Big Fat Facts Big Fat Index

Is It Anti-Feminist to Diet?

That's the big question India Knight asks in this Guardian piece. Unfortunately she doesn't tackle the question with any real substance, instead falling back on old and tired thoughts on weight that really frustrated me.

The upfront disclaimer not in the article is that Knight is the author of a diet book. Take that as you will. Her argument is that if a woman wants to lose weight (worded here in a control state - ie, if you're fat you're not in control of your body) then that's just fine and moreover is possibly a feminist action. Knight runs a weight loss forum and blog (they have those on the internets?) and she writes about the victories she sees therein:

Why is it wrong to like what you see in the mirror, or to like your body? Why is it good to be pleased that you look like a pig? I believe unhappily fat women are doing themselves an injury - literally, in health terms, but also emotionally. And I don't think them wanting to stop injuring themselves is weird, or naff, or vain, or self-obsessed.

I really see her blurring a number of issues here. Wrapping up weight in emotional and feminist reactions is a big blanket for sure. She does want to see happy fat women - allegedly - but I get the impression that anyone over a size 14 would be "too" fat. And "look like a pig"?

I'm not in a power position to speak about feminism. But my understanding of it was that part of the goal was to get past the way people look and celebrate all forms of diversity, granting equality to all people. Right? If that's the case (feel free to argue), then why is Knight twisting her weight loss into something more political? I think it could be argued that her personal weight loss was of a personal political nature - there is a huge difference there.

I don't want to say that the "sumo wrestlers" that her forum members lost in weight (900+ pounds) amounts to nothing. Obviously people who diet get very, very wrapped up in their weight and often - but not always - link the number on the scale with happiness. I think Knight is truly just repackaging the same old same old in a new wrapper: it's feminist and empowering to lose weight. Why?

...I cheer for the woman whose husband puts her and her weight down every single day. One of these days, he's going to have to stop. One of these days, she and her new-found confidence aren't going to take it any more.

Yeah, but then in Knight's vision she's going to lose weight in order to meet that goal. That's a dubious endeavor. Yes, self-esteem is vital and of course, men who put down women because of their weight are self-centered assholes who probably need to be dumped. But! Turning around and losing weight, in my opinion, only feeds into the beauty ideal. And for goodness sake, why can't one gain confidence and set that as a goal without weight loss?

Knight seems to be saying that you can't. Maybe some can't. Maybe some won't. But it bothers me a lot to see dieting as a feminist action.

We are thinking about our own gaze [versus the male gaze], about what we want, and about what it does to our sense of ourselves to want things - weight loss, in this instance - and not to blame or punish ourselves for wanting them.

And what I say in return is, think very carefully about going after such a goal as the evidence out there suggests it's harmful and irresponsible.

Wouldn't it be kinder to help create a world where she can be comfortable being her natural 14 size? How? Well, women not bullying other women might be a start. And it might also be a step forward for those "critics" of dieting to control the urge to judge and dismiss something that they clearly don't (or can't) understand. Because you do begin to wonder: whose side are they on?

Wait. Knight wants less bullying and then suggests fat women look like "pigs"?

Finally, I don't dismiss dieting. If you ultimately want to do that to your body, it's your choice. But one needs to be aware of the incredible commercial, societal, and psychological forces that may be pushing one to make that choice. [Thanks, Anna!]

Heather MacAllister Passes | Is Al Gore "Too Fat"?

