Fat acceptance synonymous with feminism

[King David]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PCkvCPvDXk

 

All About That Bass

[Psychophant]

Easy bro, you cannot own peoples´ perception of you, cuz that would mean to own their thoughts about you. Those social justice warriors trying to bully people into acceptance try to enforce acceptance which is futile.

[Lars]

I remember something interesting which Stef pointed out about how the general perception of physical beauty in any specific time and place encompasses what is rare/difficult to achieve as it relates to the accumulation or possession of resources.It's extremely easy to become obese in these modern times, not terribly flattering, just an over-consumption of cheap abundant sugar combined with inactivity.

[shirgall]

I remember something interesting which Stef pointed out about how the general perception of physical beauty in any specific time and place encompasses what is rare/difficult to achieve as it relates to the accumulation or possession of resources.

 

Yeah, if I remember correctly one example he used was that there was a time that a tan indicated you worked outside in the fields so it was not desirable... but then everyone moved to working inside so a tan became an indicator of someone that had free time to be playing outside in the sun and it became attractive again.

[den603]

whenever I "debate" a feminist the only "point/insult" they have is "you clearly don't understand what feminism is" and then it goes to name calling like I've seen some of you say I've been called cisgendered (not sure how its an insult or how they'd know but okay), mysogonist, ive been insulted by a few white knights, if you cant form any arguments backed by evidence then your idea is a bad idea

[David Ottinger]

The irrationality that circles this topic is oddly interesting because on one hand there are some valid points for opposing fat shaming because obesity is an issue that is far more complicated than the aesthetics of the dilemma, and on the other hand, there is nothing wrong with celebrating and promoting good health.

Unfortunately, there is a lot of anecdotal evidence that people refer to when passing judgment on people who are either becoming obese or heading in that direction.  And, to put some of this fat shaming analogously, there is a lot of fat shaming that would be the equivalent of going up to a drug addict and telling him/her how much they look like a bum and how unhealthy it is to live that way.  e.g. "Do you know how easy it is to clean up after yourself?"  Wouldn't make much sense, right?

 

Sure, a person telling the addict such things is expressing concern, but is that really helping the addict?  

So, yes, there is a backlash now that amounts to, "I don't care what people think of me.  Either accept me for who I am with all my faults or F-off!"

And, it's getting out of hand because the more you confront the obese person who has decided to take on that hard stance, then any attempt to shame that person is going to trigger his/her fight or flight mechanism.  It's just like the kid that fights the abusive parent(s) and is labeled rebellious.  The more the parent pushes; the more the kid rebels.

So, is it true that these people lack resolve?  Is overcoming obesity really nothing more than a will power challenge?  

There certainly is more to it than that.   The BBC documentary "The Truth About Fat" had some interesting info.  All I can find now is this article:

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-17431970

What I found most fascinating from the documentary was how hormones affect appetite.  Supposedly, people dealing with obesity do not experience a sense of satiation as long as other people.  

So, this whole idea of "Well, if I can do it [eat less], so can you," is akin to telling a super-taster, "Well, if I can eat that lasagna without tasting the acidity of the tomatoes, so can you."  

And, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that people cannot overcome obesity.  I believe it's the hubris that people have when approaching the topic that is leading to this sort of unnecessary conflict and leading to these polarized, irrational views.  

Aren't the so-called shamers simply appealing to fear?  i.e. "If I accept obesity in this person than I might accept obesity in myself?"  And thus compartmentalize away their abuse by claiming, "I'm just promoting better health."  

What's really going on here?


Anyhow... that's just my 2 cents for now. 

Just to add: Would make sense why these women are turning to feminism since it's accepting them regardless of their faults.  People just want to be loved. 

[J. D. Stembal]

 

There certainly is more to it than that.   The BBC documentary "The Truth About Fat" had some interesting info.  All I can find now is this article:

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-17431970

 

What I found most fascinating from the documentary was how hormones affect appetite.  Supposedly, people dealing with obesity do not experience a sense of satiation as long as other people.  

