2011)

Artemisia said:


> Thanks for your reply. I don't think we can make anyone believe in one basic definition of SA -- there are going to be some people who promote SA but actively denigrate intentional weight loss/gain because they strictly adhere to 'size acceptance' = 'accepting one's natural size (whatever that might be, but isn't controlled through intentional gain/loss but rather intuitive eating/moderate exercise)'.
> 
> There are also going to be people who define 'size acceptance' = 'accepting the size you want to be/got to intentionally.'
> 
> ...




i think that the "natural size" idea is problematic, at least it is for me. i know my natural size might have been to be 120lbs if my mother had not been monkeying around with my metabolism when i was 5. it was not my choice when she decided i was too thin and gave me something that actually caused damage to my thyroid. over the years i have always loved being a big woman. now that the symptoms from my thyroid damage have forced me to keep it at a normal level i have had to come to terms with being my "natural size " again. but for me internally it would feel very unnatural to be a size 8. i don't know if i'll ever be that slim but i definitely don't look forward to the prospect. i don't like the idea that other people , an accident of birth or biology should have to determine the size i get to be. if i didn't pass out, lose all energy and get severe vertigo to the point that i can't keep my balance when i walk, i'd have never considered the hormone therapy i now have to take. i still love my somewhat smaller body but its not my choice its my natural reality. i reject the notion that if i found a way that i could be at my largest size again that anyone could make me feel that it was unnatural and i wasn't allowed to change back to that size if i wanted. the only size natural to someone is they size they feel natural at. it the size that fits their spirit and ethos not someone else's be it from a fat or a thin standpoint. i guess the question that begs is natural to whom? so if someone denigrates intentional weight loss they'd also have to do the same for intentional weight gain. what does it say if people who do truly love being fat enough to gain are not allowed to? the problem i have with the kind of SA that tells people what size they have to be to be "acceptable". everyone is acceptable however they come under any circumstances whether they want to change it or stay the same. i think its time we locked the fat police and the thin police out of people's business and truly appreciate each other for who and what we are and whatever it is any of us want to become. its time to stop guilting people into being either thin or fat and let them really be who they want to be.


----------



## ashmamma84 (Apr 6, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> The last three posts more or less sum up why I started this thread. I didn't want to make this thread about my personal ax to grind, so I apologize in advance if it seems that way.. I'm just trying to open up the discussion.
> 
> I don't know.. I find the whole thing very frustrating and ultimately counterproductive. I mean.. I get it.. I wouldn't want to come on here* and see posts about the grapefruit diet or Ally pills or anything either.. but it's the resistance to healthy change I don't really get. It doesn't seem to fit into the spirit of SA at all, in my opinion.. and clearly, a lot of people agree with me, so why is it that its still so hush hush? I think a lot of it has to do with most fat sites being sexuality driven as opposed to activism driven but that doesn't stop me from resenting it.
> 
> ...



I wish I could rep you for a fantastic post. I don't desire to ever be thin or SS (and it never ceases to for that matter and it seems like there really isn't a place that one can discuss the reality of being fat/super fat no holds barred. It seems like there's a lot of sensitivity surrounding issues for whatever reason. 

Also, it always sort of makes me chuckle when I read how a person used to be a certain size and never thought they would become an ssbbw yet there they are. Being super fat isn't what everyone has in mind. I know personally its not for me, but at the same time I do like being plus size. I like living a healthy, active life and as it stands there isn't a place for fat folk who are, in that way, like minded. Must.find.balance.


----------



## bobsjers (Apr 6, 2011)

What gets me is that people who have been in the size acceptance movement for a while should know that diets do not work. In my many years of chatting with people in the movement, I have come to the conclusion that diets cause weight gain, not eating. It is amazing, someone tries the Atkins diet, then says the "Atkins" did not work. Then they try the South Beach Diet, and say that the "South Beach" did not work. Did anyone ever think, it might be the LAST word that does not work, not the first word(s)? No diet, not even if you change the name to "lifestyle change" works. This includes surgery, diet pills, etc.

Talking to someone who thinks diets work is like talking to a child who still believes in Santa Claus. You don't want to burst thier bubble, but at the same time, it is impossible to have a meaningful conversation. They always say, "this time I am going to keep it off." Did they plan to regaining it all the previous diets? People have a better chance of winning the lottery than keeping the weight off.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 6, 2011)

ashmamma84 said:


> I wish I could rep you for a fantastic post. I don't desire to ever be thin or SS (and it never ceases to for that matter and it seems like there really isn't a place that one can discuss the reality of being fat/super fat no holds barred. It seems like there's a lot of sensitivity surrounding issues for whatever reason.
> 
> Also, it always sort of makes me chuckle when I read how a person used to be a certain size and never thought they would become an ssbbw yet there they are. Being super fat isn't what everyone has in mind. I know personally its not for me, but at the same time I do like being plus size. I like living a healthy, active life and as it stands there isn't a place for fat folk who are, in that way, like minded. Must.find.balance.



they wouldn't let me rep you. its so weird that you aren't allowed by SA standards to take hold of your own body and be what you want to be, whatever that is. i think the key word especially for women is control. when do we get to control our own body? when do we finally get to make the decision for ourselves? no movement at the moment seems willing to allow is to.


----------



## KHayes666 (Apr 6, 2011)

bobsjers said:


> What gets me is that people who have been in the size acceptance movement for a while should know that diets do not work. In my many years of chatting with people in the movement, I have come to the conclusion that diets cauhttp://www.dimensionsmagazine.com/forums/images/editor/smilie.gifse weight gain, not eating. It is amazing, someone tries the Atkins diet, then says the "Atkins" did not work. Then they try the South Beach Diet, and say that the "South Beach" did not work. Did anyone ever think, it might be the LAST word that does not work, not the first word(s)? No diet, not even if you change the name to "lifestyle change" works. This includes surgery, diet pills, etc.
> 
> Talking to someone who thinks diets work is like talking to a child who still believes in Santa Claus. You don't want to burst thier bubble, but at the same time, it is impossible to have a meaningful conversation. They always say, "this time I am going to keep it off." Did they plan to regaining it all the previous diets? People have a better chance of winning the lottery than keeping the weight off.



Diets do work actually.

One reason they wouldn't work is some people are just too lazy to stay on them. Others suffer a freak injury or an emotional loss that damages their motivation. Doesn't mean the diet doesn't work, it means something happened to someone mentally.

Either way the point is with proper motivation diets DO work. Extreme fasting (starving yourself) and purging are very unhealthy but limiting your dinner to one helping instead of 2 isn't unhealthy or unreasonable at all.


----------



## bobsjers (Apr 6, 2011)

KHayes666 said:


> Diets do work actually.
> 
> One reason they wouldn't work is some people are just too lazy to stay on them. Others suffer a freak injury or an emotional loss that damages their motivation. Doesn't mean the diet doesn't work, it means something happened to someone mentally.
> 
> Either way the point is with proper motivation diets DO work. Extreme fasting (starving yourself) and purging are very unhealthy but limiting your dinner to one helping instead of 2 isn't unhealthy or unreasonable at all.



Diets work 3% of the time over time. If Chevrolet made a car that started only 3% of the time and then blamed the problem on user error, do you think they could get away with that?


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 6, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> i think that the "natural size" idea is problematic, at least it is for me. i know my natural size might have been to be 120lbs if my mother had not been monkeying around with my metabolism when i was 5. it was not my choice when she decided i was too thin and gave me something that actually caused damage to my thyroid. over the years i have always loved being a big woman. now that the symptoms from my thyroid damage have forced me to keep it at a normal level i have had to come to terms with being my "natural size " again. but for me internally it would feel very unnatural to be a size 8. i don't know if i'll ever be that slim but i definitely don't look forward to the prospect. i don't like the idea that other people , an accident of birth or biology should have to determine the size i get to be. if i didn't pass out, lose all energy and get severe vertigo to the point that i can't keep my balance when i walk, i'd have never considered the hormone therapy i now have to take. i still love my somewhat smaller body but its not my choice its my natural reality. i reject the notion that if i found a way that i could be at my largest size again that anyone could make me feel that it was unnatural and i wasn't allowed to change back to that size if i wanted. the only size natural to someone is they size they feel natural at. it the size that fits their spirit and ethos not someone else's be it from a fat or a thin standpoint. i guess the question that begs is natural to whom? so if someone denigrates intentional weight loss they'd also have to do the same for intentional weight gain. what does it say if people who do truly love being fat enough to gain are not allowed to? the problem i have with the kind of SA that tells people what size they have to be to be "acceptable". everyone is acceptable however they come under any circumstances whether they want to change it or stay the same. i think its time we locked the fat police and the thin police out of people's business and truly appreciate each other for who and what we are and whatever it is any of us want to become. its time to stop guilting people into being either thin or fat and let them really be who they want to be.





ashmamma84 said:


> I wish I could rep you for a fantastic post. I don't desire to ever be thin or SS (and it never ceases to for that matter and it seems like there really isn't a place that one can discuss the reality of being fat/super fat no holds barred. It seems like there's a lot of sensitivity surrounding issues for whatever reason.
> 
> Also, it always sort of makes me chuckle when I read how a person used to be a certain size and never thought they would become an ssbbw yet there they are. Being super fat isn't what everyone has in mind. I know personally its not for me, but at the same time I do like being plus size. I like living a healthy, active life and as it stands there isn't a place for fat folk who are, in that way, like minded. Must.find.balance.