Euterpist February 22nd, 2007 | Link | Wow, Paul, you covered
Wow, Paul, you covered everything that I wanted to comment on except her e-mail address. pig2twig? Yeah, that's really empowering.
Jenny813 February 22nd, 2007 | Link | I've asked this question of
I've asked this question of myself before, and my answer is: No, it's not anti-feminist to "diet," but it is anti-feminist to hate your body. Unfortunately, that's what most dieting is. If I want to go vegetarian because of concern for the environment, worker exploitation, etc., and "happen to" lose some of my natural mass, then so be it. If I decide to stop eating out of the vending machine because I've finally decided that the stuff in there tastes like cardboard, fine. But if I count every calorie/protein/carb/fat gram/bad guy du jour because I hate the way I look and I think that, by having less of me, I'll suddenly love the way I look, that's anti-feminist. Hell, it's anti-humanist.
Meowzer February 22nd, 2007 | Link | Not only is it antifeminist
Not only is it antifeminist to hate your body, it's antifeminist to hate other women's bodies because they don't conform to your aesthetic ideals. Don't want to look at me? Look up, there's a bird. Look down, there's a cute rock. Look at your navel, there's some crud in it. There are a million other places to look if you don't want to look at me. If India Knight or anyone else wants to live on twigs (that must be the real meaning of her email addy, Eut) so that she can be thin, that's her business. But she has, ern, brass balls to suggest that other women are inferior to herself for not doing likewise. I mean, "arms that look like whole hams"? "A potato balancing on an ant"? How is this anything but Coulteresque namecalling? Dude, be as thin as you want and as thin as you can get, I don't personally care. Just bag the smear campaign, K? N.B. I think the media, in the U.S. as well as in the U.K., just eats it up sideways when there is an intrafeminist "pie fight." I would personally proceed with caution here.
Joycelyn February 23rd, 2007 | Link | Dieting is anti-feminist
Dieting is anti-feminist because it makes you so self-involved with counting grams, carbs, calories, and pounds (or stones) that you don't notice that men are still earning more money than women and reproductive rights are being eroded and the goal of the far right seems to be to keep us barefoot, pregnant, and nailed to the kitchen floor. Also, any time a woman loses weight to gain her husband's approval, that isn't a feminist activity, not is it empowering. It is saying that she isn't good enough as nature made her and she is willing to go hungry to please a man.
Bayareagal February 23rd, 2007 | Link | A large majority of women (I
A large majority of women (I know) who diet do it out of self hate. However, a minority do it not because they hate themselves but because they honestly believe a thinner version of themselves would be more attractive; that they are simply making an "improvement" on a body they are not totally dissatisfied with. OK, I can understand that, and there's nothing wrong with trying to make yourself more attractive. They consider dieting an improvement like tanning or something; something that can have negative health effects in the longterm but that improves your appearance in the short term. I also think it's a really strong accusation to say that someone hates herself; maybe a more accurate word would be dissatisfaction or something. Even just hating your fat doesn't necessarily make you a self-hater. There are so many more important parts to your self than fat. So I guess I'm trying to defend women who both diet and who call themselves feminists, because I don't think that all weight loss attempts stem from self hatred, and I don't think that all diets are extreme and punishing. And there are people who don't even diet because of external pressures, but because they find themselves more attractive at a lower weight, just like I think I am more attractive at a higher weight. If I suddenly lost a large amount of weight due to illness or something, I would miss my current size and want to get back to it. Would any attempt to regain the weight make me a self-hating anti-feminist? Or is it different because there is no social pressure that would make me want to gain the weight? And what if a woman's desire to be thinner is independent of social pressures (for example, if even if it were in vogue to be fat, she prefers herself thin?)
Marshfield February 23rd, 2007 | Link | I've noted this before here,
I've noted this before here, but I believe the very core of feminism is control over one's own body. If that includes choosing to lose (or gain) weight, to get tattooed, to take up weight training, or to take a vow of celibacy, it's perfectly OK with me.
GiniLiz February 23rd, 2007 | Link | I agree that it is fine and
I agree that it is fine and quite feminist to have control over one's own body, but a larger part of feminism to me is recognizing the social forces at work that make us believe we are "choosing" something for ourselves when in reality we are being pressured from all sides to do or not do certain things to our bodies. Feminism involves critically questioning how women are supported in "choosing" certain options over others. In the case of weight, women are very much supported for "choosing" to lose weight and very much discouraged for "choosing" to accept their bodies at whatever weight they happen to be.
BabySeal February 23rd, 2007 | Link | "but a larger part of