 

 

 

If you force feed yourself a large pizza, the first piece always tastes better than the last. This is no accident. Hormones like leptin and ghrelin do indeed affect appetite, but I find it very interesting that no where in the article you linked is insulin mentioned. Insulin is the hormone that tells the cells in your body, including the adipose tissues, to take up blood sugar (glucose) from the blood stream. Insulin literally directs the construction and expansion of fat tissue.

 

The reason why a chronically obese person constantly feels hungry is because her body cannot access the energy (stored as triglycerides) in her adipose tissue due to insulin resistance. Muscles and other cells tend to become insulin resistant before the adipose tissue. The more insulin resistant tissues get, the more insulin your pancreas has to secrete to manage the blood sugar. The unfortunate biochemical side effect of chronically high insulin levels is that the triglycerides become locked into the fat and cannot be accessed for fuel by the other cells in the body. This is why extremely fat people suffer from near constant hunger and lethargy, and are usually also diabetic. Your adipose tissue is meant to provide a steady stream of fuel to act as an energy buffer to get you between meals that may come few and far between. When the blood stream is cranked with constant streams of glucose from dietary carbohydrate, the body never has a chance to expend the fat energy buffer, and continues to add to it. Eventually, the pancreas wears out and cannot keep up the high insulin levels and the kidneys start excreting excess glucose in your urine. Welcome to adult onset or Type 2 diabetes.

 

Doctors recommending gastric surgery is just ghastly. This is Medieval torture, not science. A much simpler and less cruel solution would be to lower the patient's intake of carbohydrates with a higher glycemic index (sugar, HFCS, potatoes, white rice, pastas, wheat, rice or corn flour). I guess that I consume roughly 60 grams of carbohydrate a day from full-fat yogurt, leafy 5% carbohydrate vegetables, dried coconut and nuts - all ultra low glycemic foods. I sometimes drink a homemade soft drink called kombucha tea which has less than 20g of sugar per bottle. If adult obesity patients can knock their intake down to 100g of carbs per day, they will see significant weight loss because the body can start accessing more of the fuel stored in the adipose tissues due to lower insulin levels.

 

Look at the 2010 USDA dietary guidelines. http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga2010/dietaryguidelines2010.pdf 

 

The federal government recommends 170g of carbs solely from grains for a two thousand calorie per day diet. Most people routinely eat more than two thousand calories per day, including myself. It's no wonder why Americans are sick and getting sicker. Cancer, heart disease, stroke, obesity, diabetes, and Alzheimer's are all scientifically linked to metabolic syndrome (described above), which is a hormone disorder caused by eating too many carbohydrates. Follow the government recommendations and we will need the Affordable Care Act to save our collective fat asses from our own folly.

 

What does all this have to do with feminism, you ask? It has been argued by Stefan Molyneux that feminism was co-opted long ago into a government program, which has the force of the political activism and voters behind it. With the passage of the ACA, which went into effect this year, and the last forty years of government funded research, inconclusive nutritional studies and false health propaganda, it isn't too difficult to connect the two. Obesity is the new government program. The obese are the new underclass while the rest of us enjoy our thin privilege.

[David Ottinger]

^It's been so long since I watched that documentary, but I know that article certainly didn't do it justice.  If I'm not mistaken, I think they were adding another layer to appetite aside from the insulin focus.

In other words, what you said about insulin is true, but this cycle you're referring to is part of the symptom of obesity.  So, how does one's appetite contribute to getting one to that point.  And, I think that's the question they were tackling.  

The idea is that there is an environmental influence that triggers a gene insofar as to cause one to have a more active appetite in order to protect oneself from periods of famine.  If this sort of biological imperative (if you will) is triggered in an environment that actually is abundant in food, and not just abundant, but calorie dense, then there is good reason to believe that there is a biological drive to consume food.

As such, assuming this is correct, if the individual puts him/her-self through a period of what would be considered a calorie deficit, then the body is treating it like a confirmation of a period of famine.  

So, the overall point is that it doesn't matter how much will power one has, this higher rate of food consumption is the result of one's biological programming, and obesity is a product of this biological error.  Insulin resistance or leptin resistance exacerbate the error, thus are symptoms of a larger issue.  

And fat shaming tends to contributes all this lack of integrity or lack of virtue to people struggling with these biological imperatives in an environment abundant with food.  
 