This is essentially what I was trying to say.. just 100% less bitchy. Thank you both for excellent posts.


----------



## KHayes666 (Apr 6, 2011)

bobsjers said:


> Diets work 3% of the time over time. If Chevrolet made a car that started only 3% of the time and then blamed the problem on user error, do you think they could get away with that?



Cars don't have emotions, feelings, 2 jobs, 3 kids, errands to do or have health conditions that impact their diet and exercise. If a car blows a tire, you replace the tire within minutes....if a human being blows a knee out, he or she will take months to repair (if ever depending on severity).


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 6, 2011)

bobsjers said:


> What gets me is that people who have been in the size acceptance movement for a while should know that diets do not work. In my many years of chatting with people in the movement, I have come to the conclusion that diets cause weight gain, not eating. It is amazing, someone tries the Atkins diet, then says the "Atkins" did not work. Then they try the South Beach Diet, and say that the "South Beach" did not work. Did anyone ever think, it might be the LAST word that does not work, not the first word(s)? No diet, not even if you change the name to "lifestyle change" works. This includes surgery, diet pills, etc.
> 
> Talking to someone who thinks diets work is like talking to a child who still believes in Santa Claus. You don't want to burst thier bubble, but at the same time, it is impossible to have a meaningful conversation. They always say, "this time I am going to keep it off." Did they plan to regaining it all the previous diets? People have a better chance of winning the lottery than keeping the weight off.



whether they work or not people need to make the choice for themselves. and no one needs people telling them that they are going to fail at anything whether its to gain or lose weight. diet only means what you eat. what people decide to do is their own business. i guess i'm of the school that if you can't support a person in what they want for themselves then just maybe its not helping them to say anything at all.

i hate to say it but for some guys i think the "you can't diet" argument is a bunch of wistful thinking, self interest and a bit of sabotage. people have lost weight on diets and people have gained weight on diets. no one can say what the case is going to be for an individual person. if someone prefers people to be fat thats fine but i don't think its productive to try and sabotage people who want to be thin. 

people should only be fat if they really love it and not because they just feel trapped. for me the "you can't" talk is just the language of someone trying to trap someone where they don't want to be. what that says to me is that there are still people who only believe people want to be fat only because they just can't be otherwise and they don't really find it beautiful. if they want to be thin they should just give up and resign themselves to liking how they are. for someone like me, who actually enjoys it, that seems insulting. thats doesn't quite sound like size acceptance to me either.


----------



## Jes (Apr 6, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> i guess i'm of the school that if you can't support a person in what they want for themselves then just maybe its not helping them to say anything at all.
> 
> i hate to say it but for some guys i think the "you can't diet" argument is a bunch of wistful thinking, self interest and a bit of sabotage. .



Beautifully said.

it's smart to be realistic about weight loss often being very difficult, and about snake oil being easy to find on every store shelf and all of that, but things that smack of a victim mentality (especially when it's shoved at us from other people) are a turn off. Making positive changes in diet, and every other area of one's life, are a good thing.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 6, 2011)

bobsjers said:


> What gets me is that people who have been in the size acceptance movement for a while should know that diets do not work. In my many years of chatting with people in the movement, I have come to the conclusion that diets cause weight gain, not eating. It is amazing, someone tries the Atkins diet, then says the "Atkins" did not work. Then they try the South Beach Diet, and say that the "South Beach" did not work. Did anyone ever think, it might be the LAST word that does not work, not the first word(s)? No diet, not even if you change the name to "lifestyle change" works. This includes surgery, diet pills, etc.
> 
> Talking to someone who thinks diets work is like talking to a child who still believes in Santa Claus. You don't want to burst thier bubble, but at the same time, it is impossible to have a meaningful conversation. They always say, "this time I am going to keep it off." Did they plan to regaining it all the previous diets? People have a better chance of winning the lottery than keeping the weight off.



The problem with this is that weight loss doesn't always = fad diet. Like I mentioned up thread, I lost about 40 pounds over the course of several months. I never counted calories or points, bought special food, or cut out an entire food group. I ate more fruit & veggies and stopped eating fast food 5 times a week. I found a few things I like to do at the gym, always took the stairs and parked my car in the last spot in the parking lot at work. Fad diets don't work long term.. I think we can all agree on that, but that doesn't mean that making gradual, reasonable, healthy changes CAN'T work or should be demonized.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 6, 2011)

KHayes666 said:


> Cars don't have emotions, feelings, 2 jobs, 3 kids, errands to do or have health conditions that impact their diet and exercise. If a car blows a tire, you replace the tire within minutes....if a human being blows a knee out, he or she will take months to repair (if ever depending on severity).





superodalisque said:


> thats doesn't quite sound like size acceptance to me either.



Fantastic posts.


----------



## Yakatori (Apr 6, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> ..parked my car in the last spot in the parking lot.../QUOTE]
> 
> An ideal strategy for keeping it from getting scratched too. I prefer to leave it as far from any other car as I can.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 6, 2011)

Yakatori said:


> thatgirl08 said:
> 
> 
> > ..parked my car in the last spot in the parking lot...
> ...



Haha, its a little too late for my car for that! I already have two dents - neither of which are from me! (Hint: never let your best friend borrow your car.)


----------



## ashmamma84 (Apr 6, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> they wouldn't let me rep you. its so weird that you aren't allowed by SA standards to take hold of your own body and be what you want to be, whatever that is. i think the key word especially for women is control. when do we get to control our own body? when do we finally get to make the decision for ourselves? no movement at the moment seems willing to allow is to.



I personally think there's a lot of excuses being made - for why diets (which, for once and all I'd like to get rid of because it's really about lifestyle changes) don't work and being fat is just someone's lot in life. That's a powerless position that doesn't really further any cause. But some fat folks are pretty comfortable with that, but for those that aren't its like dragging ass imo. Slows any kind of momentum. 

Being fat isn't the worst thing to happen to a person and if it is, said person can change it. I'm just not really vibing with the whole "most people didn't choose to be this way" deal. Guess I'm just of the school of thought that we all make choices whether they're conscious or not. I like choice because the ball is in my court - I'm not some wayward fat chick who panders to what some people think SA should be or not be. I do as I please and see fit. And really that's all I can do. 

I think if I wasn't so sure of that though I probably would have decided that being at my heaviest was the best (even if it was uncomfortable, my options for clothing were diminishing, and just logistics of doing everyday things were different/or a plain pain in the ass) since that's a lot of what was inundated or that there was something wrong with being a smaller or midsize bbw who (gasp!) had absolutely no desire to get fatter. The whole thing kinda leaves me in a tailspin.


----------



## Mathias (Apr 6, 2011)

If a person can't accept someone at the size that they feel most comfortable with than it isn't acceptance.


----------



## Miss Vickie (Apr 6, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> The problem with this is that weight loss doesn't always = fad diet. Like I mentioned up thread, I lost about 40 pounds over the course of several months. I never counted calories or points, bought special food, or cut out an entire food group. I ate more fruit & veggies and stopped eating fast food 5 times a week. I found a few things I like to do at the gym, always took the stairs and parked my car in the last spot in the parking lot at work. Fad diets don't work long term.. I think we can all agree on that, but that doesn't mean that making gradual, reasonable, healthy changes CAN'T work or should be demonized.



Oh my gosh, this is so very very true. I've read everything you've written and I agree with much of it, even while understanding that Dimensions isn't the only game in town; it's just the only one I'm really aware of, having little time to play online these days. But having been involved in SA/FA since the early 90's when I first got online, I can say that Dimensions has evolved somewhat to allow a more inclusive view of, if not dieting, at least not castigating those of us who want to make healthier choices.

In the mid-90's I made some lifestyle changes which were not meant to cause weight loss. I noticed that the only time I really ate vegetables and fruit and watched my intake of crap food was when I wanted to lose weight. Weight loss was never an easy feat for me, but I made a decision that I would eat well and exercise to be healthy -- regardless of what affect it had on my weight. I come from a family riddled with heart disease and cancer, and lost my parents at a young age. I didn't want to carry on that tradition with my kids, and I wanted to be a good role model for them.

You would not BELIEVE the crap I got. I was called a traitor to the movement, I was told that I was in denial, I was told I had no business at Dimensions, etc etc etc. There were some pretty awful threads by people no longer here where I was raked over the coals, but fortunately I was defended by Tina and some others, but it was really really rough.