"but a larger part of feminism to me is recognizing the social forces at work that make us believe we are "choosing" something for ourselves when in reality we are being pressured from all sides to do or not do certain things to our bodies" Extremely well said!
fatthought February 23rd, 2007 | Link | Bayareagal, a "woman's
Bayareagal, a "woman's desire to be thinner" is almost never independent of social pressures these days. And this site does not support or condone any kind of dieting for any reason. People can do it, but they cannot bring it to the table here. Many of us are on this site as a relief from dieting talk having been hammered into us from all sides previously. If you wish to discuss dieting as a positive measure, there are plenty of sites on which you can post. But this is not one of them.
DeeLeigh February 23rd, 2007 | Link | I agree that how we manage
I agree that how we manage our bodies would ideally be neutral, but that in this social climate, it usually isn't. Calling other women "pigs" because they're larger than you are is definitely antifeminist. Acting as if losing weight is the most important thing you've ever done is pathetic. The fact that this sort of person is often raised up by the media as a role model is anti-feminist, in my view. Losing weight means very little in the grand scheme of things. Why are women given so much positive attention for losing weight, yet are often ignored (or have their appearance criticized!) when they do things that have a real effect on the world?
madge February 23rd, 2007 | Link | Well said, DeeLeigh. I
Well said, DeeLeigh. I second all of that. As someone on this site once pointed out, it's not as though your weight gets listed on your gravestone. Losing weight really does mean soooo little in the grand scheme. It's sad that some people spend their entire lives in pursuit of it.
DebraSY February 23rd, 2007 | Link | DeeLeigh, you no doubt felt
DeeLeigh, you no doubt felt an irony alert when you read her two paragraphs on invisibility -- and her "feminist" answer to lose weight. I know I did. I have so much to respond to this article that I don't know where to begin. I could write 170 pages countering this stinker. I am absolutely dumbfounded at women who accomplish something in the name of women, then turn around and lambaste women. It happens in so many areas, but here we see it in weight loss. Oh, well, let me pick one paragraph to counter: "As I'm writing this, the members of our forum who are following our diet have collectively lost 905lbs, which is roughly two sumo wrestlers. And try as I might, I can't fathom out in what conceivable way they have done themselves any kind of disservice. . ." My answer to that is wait five years. If 95% of them gain back all their weight plus an additional 10 percent, as the statistics suggest will happen, regardless of her diet plan, then I calculate that they will regain 976 pounds for a net gain of 41 pounds. Hmmm. I'm sure they'll feel then that they have really been empowered, that they have confronted and finally addressed "something that has blighted every aspect of their lives, sometimes for decades on end, sometimes from childhood." Yeesh. This one is just under my skin. Everyone is making great posts. Let's gift wrap them and send them on to her.
Marshfield February 23rd, 2007 | Link | Isn't it anti-feminist to
Isn't it anti-feminist to suggest that women are so easily manipulated they don't know their own minds? We are all manipulated to one degree or another by clever advertising and propaganda, but I doubt women are more susceptible than men. >>Feminism involves critically questioning how women are supported in "choosing" certain options over others.
Dreama February 23rd, 2007 | Link | It is anti-feminist to
It is anti-feminist to suggest that women are easily manipulated. It is, however, decidedly feminist to take notice of the fact that none of us lives in a vacuum, we are all constantly barraged with messages about what is and isn't "acceptable" about our lives, our behavior and our bodies, and only sociopaths are wholly immune to the influences of the culture in which we live, let alone the individuals who are in our lives who are also influenced by the culture and imprint us with the mores and values of the culture, just as we imprint them. And our culture places a high value on women who meet certain standards in attitudes, behavior, dress, style, career and, perhaps more than anything else, looks. To deny that is to deny a truth as evident as the sun rising in the morning and setting when day is done. It is also decidedly feminist to reject, wholesale, anyone who wants to couch their pro-weightloss argument in terms which include dissecting other women's bodies and applying the most insulting of labels to the various parts, and calling other women pigs. I don't care if at its root her argument is that "women can make an informed choice." (Especially since, in this case, her "informed choice" isn't informed at all.) She's dressed her argument in the foulest of draperies and I refuse to spend even a moment longer than I must looking at it.
Marshfield February 23rd, 2007 | Link | Agreed that the article
Agreed that the article under discussion was glib and insulting. Also agreed that we're all shaped and influenced by the society around us. It's up to each of us to push back when society is out of whack, which is part of being a good citizen--feminist or not.
Bayareagal February 24th, 2007 | Link | To fatthought: Uh, what? I