Body signal: "Keep a look out for food; it's an imperative to our survival.  Eat when available."

Mind attempting to will power a diet: "Keep a look out for food;  it's an imperative to our survival.  Treat it like a threat when present."


Doesn't the latter get overwritten once the reward signals kick in?  i.e. The "threat" becomes a mere thought, while the food is empirically verified as beneficial.

Feminism be damned.  I have to agree that there is some merit to their stance on this one.  Though, their approach is terrible as it doesn't really provide an answer either.  They're just throwing poo right back, but hitting those celebrating health.

Personally, it makes me sad because neither side is helping those who are struggling with obesity.   
 

[danielle9184]

Most of the fat acceptance I hear comes from other women, under the justification that men prefer "curves".

I don't claim to be a feminist or any sort of lable. I am me and I have my own ideals a prefences for the body that I dwell in. Personally, I don't care if men find me less appealing because I like to be thin and I am not going to gain ten pounds to appease anyone.

[Lars]

For a woman, being obese on any typical dating site is fatal toward your chances of receiving replies. It's the same for a man if he is short and poor. Regardless, the fat woman's chances are still way better than the short poor man.

[kalmia]

Since beauty is also a subjective standard, a preference, e. g. of people who desire fattys, this statement is wrong.

 

Not anything that is perceived as dysfunction is really a dysfunction. Covered in tattoos is a good example in this case. Enabling something means you would have an obligation to intefer otherwise it would be just inaction.

Beauty isn't entirely subjective. Very little of it is subjective. There is some cultural sexual imprinting. But even that really isn't subjective. The universals include size ratios, symmetry and skin clarity. These all indicate health and longevity particularly genetic longevity.

[kalmia]

 

 

Beauty isn't entirely subjective. Very little of it is subjective. There is some cultural sexual imprinting. But even that really isn't subjective. The universals include size ratios, symmetry and skin clarity. These all indicate health and longevity particularly genetic longevity.

[Josh F]

A search for material on female obesity reveals two recurring trends: 1) a correlation between obesity and sexual abuse and, 2) obesity as a deterrent against unwanted sexual advances.

Yes, this.  Additionally, people with anorexia and bohemia and extreme eating phobias have similar origins.  

Beauty isn't entirely subjective. Very little of it is subjective. There is some cultural sexual imprinting. But even that really isn't subjective. The universals include size ratios, symmetry and skin clarity. These all indicate health and longevity particularly genetic longevity.

I don't think you clearly understand the differences between things which are objective and things which are subjective.  If 99.999% of people prefer skinny girls, it still isn't universal.  And certainly the ratio is not even that high.  

My whole thing on this topic though is that I was a fat kid, and I am still over weight.  When people tell me I have white privilege and that kind of horse shit, and how I couldn't possibly understand what its like to be judged on how you look, I just think who the fuck are you kidding?  

[kalmia]

Things like waste to hip ratios are not just about being skinny. That is part of what makes up female beauty. I'm sure that guys who prefer women with a belly fatter than their hips prefer them for comfort reasons due to their low self esteem. They are preferring comfort over beauty. But that does not negate what beauty is.

 

Another ratio for both male and female beauty is the golden ratio.

[Josh F]

I hope my post made some sense to you, but I don't think it clicked.  Trying to psychoanalyze people's preferences across broad generalities only to dismiss them is not how one arrives at objectivity.

 

Let me show you what I mean:  the attraction to people who have a golden ratio is based on anal retentive and obsessive compulsive behavior, therefor they prefer mathematical ratios to real beauty.  Thus wrong.  Does that sound as silly to you as it does to me?

 

I don't know how to explain this any better, but simply put aesthetics are never objective by definition.  This is akin to someone telling me Jazz is the best music and anyone who disagrees just doesn't understand music.  Its sophistry.  Its also insulting to try and diminish someone's subjective preferences.  How annoying are people who think their music is the only music thats good and think anyone else is a fool for having another musical preference?  

[MMX2010]

I don't know how to explain this any better, but simply put aesthetics are never objective by definition.  This is akin to someone telling me Jazz is the best music and anyone who disagrees just doesn't understand music.  Its sophistry.  Its also insulting to try and diminish someone's subjective preferences.  How annoying are people who think their music is the only music thats good and think anyone else is a fool for having another musical preference?  