And that for having the temerity to try to eat whole grains, stir fry with veggies and (gasp) brown rice, lean meats and nonfat milk. 

So yes, things have changed, but this 3% mantra keeps getting thrown about and I'm not sure it's any more truly accurate than the 100,000 people are KILLED each year by being fat. I think that there are people who believe extremes on both sides of the issue, when really, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Is dieting hard? Yes. Is keeping weight off harder? Yes. Do lots of people go back to their old way of eating and regain it? Sure, why not? If junk food didn't taste good, why would it sell so well? And most of us aren't born marathon runners. That doesn't make us bad people, it makes us human. 

Do some people die from diseases caused from being fat? Yes. Do some thin people die from those same diseases? Yes. Does that mean fat people deserve what they get? Hell no. I'm sure that not all of the people who truly died from obesity wouldn't have died anyway if they were thin because some diseases like heart disease and diabetes also claim the lives of thin people. But unfortunately, being fat is hard on your heart, and it does raise your risk for diabetes because it causes (and is the direct result of) insulin resistance. It sucks but I don't make the rules.

However, that in no way lets health care providers off the hook in caring for us kindly, professionally, and appropriately, and certainly not blaming every ailment on our weight. I start my second year of nurse practitioner schooling in a few months and I'll be taking care of a lot of fat people. (This year is pediatrics and OB so I'm not seeing too much now). Since Alaska is one of the fattest states in the nation (so you FA's, you know where to head if you want to meet a nice fat sweetie), I will be caring for many, and I made a promise to myself that I would give them the same care I've expected for myself all these years. 

It would be nice if we could all work together to gain the accommodations and rights we want for all fat people, rather than worry about whether someone is trying to shed a few pounds to make getting around a little easier.


----------



## PeanutButterfly (Apr 6, 2011)

Miss Vickie said:


> Oh my gosh, this is so very very true. I've read everything you've written and I agree with much of it, even while understanding that Dimensions isn't the only game in town; it's just the only one I'm really aware of, having little time to play online these days. But having been involved in SA/FA since the early 90's when I first got online, I can say that Dimensions has evolved somewhat to allow a more inclusive view of, if not dieting, at least not castigating those of us who want to make healthier choices.
> 
> In the mid-90's I made some lifestyle changes which were not meant to cause weight loss. I noticed that the only time I really ate vegetables and fruit and watched my intake of crap food was when I wanted to lose weight. Weight loss was never an easy feat for me, but I made a decision that I would eat well and exercise to be healthy -- regardless of what affect it had on my weight. I come from a family riddled with heart disease and cancer, and lost my parents at a young age. I didn't want to carry on that tradition with my kids, and I wanted to be a good role model for them.
> 
> ...



Wish I could rep you because this is a kick ass post.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 6, 2011)

yes, evidently you are a sicko if you believe you can be fat and probably feel a whole lot better if you don't exist on processed foods with absolutely no nutrients to help you to be strong enough to carry all of your lovely fat around no matter how much or little of it you have. you are evidently calling someone else a bad fatty if you suggest that a real strawberry short cake with real whipped creme might just taste better than a twelve year old lil debbie snack cake and not pack your fat cells full of preservatives. i want to be well preserved but not that way!


----------



## Saoirse (Apr 7, 2011)

Sometimes people are not comfortable at a higher weight and it could be a multitude of reasons. But who are we to judge them? This whole thread makes me wanna lose a bajillion pounds.

ps- this just in. "DIETS" WORK.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Apr 7, 2011)

Miss Vickie said:


> Oh my gosh, this is so very very true. I've read everything you've written and I agree with much of it, even while understanding that Dimensions isn't the only game in town; it's just the only one I'm really aware of, having little time to play online these days. But having been involved in SA/FA since the early 90's when I first got online, I can say that Dimensions has evolved somewhat to allow a more inclusive view of, if not dieting, at least not castigating those of us who want to make healthier choices.
> 
> In the mid-90's I made some lifestyle changes which were not meant to cause weight loss. I noticed that the only time I really ate vegetables and fruit and watched my intake of crap food was when I wanted to lose weight. Weight loss was never an easy feat for me, but I made a decision that I would eat well and exercise to be healthy -- regardless of what affect it had on my weight. I come from a family riddled with heart disease and cancer, and lost my parents at a young age. I didn't want to carry on that tradition with my kids, and I wanted to be a good role model for them.
> 
> ...


 
I don't understand why people so readily accept the "conventional wisdom" that only 2% of people who intentionally diet to lose weight manage to keep the weight off. It's based on a study done in the 1950's. Anyone can google gaggles (heh) of more recent and long-term studies that show a far, far higher percentage of people who have lost +10% of body weight and kept it off longer term. I don't believe those studies, either. I seldom rely on statistics in matters like this, because statistics are pliable and can easily be skewed. It may be far less scientific, but I rely more on ancetodal evidence and my own common sense. I've seen people who have made lifestyle changes and accomplished whatever individual goals they set for themselves. Like you, I've fluctuated a bit here and there but have kept to my personal goal (for mobility and personal comfort level, under 200 pounds) for 6 years. I've also seen many people try, and fail, and try again and succeed and then fail again. It is damn hard, and I don't always personally agree with the reasons behind why many people put themselves through hell and back to lose a few pounds. But I don't have to agree. It's not my life or body. My role is to be supportive or to at least shut the hell up, as a belief that I hold very dear is that we're all in control of our own destiny ... and we get to define what that is. No matter what my personal goals are, independent of my weight, I will NEVER believe that I'm destined to fail. If it's important enough to me, I'll succeed or I'll die trying. Hopefully, at the age of 95 with facilties intact and most of my own teeth


----------



## Artemisia (Apr 7, 2011)

Wow, I stumble back into this thread to discover that the massive failure rate of diets well-known in current obesity research has been successfully disproved by argument. 

How about some real studies to back up these claims? Ones that look at long-term maintenance past five years, have decent sample sizes, and aren't conducted by companies/institutions with a vested interest in selling a particular diet or weight-loss treatment? 

Some good evidence (much more recent than the 1940s): check out the Fat Nutritionist's wonderful (and growing!) list of "Evidence" (scroll down, they're on the right sidebar). 

I can totally agree that size acceptance has room for dieters. But let's at least get real with the facts that yes, most diets fail most people and it's not the fault of the person, and yes, weight is 77% heritable, and yes, weight is not a marker of health in general. Making blanket statements about weight and health isn't just about one's individual path in size acceptance (which might include weight loss for you), it perpetuates misinformation which results in oppression and ostracization of fat people. 

"Health" is an increasingly morally-charged goal in the Western world, and to suggest one is size accepting but in the same breath that fat is unhealthy and fat people can succeed at losing weight if they try hard enough is not size acceptance. That much I can say. Weight loss for thou -- and it stops there. Or else one *is* perpetuating size-related bigotry, because that's the effect blanket misinformed common-wisdom statements about fat and health have. 

The past page or so of responses has been frustrating. I get that some dieters feel hurt and left out by size acceptance, but I can't stand by while misinformation about weight and health of a more general population than the individual is promulgated. I don't make assumptions about your health and abilities and willpower, I'd ask you not to make assumptions about mine. It makes me feel anything but accepted for my size -- it makes me feel judged and looked down upon for my size. I can't speak for others, but I know the anti-obese Healthism of the Western world makes very many of my fat friends feel judged, looked down upon, and excluded, as well. 

Especially considering that health is such a moral imperative these days. Especially _especially_ considering many of the claims concerning the evil, toxic fat have been shown to be specious and correlative, at best. 

Perhaps I'm overreacting. I don't tend to feed into the conversation when it goes in this direction. And I probably won't, after this (who knows, I don't usually participate in discussions about weight loss since they tend to go in this direction no matter how they begin). But considering I was active in the thread earlier here are my two cents, and I'll step out now. :happy:


----------



## tinkerbell (Apr 7, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> The last three posts more or less sum up why I started this thread. I didn't want to make this thread about my personal ax to grind, so I apologize in advance if it seems that way.. I'm just trying to open up the discussion.
> 
> I don't know.. I find the whole thing very frustrating and ultimately counterproductive. I mean.. I get it.. I wouldn't want to come on here* and see posts about the grapefruit diet or Ally pills or anything either.. but it's the resistance to healthy change I don't really get. It doesn't seem to fit into the spirit of SA at all, in my opinion.. and clearly, a lot of people agree with me, so why is it that its still so hush hush? I think a lot of it has to do with most fat sites being sexuality driven as opposed to activism driven but that doesn't stop me from resenting it.
> 
> ...



This is such a great post. I agree with so many points in it. 