To fatthought: Uh, what? I don't support or condone dieting at ALL. Dieting nearly ruined my life (literally). What I was saying was that we cannot assume that in *every* case, a woman wants to be thinner because of societal pressures, because on the flip side, I know that it's possible to ignore societal pressures, because I have, and a lot of other women have, and prefer themselves fat. I wasn't discussing the positive aspect of dieting; I'm just trying to be realistic here, because I don't think it's necessary to hate yourself to want to change *if* you sincerely believe that change would be an improvement to yourself and the measures you are taking are not self-punishing. I realize this excludes a number (the majority, even) of dieters, but I also think that accusing a person of hating herself is a pretty serious charge, though it gets thrown around a lot. I'm sorry that you misunderstood what I was saying and that you were so quick to suggest that I post elsewhere. I don't have a positive attitude towards dieting, but I also have a tolerant attitude towards people doing things that make them happy as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else, and instead of targeting the people and accusing them of being anti-feminist or of hating themselves, to target the social pressures that might unfairly influence them. But I also agree with other posters, that women are not as easily manipulated as some think. If a woman expresses a strong desire to be thin, saying it's because she thinks a thinner body is more aesthetically pleasing, and she doesn't like the way she looks fat, which is more insulting? To assume she doesn't know what she's talking about because society has forced her to think that way, or to think she is capable of making this decision and accepting that this is genuinely how she feels? I'm a libertarian so the general "society made me do/think it" is not acceptable to me. After all, very few people have any thoughts that are completely independent of society, so pointing out that society was an influence is an obvious given, with the more important question being, "Is there only one option?" By that, I mean, is wanting to be thin the *only* option given to us in society? I don't believe so. But because I'm fat and genuinely happy with myself and that I would be, at least to some extent, unsatisfied with my body if I were thin, I have to believe that on the other hand, there are thin women who are genuinely happy thin and would be unsatisfied (but not necessarily hate) themselves if they were fat. And you're definitely right that most women only want to be thin because of society, but we should also take into account individual differences.
mommaterra February 25th, 2007 | Link | Is it feminist to diet? No.
Is it feminist to diet? No. Do feminists diet? Yes. Is that counterproductive? Yep. So's a lot of what we do in a coercive culture. You get to be a feminist by being female and saying you are one (you can be a profeminist male, in the same way I can be a pro-Black activist and yet cannot be a Black activist no matter how much I wail on the unfairness of it all; that's privilege and it smells and is loud and wailey without my help). The standard for feminist is reasonable, IMO. You get to be a trusted sister by acting like one. Dieting disqualifies you from the get-go. And you don't get to demand trust -- you get to earn it. Individually, one sister at a time. That standard makes it rather tough, and never certain -- again, IMO, much like disprivilege is! If we could get feminism to shift its oft-privileged view to more like the above, it'd solve many of feminisms ills. And I'm one of the most adamant feminists you'll ever meet: Dworkin and Lorde live on in print, goddesses of my soul's content. :) --diana
Marshfield February 25th, 2007 | Link | But if it's so easy to be
But if it's so easy to be disqualified as a "trusted sister"--some would say sex with men would do it, or wearing makeup--and the standard is so tough, then is feminism (or should it be) just a small, exclusive sorority of True Believers? I wouldn't have thought so.
Bayareagal February 25th, 2007 | Link | Can you not be a feminist if
Can you not be a feminist if you are not "female?" Heh, another reason I don't call myself a feminist. The Circle of Trusted Sisters sounds more like a cult than a majority of people who believe in gender equality.
GiniLiz February 25th, 2007 | Link | "I also have a tolerant
"I also have a tolerant attitude towards people doing things that make them happy as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else, and instead of targeting the people and accusing them of being anti-feminist or of hating themselves, to target the social pressures that might unfairly influence them." First, this person is hurting somebody else. She is hurting all of her readers who will read her insulting remarks. Second, most dieting is not a private affair that has no affect on anybody else. I've never met a dieter who didn't tell others she was losing weight OR who didn't gladly accept compliments about her thinner body. This perpetuates the idea that thinner bodies are better. The person making the compliment, the person receiving the compliment, and those in earshot all get the message - Thin is beautiful. Thin is good. Thin gets compliments. Fat is bad. Fat is something to be avoided. We don't live in bubbles where the decisions we make "for ourselves" only influence ourselves. "If a woman expresses a strong desire to be thin, saying it's because she thinks a thinner body is more aesthetically pleasing, and she doesn't like the way she looks fat, which is more insulting? To assume she doesn't know what she's talking about because society has forced her to think that way, or to think she is capable of making this decision and accepting that this is genuinely how she feels?" I'm a strict behaviorist. I don't believe in free will. So I don't think it is insulting to be told how my "decisions" have been influenced by my experiences. And in many places for many women, yes, being thin is the only real option given, if one believes a true "free choice" (if one believes in free will) is one where all options are equally rewarded or punished.