 

When you say, "Aesthetics are never objective by definition.", you're implying that the scientific study of aesthetics can never yield either large clusters of agreement or highly predictive characterizations of people who prefer certain aesthetics. 

 

So what happens to your argument when the scientific study of aesthetics routinely does both? 

[Bipedal Primate]

I don't know how to explain this any better, but simply put aesthetics are never objective by definition.  This is akin to someone telling me Jazz is the best music and anyone who disagrees just doesn't understand music.  Its sophistry.  Its also insulting to try and diminish someone's subjective preferences.  How annoying are people who think their music is the only music thats good and think anyone else is a fool for having another musical preference?

Yep, I agree with this premise. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

 

I also know for myself, that the way a person makes me *feel* can alter my perception of their attractiveness. I also suspect my own 'number' goes up after a guy hangs out with me, due to my fab personality ;-)

 

I was recently watching some funny videos on YouTube about the myth of 'size matters.' And the host made a point of saying that women's perception of penis size is directly related to how the guy makes her feel. It made me rethink my own perception of, um, "past experiences" -- and I was like, oh my gosh! -- he is soooooo right! ;-) So much of our attraction to others is actually based on how the other person makes us feel, and a lot less on what others/tv/books/ etc. tell us.

 

And in reference to the OP : The only people who ever try to guilt trip me for being "too thin" are obese females, it is so hypocritical. Go Figure!

[Josh F]

When you say, "Aesthetics are never objective by definition.", you're implying that the scientific study of aesthetics can never yield either large clusters of agreement or highly predictive characterizations of people who prefer certain aesthetics. 

 

So what happens to your argument when the scientific study of aesthetics routinely does both? 

Its the same thing as the Billboard top 100 telling you that Miley Cirus is the best musician.  This is a forum of objectivists, its a little strange to have to explain the difference between objective and subjective.   If more people like Chocolate than Vanilla is it objectively better?  I'm frankly baffled. 

 

Yep, I agree with this premise. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

 

I also know for myself, that the way a person makes me *feel* can alter my perception of their attractiveness. I also suspect my own 'number' goes up after a guy hangs out with me, due to my fab personality ;-)

 

I was recently watching some funny videos on YouTube about the myth of 'size matters.' And the host made a point of saying that women's perception of penis size is directly related to how the guy makes her feel. It made me rethink my own perception of, um, "past experiences" -- and I was like, oh my gosh! -- he is soooooo right! ;-) So much of our attraction to others is actually based on how the other person makes us feel, and a lot less on what others/tv/books/ etc. tell us.

 

And in reference to the OP : The only people who ever try to guilt trip me for being "too thin" are obese females, it is so hypocritical. Go Figure!

Yes, indeed.  I remember a girl in high school who was over weight but was amongst the popular girls because her personality was quite special.  I would hear again and again "I dont like big girls, but I would date her"  (okay perhaps they said that more crudely) 

[kalmia]

There is a difference in attractiveness and beauty. Exactly what defines objective beauty is something that is not completely settled. But there is something objective even if everyone has a different ideal. There is an objective definition of a chair even if everyone disagrees on what an ideal chair is. To deny that there is an objective beauty is to negate the concept.

[J. D. Stembal]

And in reference to the OP : The only people who ever try to guilt trip me for being "too thin" are obese females, it is so hypocritical. Go Figure!

 

It is universally true that a woman's outward appearance is strictly the concern of other women. Men are conditioned to compliment women that doll themselves up because if they do not, they will typically be rejected out of hand. When a man goes a on a date with a woman, he is told to compliment the date at least twice and it must be about her appearance. (From the book, How to Succeed with Women.)

 

When it comes down to it, men don't really care about the cost of her shoes, the designer of her purse, or how many cosmetic enhancements she has. All we need to know is if the eggs are fresh.

 

As far as obesity goes, the male species does generally not find it attractive in females because the disease of obesity adds unnecessary complications to pregnancy. There is a substantially greater risk for still birth, miscarriage, and gestational diabetes.