The online forums for weight loss, are so typically negative when it comes to being fat, which is why I no longer visit them. Its hard when your goal is still considered 'plus sized' to be posting along side a person going on about how disgusting they are at what will be your goal size. And how it becomes a race as to who can lose the most amount of weight, in the quickest amount of time. Its taken me over 4 years to lose the amount of weight that I have and so often on the weight loss forums, people are just looking for a quick fix, rather than being healthy (and I do believe people can be healthy at any weight, and that you don't have to be "skinny" to be healthy).

I feel fortunate that the main forum I visit on a daily basis isn't a weight loss site, but we have a weight loss board. And I mod it. So I get to set the tone for the board, which I love. I strive for healthy eating, healthy living, exercise, no negative self talk, and advocate loving ones self at ANY size. 

And I think that sort of board, would be an asset to SA communities. But I also see this site, as its the only one I really visit in the SA world, as a FA site run by a male FA, and not so much as a SA site. I understand that is only my opinion on this site, and others may disagree. And because of that, I can totally understand why any real support and discussion about WL is discouraged here. But to me, to be a true SA site, if you include a sub forum on WG, it would only make sense to have a sub forum on WL - in a SA way, which I think IS possible. 

I know that because I've lost weight I might be seen as someone who has sold out to the constant pressure out in the world to be "thin" (and I'm far from being thin). That is not true, and was recently commented on my outspokenness on the topic of fat discrimination. I don't post here often because I feel out of place and always have, even before my weight loss. And even more so as I continue on this path. But I do feel that SA is something that is important and worth fighting for, but I also feel that WL can and should have a place in the SA community. And I think it would be beneficial to have it here (meaning the SA community in general).


----------



## JMNYC (Apr 7, 2011)

Lamia said:


> This is something I am dealing with right now. I started a weight loss program recently with the intent of just eating healthier and giving myself more structure. I'm conflicted by a desire to lose some weight, yet afraid of losing my identity in the process.
> 
> Plus, having to deal with everyone wanting to offer advice because they're so "GLAD I am finally doing something about my weight". I know they have good intentions, but it pisses me off. It makes me feel guilty for wanting to hit them when they're talking.
> 
> ...




I hear this loud and clear. My wife lost about 50 pounds 2 years ago, just from eating a little better, and she shakes her head at the people who dash up, thinking they're giving her the biggest compliment in the world when they make comment after comment about "the weight" and "How much HAVE you lost?" Most of the loudest people are WOMEN WHO ARE THIN OR CLOSE TO IT. 

She doesn't know. She doesn't weigh herself. She doesn't give too much attention to her size, whether bigger or smaller. She doesn't diet. If she wants french fries, she gets french fries. She doesn't count calories. She's not writing a book on weight loss. She doesn't notice what other people weigh, or what I weigh. 

It's nice.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 7, 2011)

Artemisia said:


> ^Agreed with *butch* and *mcbeth*. Social movements are best defined by the members, not by a subset on behalf of everyone else. There's the question of meaningfulness, of course -- there has to be *some* common ground on which we all can stand. In my experience in SA, this common ground is generally defined by the following points:
> 
> 1) Sizism is wrong -- that is, size does not convey moral virtue or vice
> 2) You cannot tell if someone is healthy or unhealthy by the size of his/her body
> ...



i think one thing the more political and none sexual topical sites might be generally missing is fun. that might be the big reason they aren't as much of a draw. yeah, people might to go there to post things near and dear to them but if you want a lot of participation they need to find a way to create more fun for folks without making them feel bad or guilty about it.


----------



## butch (Apr 8, 2011)

Artesimia is my hero. 


There is a national weight loss registry, founded by the government, so they could gather data on what people who are winning at dieting do to keep winning. From what I remember, they had to keep lowering their requirements to join the registry because they weren't finding people who were losing significant amounts of weight and keeping it off. And by significant amount of weight, we're talking numbers that are much lower than the so-called morbidly obese would need to lose to be considered winning at weight loss. And by keeping it off, I think their original time frame was one year.

So, if the government can't track down all these winning dieters, I wonder why they aren't participating, considering we live in a culture that practically gives people a ticker tape parade when they lose a lot of weight. It could be because, as Artesimia points out, there is lots of current data that back up the high failure rate of diets. In my own research, the most optimistic number I ever came across said diets have a 80% failure rate. I guess 20% winning is a lot better than 3-5% winning, but that still means 8 out of 10 people will still be at their pre-diet weight. Plus, there's a lot of info to suggest that with each failed diet, the individual gets fatter, so in the long run, isn't dieting actually counter-intuitive to weight loss?

I don't care if people lose weight, gain weight, share weight with their friends, really, your body, your life, do what you want. I think SA/FA is big enough to allow spaces that support weight loss talk, and those that don't. I think Dimensions is more generous that most when it comes to weight loss talk being allowed (heck, this whole thread is full of people's weight loss stories), and I personally prefer spaces that don't allow weight loss talk. I prefer this not because I am threatened by weight loss, or that I want everyone to stay big and fat. I find weight loss talk to be boring, quite frankly, and the ego stroking that often goes along with weight loss I find to be reinforcing fat stigma, regardless of how fat the person may be after the weight loss is done. 

Now, as some know, I'm happy to talk about HAES til the cows come home, and I wonder why people who believe in weight loss couldn't get behind a space on Dimensions devoted to HAES talk. That way, you can talk all about the healthy behaviors that you've adopted to get smaller, as long as you don't mention the weight or inches you've lost. If the goal of weight loss is better health, then doesn't it make more sense to talk about the behaviors which are driving the weight loss?

It seems a small price to pay to respect the wishes of those of us who prefer diet-talk free spaces, to use HAES principles to talk about one's changing body. If nothing else, it might be a great thought exercise to see how one's connection to their weight loss changes when they view it through a lens where something other than the numbers on the scale is the greatest measure of one's health.

Here's another thought exercise, if we lived in a world with no fat stigma, what role would weight loss have in our world?


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 8, 2011)

butch said:


> Artesimia is my hero.
> 
> 
> There is a national weight loss registry, founded by the government, so they could gather data on what people who are winning at dieting do to keep winning. From what I remember, they had to keep lowering their requirements to join the registry because they weren't finding people who were losing significant amounts of weight and keeping it off. And by significant amount of weight, we're talking numbers that are much lower than the so-called morbidly obese would need to lose to be considered winning at weight loss. And by keeping it off, I think their original time frame was one year.
> ...



I guess it depends on how everyone is defining "diet." If you're talking low fat, Atkins, Weight Watchers, etc. then I agree with you.. what I don't agree with is that small gradual changes in lifestyle = diet. Like I said up thread, a few small changes in my eating and exercise habits caused me to lose weight but I'm not exactly dieting.. hell, I ate a burger & cupcake last night for dinner. I think we should support people in making these changes, if they want to, regardless of whether they lose weight or not. I mean, isn't that HAES in a way? Supporting everyones decision, at any size, to make positive health choices? 

I hate to be rude but the argument that you find something boring is.. weak? at best. There are a lot of things on this board that don't pertain to my interests.. you'll rarely find me posting in BHM/FFA, GLBTQ, WLS Controversy or Hyde Park but I don't think we should get rid of those boards just because I don't particularly care about them. It obviously pertains to someones interests as there are plenty of posts in all four. As far as ego stroking, I can understand.. but I think there's a huge difference in saying "I lost 23.6 pounds so far, almost to my goal weight and the new bikini I want!" and saying "I'm really proud of myself because I've been going to the gym every day. I've lost about 25 pounds and my knees aren't hurting me as much!"

Really though, my main point in this thread is not that Dimensions should allow weight loss talk.. that decision is ultimately up to Conrad. I don't expect a weight loss board to pop up here at any point and frankly, I don't give a shit if it does or doesn't. It's more the general attitude of individuals that bothers me. This thread has been eye opening in the sense that there are other people who feel similarly about this, but it's also been made clear (both here and in PMs) that some people vehemntly disagree with how I feel about it. I guess were pretty split, and I respect that. 

However, I would support the health board becoming more HAES oriented, especially if we were allowed a single thread where weight loss talk would be permitted. That way, if you wanted to avoid it it'd be simple to do so and those of that wanted to discuss it, could.


----------



## butch (Apr 8, 2011)

Fair enough, but my use of the word weak wasn't because I was trying to enforce my way of doing things, simply sharing a personal belief that I was glad some places seemed to support. It is indeed a weak point to hang an argument on, if I was trying to bend people to my will and create a FA/SA world that only reflected my personal wants. Anyway, I already know that millions find diet talk endlessly fascinating, and more power to them, and I'm glad a tiny place like Dimensions so far has rules I can accept that limits the amount of weight loss talk folks indulge in.

You know, we have more in common than you realize when it comes to 'weight loss.' I too 'eat better, move more, and have lost weight.' The difference is, I focus on behaviors, not numbers on a scale, and I find that this is a more humane way to deal with the body shaming culture that affects us all, regardless of weight. 