Bayareagal February 25th, 2007 | Link | I wasn't actually referring
I wasn't actually referring to the author of this article (even though I meant hurting in a physical sense). I guess I should have made it clear that I was referring to a hypothetical dieter. Trying to force yourself to become thin may be the socially favored option, but my own personal experiences and common sense tell me that it's not the only one. If it were, then I and basically all the women I associate myself with (and many, if not most, of the people on this blog) could not have made the decision to refrain from dieting. Just because one option is more strongly favored and just because the choice is not fair, does not mean no other choice is possible. It makes the other choice perhaps more difficult, but by no means impossible.
Alyssa February 25th, 2007 | Link | Quoting from the
Quoting from the article: "Why is it good to be pleased that you look like a pig?" This is a woman-hating, misogynistic statement.
mommaterra February 26th, 2007 | Link | 'But if it's so easy to be
'But if it's so easy to be disqualified as a "trusted sister"--some would say sex with men would do it, or wearing makeup--and the standard is so tough, then is feminism (or should it be) just a small, exclusive sorority of True Believers? I wouldn't have thought so.' Actually quite the reverse! If feminism is open to all women's definitions (um, including those who don't always get asked what they think, say women of especially rich pigmentation or of especially blessed adiposity? ;), then it doesn't get to be a country club, exclusive place where only the culturally privileged monitor the door. It was a pain the first times I got 'disqualified' for sleeping with male type persons. But you can sure believe it reinforced for me how much I had not sold out who I am to do so! Made me think. And for privileged people, that's the point. At the end of the class or session or day, or whatever the feminist unit of measurement, usually women build bridges. If I can build those bridges with women who know that I have more cultural power, and feel they might be able to trust me not to use it, that is an incredible honor! There are so many doors into feminism that, yes, it may make more sense to concentrate on the underlying cause, and not diss a sister for her adding to the effect. Sometimes. And sometimes I hope sincerely that my own will not cut *me* that slack, will call *me* on my stuff (though I may not actually like it, and I do appreciate gentleness), because I do not want to add to others' oppression. If I don't like the garbage I get, I sure can't condone dishing it toward others.
Marshfield February 26th, 2007 | Link | I'm not a team player, I
I'm not a team player, I guess, because I get tired of all the jockeying for position and resultant in-fighting, judging and ranking, but I try to work for change as an individual by supporting female candidates (and pro-female male candidates as well), seeking out female professionals (doctors, contractors, etc.) writing letters, speaking out, and just living my life as an independent woman.
Marshfield February 26th, 2007 | Link | I'm not a team player, I
I'm not a team player, I guess, because I get tired of all the jockeying for position and resultant in-fighting, judging and ranking, but I try to work for change as an individual by (financially) supporting female candidates (and pro-female male candidates as well), seeking out female professionals (doctors, contractors, etc.) writing letters, speaking out, and just living my life as an independent woman.
rachelr February 26th, 2007 | Link | I've been fat and I've been
I've been fat and I've been thin. I never found the blissful self-acceptance and self-confidence Knight speaks of at either weight. Knight has merely joined the denizons in the weight-loss industry whose ultimate goal is to profit by making women (namely) feel bad and insecure about how they look. Feminism is the acceptance of and celebration of diversity in society, yet Knight and her minions promote the idea that only thin women are to be recognized and valued. Doing things that are healthier and make you feel better is one thing... But in her article, Knight starts off with the many ways in which she was discriminated against because of her weight. It's sad to see that she has joined the ranks and is now doing the very same thing to other women.
mommaterra February 26th, 2007 | Link | Oh, Marshfield, for what
Oh, Marshfield, for what it's worth, I'd join your team! All I'm worried about is getting those who have been marginalized a shot at a voice in the movement. And while I do think those with the least power should get to do the judging and such, for once, I, too, look forward to a world where freedom is more than a rallying cry against Those Other People, whomever they might be. You are doing good feminist work, to my mind. You are focusing on access to points of power; this is good. I am focusing on access to challenging the effects of those points of power (Audre Lorde's "the master's tools ..."). The only possible "wrong" position, IMO, is to close down, give up, concede to coercion while dissing other women, other people, who do not, and pretending to be a part of the Real Power Structure when, in fact, one is not. (Maybe 'Tokens in Favor of Oppressing People Like Me'?) Reminds me of someone named 'Knight.'
tarahj65 February 27th, 2007 | Link | To me the language that
To me the language that knight uses to describe fat women discredit her. I don't think it is anti-feminist to lose weight. I always have problems when people act as arbiters pronouncing who is feminist, who is not, who is Black, who is not--you get the idea. I think we define ourselves. I guess an argument can be made that even feminist can commit anti-feminist acts, such as Knights degradation of fat women. Is dieting an anti-feminist act--if it comes out of self hatred as a fat woman, than I would say it is, but I also wonder what the definition of dieting is here. I don't believe that everyone loses weight out of self hatred. But returning to the article, I don't believe that the author has the best interests of women in mind, and ultimately that would be the goal of a feminist. peace, Tara
Marshfield February 27th, 2007 | Link | Among the defensive insults,
Among the defensive insults, Knight made one good point: >>Wouldn't it be kinder to help create a world where she can be comfortable being her natural 14 size?
DebraSY February 27th, 2007 | Link | "Among the defensive
"Among the defensive insults, Knight made one good point: >>Wouldn't it be kinder to help create a world where she can be comfortable being her natural 14 size?" True, but safe. How 'bout her natural 22? 26? 52? Where's the line? How daring might Knight be? I'm betting not very. How 'bout allowing a woman to be comfortable in her natural child's Lg size? The other end of the spectrum. Life in the middle of the bell curve is just peachy, as Knight well knows.
DebraSY February 27th, 2007 | Link | Or, I should say, life in
Or, I should say, life in the center of the bell curve SHOULD be just peachy. That is all that Knight is advocating for. Not too brave in my book.
Marshfield February 27th, 2007 | Link | >>True, but safe. How 'bout
>>True, but safe. How 'bout her natural 22? 26? 52? Where's the line?
nobluz February 28th, 2007 | Link | As a fat woman with a very
As a fat woman with a very wide circle of fat friends, from Massachusetts to my home state, I don't remember anyone of them making self-depricating remarks about their weight, or anyone else's for that matter. This is a stereotypical remark leftover from last quarter of the 20th century. Actually, I believe this article is a weak attempt to defend her "buy my book now and lose weight" money-grubbing schpiel. It's amazing to me she didn't also mention that old standard, "always a bridesmaid, never a bride crappola" so well known from the 1950 and 60s. What a crock. Research tells us that weightloss is not a permanent action. I say give her 5 years and revisit her blog. "You develop a whole fraudulent persona to go with your weight: you become a "jolly" fat person with a nifty line in self-deprecating jokes, expertly - and viciously - insulting yourself before anyone can insult you.":
Imagynne February 28th, 2007 | Link | "...I cheer for the woman
"...I cheer for the woman whose husband puts her and her weight down every single day. One of these days, he's going to have to stop. One of these days, she and her new-found confidence aren't going to take it any more." Indeed. Domestic abuse is really all about uplifting self-esteem. She should really be thanking her partner for helping her become a better person. Fucking bollocks.
xenafu March 3rd, 2007 | Link | The diet industry is
The diet industry is monstrous. It's become more of an institution really in the sense that it's concerned with controlling social behavior and remaining a permanent part of society. Ms. Knight is just one of millions of drones giving voice to it and as usual she says nothing new (Corporatism isn't prone to originality). She hasn't earned the respect necessary to bring her rhetoric into the serious realm of Feminism so I won't bother.
LLW March 8th, 2007 | Link | To make an argument either
To make an argument either way, one would have to first clearly define "feminist," and it's one of those words that mean so many different things to different people that it's nearly a nonsense word. I also want to point out that she thinks it's a good thing to "lose" or annihilate, actually, two sumo wrestlers. Not if I'm one of them, it ain't--nor if I'm a lover of a sumo wrestler. To me, this is the trafic face of dieting, that it is hatred of one's own being. Our flesh is our self, and to wish to kill it is a form of self-mutilation, self-hatred. IMO, whether dieting is "Feminist" or not is not really an interesting issue (and SO badly argued in this article. I can crap better arguments than that!), but the interesting question is "is dieting always neurotic? Is it always a sign of emotional illness?" And I'd answer, yes, it is, just as another form of self-mutilation, cutting, is. People have the right to do both, but I'd like dieting added to the DSMIVR as a mental illness, like bulimia and superdieting/anorexia. A person's starting weight does not change a diagnosis of schizophrenia; it should not change a diagnosis of anorexia. Neurosis is always a "substitute for legitimate suffering" (Jung), but dieting is, imo, certainly one.
Euterpist's picture
Euterpist
March 12th, 2007 | Link | I'd like dieting added to