Plus, that weight loss registry doesn't care how you lost weight, so if you do it by HAES principles or Atkins, they want to know. Perhaps folks here who want to, could submit their data to the registry.


----------



## Miss Vickie (Apr 8, 2011)

butch said:


> So, if the government can't track down all these winning dieters, I wonder why they aren't participating, considering we live in a culture that practically gives people a ticker tape parade when they lose a lot of weight. It could be because, as Artesimia points out, there is lots of current data that back up the high failure rate of diets. In my own research, the most optimistic number I ever came across said diets have a 80% failure rate. I guess 20% winning is a lot better than 3-5% winning, but that still means 8 out of 10 people will still be at their pre-diet weight. Plus, there's a lot of info to suggest that with each failed diet, the individual gets fatter, so in the long run, isn't dieting actually counter-intuitive to weight loss?



I'm guessing it's that there are so many different diets it's hard to compare them. How can you compare Atkins with Weight Watchers with Nutrisystem when deciding if "diets" (in the broader sense of the word) work? You'd have to do different studies for each diet, which the diet makers do but they're hardly disinterested bystanders so their "clinical proof" that these diets work can hardly be trusted.

I'd be happy to do a search but I'm swamped with end-of-the-semester school work right now and am doing a ton of research on other issues so it'll have to wait. But if I have a quiet period in the next few weeks I'll see what I can find.



> I find weight loss talk to be boring, quite frankly, and the ego stroking that often goes along with weight loss I find to be reinforcing fat stigma, regardless of how fat the person may be after the weight loss is done.



I find lots of stuff here boring, and the ego stroking on weight GAIN upsetting because yet again women aren't "good enough" unless they make themselves different for a guy (or guys). But it's not my board and some people here seem to like it. So I exercise my control over my clicker and just ignore it. *shrug*



> Now, as some know, I'm happy to talk about HAES til the cows come home, and I wonder why people who believe in weight loss couldn't get behind a space on Dimensions devoted to HAES talk. That way, you can talk all about the healthy behaviors that you've adopted to get smaller, as long as you don't mention the weight or inches you've lost. If the goal of weight loss is better health, then doesn't it make more sense to talk about the behaviors which are driving the weight loss?



I'd LOVE it. I think it would be a great idea and would be all on board with it. Anything that helps people live happier makes me happy and I'm behind it.



> Here's another thought exercise, if we lived in a world with no fat stigma, what role would weight loss have in our world?



I can't speak for others but in my case, weight loss had everything to do with dealing with my craptastic genetics and nothing to do with what my culture tells me about fat. Nobody encouraged me to lose weight. I knew that I felt better and had better "numbers" at a lower weight (and at a younger age but obviously that's beyond my capability) so it made sense to me to try that. 

I would hope that perhaps we could detach the shame issue with being fat and look at it in a more neutral way, such as cutting out caffeine or alcohol (notice I left out smoking which IS judged harshly). I hate how so many of us feel shame for being fat. It's hardly fair and certainly non-productive.


----------



## butch (Apr 8, 2011)

The thing about the weight loss registry is, it simply wants to collate data from folks who have lost a certain amount of weight and kept it off for a certain amount of time, without any concern for how. The government wants this information so it can determine what does, and does not work, so the registry itself is the statistical information that will prove which diets work and which do not. If the folks running it are finding it difficult to find the info they want to find, considering that they are looking for all of it, and hoping to weed out which types of diets don't work, then it makes me wonder where people are coming up with data that suggests that dieting works if one just follows a certain magic formula.

In fact, here is the website:

http://www.nwcr.ws/

I haven't looked past the home page, but all the info we could need to determine what does and does not work should be there. They have a pool of 5,000 folks that have contributed data. Seems awfully small in a world where 60% of a population in the hundreds of millions are considered overweight or obese, I would think.

Vickie, you're right that we won't see to eye-to eye about weight loss talk, which is fine. If Conrad were to decide a weight loss section of the board was appropriate, then of course I'd abide by that. At this point, I want to share my appreciation for the fact that this site doesn't allow weight loss talk, and my hope that it never does. I'm glad that Dimensions is open enough to allow us to express different points of view on this issue, as I know many SA/FA sites won't allow the discussions to be had at all.

I always respect your point of view, even when it isn't mine. I do think it is almost impossible for any of us to make decisions about our fat without the effect of fat stigma, even though I know other feel differently. Again, it all comes down to your body, your choice. I just want to see that those choices are made as fairly as possible, and at this point in time, decisions about fat have to jump over a lot of stupid obstacles in order to be made objectively and fairly.


----------



## mossystate (Apr 8, 2011)

Miss Vickie said:


> ...the ego stroking on weight GAIN upsetting because *yet again women aren't "good enough" *unless they make themselves different for a guy (or guys). But it's not my board and some people here seem to like it. So I exercise my control over my clicker and just ignore it. *shrug*



I liked the whole post, but this part is something that rarely gets addressed when the conversation turns to fat people being OK exactly as we are. Weight gain, and the crowing of it at every turn always equals great, with inches and pounds gained savored in a way, by many, so much so that the fat person becomes just a body...numbers. I get that that is a big part of this site, and that's fine...I long ago understood what the place is and isn't. I just don't understand how, when talking about SA, that this is a positive thing, while weight loss is so ' examined ' ( and I don't think that is always bad, at all, considering how fat phobic our world is ).


----------



## butch (Apr 8, 2011)

mossystate said:


> I liked the whole post, but this part is something that rarely gets addressed when the conversation turns to fat people being OK exactly as we are. Weight gain, and the crowing of it at every turn always equals great, with inches and pounds gained savored in a way, by many, so much so that the fat person becomes just a body...numbers. I get that that is a big part of this site, and that's fine...I long ago understood what the place is and isn't. I just don't understand how, when talking about SA, that this is a positive thing, while weight loss is so ' examined ' ( and I don't think that is always bad, at all, considering how fat phobic our world is ).



I examine it because it plays out in my real world. Weight Gain doesn't. Nobody in the real world brow beats me in the doctor's office because I'm not gaining weight, or puts me on medication because they hope it will make me gain weight. All of that has recently happened to me in the real world about losing weight, so I admit liking that I can come here and get away from talk that reminds me of my real life antagonisms over my weight.

It may not be consistent or rational, that while I don't endorse intentional weight gain, I don't speak up about it even though I know many people don't like it (some of who I like very much, and respect their opinions). However, as I said about weight loss, I'm all for people doing what they want with their body, as long as they have autonomy and information, whether it be weight gain or weight loss. I just find one to be more of a threat to my goals of making the world less fat stigmatizing. 

Maybe I'm wrong, and of course I like debating the topic so that I can be sure of my beliefs, or have them changed if need be.


----------



## Weirdo890 (Apr 8, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> Are weight loss and involvement in the SA movement mutually exclusive things?
> 
> Is it possible for someone to be genuinely interested in both weight loss and SA? If so, how are those people perceived by others in the SA movement? Does losing weight make you less credible and/or make the overall movement less credible to the outside world? On the other hand, does staunch resistance to weight loss as a whole reduce the movements credibility to people not involved?
> 
> Just thought it'd be interesting to see everyones opinions on this.



I don't see them as mutually exclusive, but I would see conflict in the two. I find that weight loss would fit more with the SA movement if it were purely about health. Although, perhaps being a part of the SA movement might help people deal with their weight issues, at least in a psychological or emotional way. They could come to terms with their feelings about it. Maybe I'm just spewing a bunch of crap about a subject I know nothing about.


----------



## Miss Vickie (Apr 8, 2011)

butch said:


> The thing about the weight loss registry is, it simply wants to collate data from folks who have lost a certain amount of weight and kept it off for a certain amount of time, without any concern for how. The government wants this information so it can determine what does, and does not work, so the registry itself is the statistical information that will prove which diets work and which do not. If the folks running it are finding it difficult to find the info they want to find, considering that they are looking for all of it, and hoping to weed out which types of diets don't work, then it makes me wonder where people are coming up with data that suggests that dieting works if one just follows a certain magic formula.
> 
> In fact, here is the website:
> 
> http://www.nwcr.ws/



Also, if it's voluntary, then given the issue of self selection, this makes the data somewhat less viable in my mind. There is no randomization, no control, no placebo, so whatever "evidence" is gleaned is rather weak in terms of its generalizability. How well known is this website? How are people recruited for it? Do health care providers know about it? I confess I didn't know about it and I'm involved both in health care and the SA movement. I can think of a half a dozen people off the top of my head who would qualify to be part of the study, but I wonder if they even know about it. (I'm assuming since I had WLS I'm would not qualify, but who knows?)



> I haven't looked past the home page, but all the info we could need to determine what does and does not work should be there. They have a pool of 5,000 folks that have contributed data. Seems awfully small in a world where 60% of a population in the hundreds of millions are considered overweight or obese, I would think.



I bet if this were more well known (I smell a facebook campaign!), more members could be found. However, depending on how this data is collected, it may or may not add much really usable information about weight loss.