I'd like dieting added to the DSMIVR as a mental illness, like bulimia and superdieting/anorexia. A person's starting weight does not change a diagnosis of schizophrenia; it should not change a diagnosis of anorexia.

Beautifully put. I hold out no hope that this will happen in our lifetimes (or even those of our children), but it would be wonderful to think that the mass delusion that dieting is good for one would one day be seen for what it really is.

EmilyH March 13th, 2007 | Link | How is it feminist to hate

How is it feminist to hate your body? To starve yourself because men say you need to be thin? To hate other women because you hate yourself for not being able to conform to a standard that men set up in order to control women? I would think that if anything, it would be anti-feminist.

I agree that it's one thing to diet for environmental reasons, or even actual health reasons, but I think dieting just for the sake of being thin to be able to conform isn't right. Women are not going to get anywhere with equality until we all stop buying into this "you must be thin" hype. It is all about controlling us. Stop letting them control you.

Stinger March 27th, 2007 | Link | I think we need to relax

I think we need to relax about this some because we are winning. The latest statistics say that 65% of Americans are "overweight." That number is even higher for women and that number continues to grow inspite of the media's bias against fat people.

Skinny women are in the minority by far! Women are no longer listening to the the propaganda.

I think we are winning!

DeeLeigh's picture
DeeLeigh
March 27th, 2007 | Link | Winning? No we're not.

Winning? No we're not. We're not out to make more people fat. The percentage of fat people is going up partly because everyone is dieting. Dieting, for many people, leads to weight gain over the long term.

We'll be winning when our society is no longer neurotic about food and weight, and people aren't judged by their size.

Stinger March 27th, 2007 | Link | Yes we are winning. The statistics prove it.

in the short term you are correct but the more fat people there are the more difficult is will be for them to insult our intelligence.

Inspite of the efforts of media, the diet industry and government the trend for obesity is still growing. People are leting the propaganda go in one ear and out the other.

Clearly Americans are not falling for it as the following article illustrates.

Obesity rates continued to rise last year in every state but one, and government policies and actions to date offer little hope of countering the trend, according to a new report by Trust for America's Health. Mississippi ranked as the heaviest state, Colorado as the least heavy, and rates stayed the same in Oregon,

How Obesity Policies are Failing in America, 2005.

Over 25 percent of adults in 10 states are obese, including in Mississippi, Alabama, West Virginia, Louisiana, Tennessee, Texas, Michigan, Kentucky, Indiana, and South Carolina. Seven of those 10 states are in the Southeastern U.S.