> I always respect your point of view, even when it isn't mine. I do think it is almost impossible for any of us to make decisions about our fat without the effect of fat stigma, even though I know other feel differently. Again, it all comes down to your body, your choice. I just want to see that those choices are made as fairly as possible, and at this point in time, decisions about fat have to jump over a lot of stupid obstacles in order to be made objectively and fairly.



I think you're right, that our culture's approach to fat (realizing of course that it's not a monolithic thing) makes it difficult, and there have been issues if one is fat, doesn't want to lose weight, and wants to be treated fairly and effectively. But it shouldn't be so difficult for providers to do this -- lifestyle changes are often the first choices, and then there is often a pharmaceutical component. There is no reason why the provider can't encourage lifestyle changes independent of weight loss while prescribing meds as appropriate. This is why we need health care providers who are fat neutral (and hey, I'm working on it! One more year and I'll be done!) who won't treat the fat, but rather the patient. 

And while there is all kinds of anti-fat propaganda out there, in the practices I'm doing clinical rotations at I'm just not seeing any anti-fat attitudes but rather a reasonable understanding of the role of fat as one of many factors that have a role in the diseases being treated. At my "day job", we have two providers who are anti-fat, and would love to say more but I can't. However, both know how I feel about the way they treat fat women.

In my own case, given that I had a fat mom was super fat positive and who took no shit from doctors who blamed her fat for every illness, long before we had FA/SA, and have had -- whether by luck or by design -- almost exclusively fat neutral providers, it's probably been easier for me than others to look at weight loss in a neutral way. I work hard not to let our cultural slime cling to me, which would cause me to pass judgment to myself about my weight. I tried for a long, LONG time to manage my health issues by eating well, being active and utilizing naturopathic medicine, but I still got worse. My desires were to get off meds and be able to do my job, and in fact haggled with my WLS doc to bypass as little as possible. It was important to maintain my curves and not have some of the nutritional issues that others have. I'm still, by the BMI tables, obese, and therefore a "failure" by some. Oh well. I didn't use "their" criteria to judge "my" success. I think that's where many of us get into trouble.



mossystate said:


> I liked the whole post, but this part is something that rarely gets addressed when the conversation turns to fat people being OK exactly as we are. Weight gain, and the crowing of it at every turn always equals great, with inches and pounds gained savored in a way, by many, so much so that the fat person becomes just a body...numbers. I get that that is a big part of this site, and that's fine...I long ago understood what the place is and isn't. I just don't understand how, when talking about SA, that this is a positive thing, while weight loss is so ' examined ' ( and I don't think that is always bad, at all, considering how fat phobic our world is ).



I have to admit, it's something that gives me a little "tic" when I think about it too much. As a woman who knows how we as women are judged, where every bite we put into our mouths is scrutinized and remarked upon, I just don't see how it's much different than what happens here. Like you, I understand what Dimensions is -- and isn't -- but the double standard isn't cool, in my book. But hey, if women choose to be part of that, then who am I to judge? I know how I've felt when my choices have been judged. I just try to avoid the more obvious places where such talk takes place and pretend that the world is a perfect place, where women aren't judged by the size of their ass.


----------



## Elfcat (Apr 8, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> unfortunately some folks often think they are powerless and are always going to be that size anyway. so sometimes for them acceptance is like some kind of consolation prize.



That would seem to me to be the description of many of those who semantically split "size acceptance" from "fat acceptance" in the sense that they want safe social and sexual spaces, but are not so much interested in political endeavors against discrimination beyond that.




> i don't think its a good enough answer to say that we can't be size positive toward smaller people because people aren't size positive toward us.



I can't rightly be counter to that, being a smaller person myself. In fact it was by NAAFA's involvement in the realm of discrimination law that I found out about NOSSA.



> i'm not sure size acceptance should be a one size fits all thing. i don't think thin people should make it that and i don't think fat people should make it that either because either way you support some kind of intolerance if you do.



For myself, I'm open to anyone who has other answers to discrimination against the fat than to tell them all to lose weight, and who recognizes that for at least some fat people, other routes to health look more promising.


----------



## Never2fat4me (Apr 8, 2011)

My 2 cents worth: I think that WL and SA are not mutually exclusive; at least not always. In my view, the reason for WL has to be taken into account. If you are trying to lose weight because you think it will make you more attractive, then that is antithetical to SA. However, if you are trying to lose weight because of medical or mobility issues, for example, then I think that is completely consistent. SA is about valuing all people, not just promoting being fat. It means accepting the equality of people regardless of size, and accepting someone who is getting thinner is not necessarily any different than accepting someone who is getting fatter.

Actually, an equally interesting question is whether SA and weight gain are mutually exclusive. It is arguable that if someone is trying to gain weight (as opposed to just enjoying food and WG happens), then they are not accepting themselves at a certain size, much in the same way as someone who is trying to lose weight isn't. (Even though they are trying to get fatter, as opposed to bending to society's norms, it still is trying to change your physical appearance, so is trying to gain for pleasure really any different than losing to fit into a smaller dress?)

Chris


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 10, 2011)

Elfcat said:


> That would seem to me to be the description of many of those who semantically split "size acceptance" from "fat acceptance" in the sense that they want safe social and sexual spaces, but are not so much interested in political endeavors against discrimination beyond that.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




i can agree with that. just as long as there is no constraint on people who really don't want to be fat. after we've talked and shown fat positivity as much as we can there is some point that we have to give people credit for knowing their own mind.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 10, 2011)

Never2fat4me said:


> My 2 cents worth: I think that WL and SA are not mutually exclusive; at least not always. In my view, the reason for WL has to be taken into account. If you are trying to lose weight because you think it will make you more attractive, then that is antithetical to SA. However, if you are trying to lose weight because of medical or mobility issues, for example, then I think that is completely consistent. SA is about valuing all people, not just promoting being fat. It means accepting the equality of people regardless of size, and accepting someone who is getting thinner is not necessarily any different than accepting someone who is getting fatter.
> 
> Actually, an equally interesting question is whether SA and weight gain are mutually exclusive. It is arguable that if someone is trying to gain weight (as opposed to just enjoying food and WG happens), then they are not accepting themselves at a certain size, much in the same way as someone who is trying to lose weight isn't. (Even though they are trying to get fatter, as opposed to bending to society's norms, it still is trying to change your physical appearance, so is trying to gain for pleasure really any different than losing to fit into a smaller dress?)
> 
> Chris



i'm not totally disagreeing here because i personally feel its sad when people don't feel beautiful when they are fat, since they are. i wish everyone who was fat completely loved their body that way. but what i'd like to ask is if someone really wants to look smaller shouldn't we accept that thats just what they'd like and need to do for themselves? thats the size they want to be. shouldn't we just accept that thats their aesthetic and leave it at that? do they really have to be about to die or something before we take into account what they truly want?


----------



## James (Apr 10, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> I really appreciate this post. My main experiences with fat acceptance have come from within this site.. maybe this has given me a narrow point of view on it. I think I tend to believe that most people on Dims are here because they, in some way, support fat acceptance.. but I guess that's not necessarily true.. this site is about sexuality first and foremost. I'm not saying that thats a bad thing.. just that its probably not the best judge of the cause in general.



The consensus among other size acceptance communities tends toward a strong no-dieting line too. At such locations, there can be no confusion with the aesthetic drivers for this that are oft alleged of Dimensions . This brand of 'no diet talk' is motivated solely by the politics and ethics of the movement where weight loss is generally considered compatible, only as an unintentional and value-free by-product to HAES.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 10, 2011)

James said:


> The consensus among other size acceptance communities tends toward a strong no-dieting line too. At such locations, there can be no confusion with the aesthetic drivers for this that are oft alleged of Dimensions . This brand of 'no diet talk' is motivated solely by the politics and ethics of the movement where weight loss is generally considered compatible, only as an unintentional and value-free by-product to HAES.



thats true. i've seen that SA wide. some politically oriented SA sites are also beginning to question the weight gain talk as well since that is also indicative of dissatisfaction with how a person already is. so both ends are probably going to come under fire more and more when it comes to SA sites.


----------



## Never2fat4me (Apr 10, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> i'm not totally disagreeing here because i personally feel its sad when people don't feel beautiful when they are fat, since they are. i wish everyone who was fat completely loved their body that way. but what i'd like to ask is if someone really wants to look smaller shouldn't we accept that thats just what they'd like and need to do for themselves? thats the size they want to be. shouldn't we just accept that thats their aesthetic and leave it at that? do they really have to be about to die or something before we take into account what they truly want?



I don't disagree with you either, but I think it is a fine line between someone truly believing they would look better at a lesser weight and someone feeling pressure to comply with society's norms. Unfortunately, I think WL generally has a lot more to do with the latter than the former.

Chris


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 10, 2011)

I guess I must not be a true believer in SA then. 

I think ALL people, regardless of weight/size/shape, should be treated with respect. I think discrimination based on any body characteristic is wrong, especially in regards to employment, housing and jobs. I think all people, regardless of weight/size/shape, should have the accommodations necessary to use public facilities. And, I think that every single person on this planet should be able to choose to change their body however they want.. whether they want to gain weight, lose weight, body build, cover themselves in tattoos, shave their head, pierce their entire face or cut off a limb, for all I care. 

I don't agree with the conditions and morality attached to being part of SA. You can gain.. IF its on accident. You can lose.. IF its a result of HAES. You can be okay with your thinner or fatter self.. IF you don't prefer it. You can eat better.. IF you don't call it a diet. You can exercise.. IF you aren't doing it to be leaner. 

I don't get it. I don't like it. IF that means I don't support SA.. then so be it.


----------



## Saoirse (Apr 10, 2011)

It won't let me rep you '08


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 10, 2011)

Never2fat4me said:


> I don't disagree with you either, but I think it is a fine line between someone truly believing they would look better at a lesser weight and someone feeling pressure to comply with society's norms. Unfortunately, I think WL generally has a lot more to do with the latter than the former.
> 
> Chris



you know, thats the same thing that some people say about me when i say i love how i am. they say i'm just being influenced by the community that i belong to. the truth is i've always liked being big even when i was a little girl. i think its highly possible that someone else could feel the same about being another size. i'm sure at least some people must know their own mind.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 10, 2011)

Artemisia said:


> Wow, I stumble back into this thread to discover that the massive failure rate of diets well-known in current obesity research has been successfully disproved by argument.
> 
> How about some real studies to back up these claims? Ones that look at long-term maintenance past five years, have decent sample sizes, and aren't conducted by companies/institutions with a vested interest in selling a particular diet or weight-loss treatment?
> 
> ...



i don't know what numbers about other people can prove when they are not that individual person. isn't generalizing to a particular some kind of fallacy? its been a long time since i took logic. i forget. no one can predict what can happen. no one truly knows who individually has enough will power, dedication or just wants it badly enough to make a lifestyle change. 

i wouldn't want to be the one to tell someone that really wants something that they can't have it just because it somehow upholds my personal politics and my beliefs or because what someone says, that going by what happens to most people you shouldn't be able to. in that case we wouldn't have astronauts or presidents or anything else because no one would try for their goals. even if someone failed thats part of their own personal growth process and should be respected. .who am i to tell anyone they can't individually try for something they really want to do? that would be truly presumptuous.


----------



## James (Apr 10, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> I guess I must not be a true believer in SA then.
> 
> I think ALL people, regardless of weight/size/shape, should be treated with respect. I think discrimination based on any body characteristic is wrong, especially in regards to employment, housing and jobs. I think all people, regardless of weight/size/shape, should have the accommodations necessary to use public facilities. And, I think that every single person on this planet should be able to choose to change their body however they want.. whether they want to gain weight, lose weight, body build, cover themselves in tattoos, shave their head, pierce their entire face or cut off a limb, for all I care.
> 
> ...



Size acceptance is inherently a moral issue because being fat is near-universally understood to be immoral. 

To take a view that fat is anything but an immoral state of being (i.e size acceptance) automatically opens us up to a barrage of criticism that, on a macro level, makes it necessary to establish a defense to justify grounds for being fat. 

Intentional weight loss (or gain) weakens a defense for advocating size equality because it indicates an inadequacy in one's current state which ends up re-enforcing an anti-size argument. 

I don't think size acceptance should limit or seek to override individual weight change choices but, at the same time those choices can't logically be endorsed by a size acceptance agenda.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 10, 2011)

James said:


> Size acceptance is inherently a moral issue because being fat is near-universally understood to be immoral.
> 
> To take a view that fat is anything but an immoral state of being (i.e size acceptance) automatically opens us up to a barrage of criticism that, on a macro level, makes it necessary to establish a defense to justify grounds for being fat.
> 
> ...



actually i'm not sure about those premises because

you saying that via SA people should accept the fact that fat is immoral since would be a hard argument to make that it isn't?

and that

size change can never be seen as reinforcing a pro size argument in as much as being fat is nice so i'll change to that, being thin is nice so i'll change to that. couldn't the argument go both ways if handled well?

i think there are some flaws in the assumptions you listed because they both view SA and fat etc... from a losing rather than a winning position which is the same as the prejudiced culture its trying to escape. isn't it possible that one way to change that culture in the outside world, if that were the goal, would be to actually be the change?


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 10, 2011)

James said:


> Size acceptance is inherently a moral issue because being fat is near-universally understood to be immoral.
> 
> To take a view that fat is anything but an immoral state of being (i.e size acceptance) automatically opens us up to a barrage of criticism that, on a macro level, makes it necessary to establish a defense to justify grounds for being fat.
> 
> ...



I get that but I don't think any acceptance/equality movement is benefited by placing extensive conditions on being accepted into the movement itself.. isn't that hypocrisy, really? If the goal of size acceptance is accepting people and their bodies as they are then doesn't it make sense to accept anyone, regardless of what they look like, who shares the same basic desire of eliminating discrimination based on size? I don't think being picky helps anyone really.


----------



## LovelyLiz (Apr 10, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> I get that but I don't think any acceptance/equality movement is benefited by placing extensive conditions on being accepted into the movement itself.. isn't that hypocrisy, really? If the goal of size acceptance is accepting people and their bodies as they are then doesn't it make sense to accept anyone, regardless of what they look like, who shares the same basic desire of eliminating discrimination based on size? I don't think being picky helps anyone really.



But I think the difference is, some body types are already deemed more "accepted" in our context. So when size acceptance started as a movement, it wasn't the thin people that were fighting to have their own body types celebrated - since that's already how things are. Size acceptance isn't just "let's accept every size of body of whoever", but it is intentionally about having society accept MORE types of bodies into the definition of "acceptable" body types; and in our culture that especially means fat people.

There's no need to start advocating for the acceptance of body types and ways of thinking that already are thought to be morally good and socially acceptable.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 10, 2011)

mcbeth said:


> But I think the difference is, some body types are already deemed more "accepted" in our context. So when size acceptance started as a movement, it wasn't the thin people that were fighting to have their own body types celebrated - since that's already how things are. Size acceptance isn't just "let's accept every size of body of whoever", but it is intentionally about having society accept MORE types of bodies into the definition of "acceptable" body types; and in our culture that especially means fat people.
> 
> There's no need to start advocating for the acceptance of body types and ways of thinking that already are thought to be morally good and socially acceptable.




so when and how does excluding other body types actually aid in the acceptance of a fat body type? and do you feel that excluding and not accepting others is really going to inspire those people to accept fat folk? who is really likely to accept people who don't/won't accept them? does skinny bitch syndrome really progress any of our goals? or does it just create more distance, hatred, resentment, prejudice and otherness whether inside or outside of the movement?


----------



## LovelyLiz (Apr 10, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> so when and how does excluding other body types actually aid in the acceptance of a fat body type? and do you feel that excluding and not accepting others is really going to inspire those people to accept fat folk? who is really likely to accept people who don't/won't accept them? does skinny bitch syndrome really progress any of our goals? or does it just create more distance, hatred, resentment, prejudice and otherness whether inside or outside of the movement?



I never said we shouldn't accept other body types - of course we should. I just said we don't have to establish a movement to have thin body types accepted BECAUSE THEY ALREADY ARE.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 10, 2011)

mcbeth said:


> I never said we shouldn't accept other body types - of course we should. I just said we don't have to establish a movement to have thin body types accepted BECAUSE THEY ALREADY ARE.



but it wouldn't be a movement to have thin bodies accepted but a movement that has everyone accepting everyone's body, since as we know here, there are some people who don't find thin bodies acceptable. so maybe we need to respect that everyone at some point might need their body image to be protected, especially if we expect our own rights to be protected. even if it never had to happen it needs to be understood that would occur. the basis of respect has to be extended to everyone even if some of us have to have our rights enforced more than others.


----------



## LovelyLiz (Apr 10, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> but it wouldn't be a movement to have thin bodies accepted but a movement that has everyone accepting everyone's body, since as we know here, there are some people who don't find thin bodies acceptable. so maybe we need to respect that everyone at some point might need their body image to be protected, especially if we expect our own rights to be protected. even if it never had to happen it needs to be understood that would occur. the basis of respect has to be extended to everyone even if some of us have to have our rights enforced more than others.



I feel like we're talking in circles. Yes, everyone's body should be celebrated and honored, and yes, I'm sure every body type out there has experienced someone telling them they are too [whatever]. But if you think we live in a world where all body types are subject to equal amounts of discrimination and moral judgment, and thus need equal space and protection in the SA movement, we can agree to disagree on that point.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 10, 2011)

mcbeth said:


> I feel like we're talking in circles. Yes, everyone's body should be celebrated and honored, and yes, I'm sure every body type out there has experienced someone telling them they are too [whatever]. But if you think we live in a world where all body types are subject to equal amounts of discrimination and moral judgment, and thus need equal space and protection in the SA movement, we can agree to disagree on that point.



yes we can. i understand and respect your position.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 10, 2011)

mcbeth said:


> I feel like we're talking in circles. Yes, everyone's body should be celebrated and honored, and yes, I'm sure every body type out there has experienced someone telling them they are too [whatever]. But if you think we live in a world where all body types are subject to equal amounts of discrimination and moral judgment, and thus need equal space and protection in the SA movement, we can agree to disagree on that point.



yes we can. i understand and respect your position though .


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 11, 2011)

mcbeth said:


> But I think the difference is, some body types are already deemed more "accepted" in our context. So when size acceptance started as a movement, it wasn't the thin people that were fighting to have their own body types celebrated - since that's already how things are. Size acceptance isn't just "let's accept every size of body of whoever", but it is intentionally about having society accept MORE types of bodies into the definition of "acceptable" body types; and in our culture that especially means fat people.
> 
> There's no need to start advocating for the acceptance of body types and ways of thinking that already are thought to be morally good and socially acceptable.



I'm not in disagreement that being thin is easier than being fat, I think most of us can agree on that. My point though, is that excluding ANYONE who believes in the basics of size acceptance, regardless of whether they're 100 or 1000 or want to weigh less or weigh more, is probably a bad idea. Generally speaking, less acceptance in an acceptance movement is probably a bad idea (IMO, of course.)

But, I don't want to talk circles either McBeth, and I hope you don't see any of this as a personal attack.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 11, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> I'm not in disagreement that being thin is easier than being fat, I think most of us can agree on that. My point though, is that excluding ANYONE who believes in the basics of size acceptance, regardless of whether they're 100 or 1000 or want to weigh less or weigh more, is probably a bad idea. Generally speaking, less acceptance in an acceptance movement is probably a bad idea (IMO, of course.)
> 
> But, I don't want to talk circles either McBeth, and I hope you don't see any of this as a personal attack.



i still can't wrap my head around how we are supposed to be accepted by people we wont accept. no matter how hard i try i can't understand how that works. can you?


----------



## LovelyLiz (Apr 11, 2011)

thatgirl08 said:


> I'm not in disagreement that being thin is easier than being fat, I think most of us can agree on that. My point though, is that excluding ANYONE who believes in the basics of size acceptance, regardless of whether they're 100 or 1000 or want to weigh less or weigh more, is probably a bad idea. Generally speaking, less acceptance in an acceptance movement is probably a bad idea (IMO, of course.)
> 
> But, I don't want to talk circles either McBeth, and I hope you don't see any of this as a personal attack.



I actually completely agree with you, and don't feel personally attacked at all. All's good. I am all for accepting thin people, and all body types. My bf probably weighs 100 pounds for f's sake. I love thin people. All I'm saying is, probably more time and energy in a size acceptance should be geared toward body types that experience the most discrimination. That does not entail any thin-hatred. I'm just saying that equal treatment is unjust when the starting point is not equal.

Do we disagree? It's cool if we do, I am just dense and not seeing the disagreement.


----------



## mithrandirjn (Apr 11, 2011)

I really don't see the conflict: discussing issues of discrimination based on size is a macro topic, while a person's own health and body is a micro one.

I've dropped about 40 pounds in the past year and a month or so; I made some dietary changes (basically cutting back on portions, which, yes, does include some "calorie counting"...it really isn't a sin to know how much you're putting into your system), started working out more seriously, and now I'm basically in the best shape of my adult life, down to around 200 pounds and getting pretty damned toned. 

That was my own personal choice: I, _personally_, wasn't comfortable where I was when I weighed around 245 pounds, a gain I experienced due to working two jobs and coming home and crashing a lot in exhaustion. I was tired a lot, I got sick quite a bit, and what drove me to do the work in the first place was a doctor's office visit where I was told my blood sugar was a little bit high: I have a family history of Type II diabetes, and I didn't want to potentially face that hurdle before I was even 30 years old. I flat-out wasn't comfortable with where I was.

However, does that suddenly undercut me if I hold feelings that size discrimination in places like an office or wherever else is wrong? Why should it? I never tied my weight to my identity; being thinner/toned/fatter/etc. doesn't have a big effect on my perception of the world around me, if I see unwarranted discrimination (and discrimination, by definition, is almost always unwarranted) I have no problem saying it's wrong.

I dislike the notion of society driving a person to hate his/her body. I dislike how many diet companies prey on people's insecurities. I dislike seeing somebody driven to misery or being discriminated against simply due to appearance (thin OR fat), with people automatically assuming "He/she weighs x number of pounds, he/she MUST be unhealthy/lazy/sick/anorexic!". 

But, again, for me personally, I found that I get some enjoyment out of tougher workouts, I found that eating a certain way agreed with me, and I like the results I get. Does that suddenly invalidate my opinions, past experiences, and my perception of the world around me? I think it's silly to argue that it does.

I'll grant you, I'm also somebody who really believes in promoting overall health: like encouraging people to at least get a few minutes of daily exercise, agreeing with the idea of a "soda tax", and not having any use for cigarettes (not bashing smokers, I just can't stand the tobacco industry). To me, these have little-to-nothing to do with weight and size. If anything, I really wish more people would focus on lifestyle changes and less on numbers on the scale.

I've said it before, I'll say it again: as a people, our culture is obsessed with numbers, and the obsession with getting down x number of pounds to fit into a size y pair of jeans is what keeps a lot of people on the mass-produced diet roller coaster. If instead people made lifestyle changes that gradually improved their overall health, even if they didn't have much of an impact on their weight, it'd be a much more positive development.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 11, 2011)

i think its important that we don't alienate people like you just because you make different choices for yourself. you are one o our allies we really can't afford to lose. why should we push you away? we need people in SA who might be smaller than some of us and may possibly get smaller still to stand with us. people like you prove that someone may have a totally different lifestyle from some of us but it doesn't mean you can't honor someone else's rights. you can makes some points that maybe we can't. sometimes when bigger folks say it it get discounted as denial. also, you need to have your own choices respected and validated since your body belongs to you and you have every right to be comfortable at any size you choose. besides all that even if you are just a hair above what pop culture thinks the normal weight range is you are still subject to discrimination. i think SA really should have a big enough blanket of tolerance to cover you too. if it doesn't i don't think what e are talking about is really SA.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 12, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> i still can't wrap my head around how we are supposed to be accepted by people we wont accept. no matter how hard i try i can't understand how that works. can you?



I can't either.



mcbeth said:


> All I'm saying is, probably more time and energy in a size acceptance should be geared toward body types that experience the most discrimination.



I absolutely agree with you on this.


----------



## CastingPearls (Apr 12, 2011)

If any group keeps excluding people--who's left?


----------



## KHayes666 (Apr 12, 2011)

CastingPearls said:


> If any group keeps excluding people--who's left?



Reminds me of First They Came.


----------



## Dolce (Apr 14, 2011)

I would certainly hope that there could be room for the two. A lot of healthy lifestyle changes are going to result in weight loss for a person of size. For me, size acceptance means that a 400 pound person can go to a gym and go swimming without getting "looks". It means a SSBBW can go in for an epidural injection for her back pain without the doctor complaining that she is going to break the bed and that 30 years ago a person like her would be dead (meaning we would be better off if SS people were dead). It means a 500 lb. person can be admitted to the ER without nurses gasping in disbelief or speaking of him like he is some kind of freak to his face or behind his back. It means that people who are not SS are educated on what it means to be SS and how their negative reactions towards them often make people who have food addictions and mobility issues dig deeper into despair. It means that *helping* those who do want to lose weight consists of focusing first on the human aspect and then on the lifestyle changes. It means being patient and loving with all people and refraining from making judgments until you have all the data (and data changes all the time so best to not make judgments when they can be avoided). It means no one has the right to tell another what size he or she should or shouldn't be. It means understanding one another and daring to dig a little deeper. It means that weight loss is not the goal - the realization of one's own strength and ability is the goal for those who wish to pursue it.

It means someone is not overly valued for ascetic appeal. It means someone is not devalued for their perceived lack of appeal. It means an asshole is still an asshole whether he is fat or thin and will be treated as such. It means we see beyond the physical exterior and into the heart taking note along the way how the inner has effected the outer. The two are not mutually exclusive. 

I will have to think more about it. 

It seems we have a huge lack of health professionals that actually cater to the specific needs of the SS. The focus is always weight loss, weight loss! We will deal with you on a human level once you are at a palatable weight. I think this approach is totally unproductive as being thin is not an option for many SS and it discounts the progress they do make towards a quality of life which is acceptable to them personally.

I can see more and more why NAAFA is against the practice of feeding.


----------