"Obesity is a gateway to heart disease, diabetes and a host of other diseases," said Parris N. Glendening, former two-term Governor of Maryland, president of the Smart Growth Leadership Institute, and co-author of the report.

"There is much more that can be done to help people make healthy choices about nutrition and exercise. For instance, decisions about where we build new houses and highways or schools and sidewalks can mean the difference between giving people more or less opportunity to participate in physical activity."

Approximately 119 million Americans, or 64.5 percent, of adult Americans are either overweight or obese. Estimates of the number of obese American adults rose from 23.7 percent in 2003 to 24.5 percent in 2004. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services set a national goal of reducing obesity in adults to 15 percent or less of the population in states by the year 2010. In addition, 16 percent of active duty U.S. military personnel are obese, and it is currently the biggest reason for the discharge of soldiers.

"We have reached a state of policy paralysis in regards to obesity," said Shelley A. Hearne, DrPH, Executive Director of TFAH. "We need more and better data so we can make decisions to get out of the debate limbo in which we are stuck. We have a crisis of poor nutrition and physical inactivity in the U.S. and it's time we dealt with it." Some other key findings from the study include:

-- Federal obesity programs are too limited and silo-ed to have a significant impact toward reducing or controlling obesity. Additionally, the lack of sufficient research to inform policies and programs severely constrains activities.

-- Obesity is exacerbated by the lack of significant policies addressing community design issues -- such as sidewalks and suburban sprawl -- and greater affordability and accessibility of healthy food options -- including the "urban grocery store gap."

-- People who receive food stamps are more likely to be obese compared to both eligible non-participants and higher-income individuals.

-- Most school meal programs still focus on delivering minimum versus maximum nutrition to students, and physical education programs are given low priority.

-- Six states have stricter requirements for the nutrition value of school lunches, breakfasts, and snacks than the U.S. Department of Agriculture requires. -- Three states have established new standards since last year.

-- Eleven states have set nutritional standards for foods sold in schools that are not part of the federally sponsored school lunch program, called "competitive foods," which include items sold in vending machines, a la carte in cafeterias, snack shops, and bake sales.

` -- Nineteen states limit the availability of "competitive foods" beyond federal requirements, such as restrictions on when they can be sold.

-- Over one-third of states tried to improve school physical education programs in the last year, however, requirements still fall short. While South Dakota is the only state not to require physical education for students, most state requirements in place are often not enforced.

-- A majority of governors throughout the country have taken steps to initiate innovative obesity-reduction and control programs for state employees, however, most statewide initiatives aimed at the general public are often limited to public information campaigns.

-- Forty percent of states have enacted legislation to limit obesity-related law suits.

-- Trends suggest possible future changes to employer health care plans, such as "fit versus fat" premium differences for individuals based on lifestyle and risk for disease due to obesity.

To help combat the obesity crisis, in the report, TFAH challenges the research community to focus on five major research questions to better inform policy decisions, and policymakers to act on 20 identifiable common sense based policy actions.
:

Kindly link to articles instead of copy/pasting in the future. -Paul

DeeLeigh's picture
DeeLeigh
March 28th, 2007 | Link | Stinger, you don't seem to

Stinger, you don't seem to be registering what we're saying. Most people aren't becoming fatter because they are ignoring anti-fat propaganda. They are becoming fatter because they're trying to do what the government and the media tell them to. However, those "common sense" weight loss methods tend to be either ineffective or counterproductive.

You list government "anti-obesity" strategies and seem to imply that if people were going along with the government mandated focus on weight loss, then those strategies would be causing people to lose weight. However, most of these strategies concern reducing access to highly processed food and encouraging people to become more active. Every one of these strategies contains the assumption that fat people eat more "junk food" and are less active than other people. We know that those assumptions are not necessarily true.

Most fat people aren't size accepting. In fact, some of the worst anti-fat bigots are fat. Most people who get fat do not have a consciously rebellious mind set. They don't get fat on purpose, and they are absolutely mortified by it. They believe that getting fat is a horrible thing that someone must be blamed for. Most often, they blame themselves. They often internalize the hatred for fat and for fat people in our society.

I often wonder about the effect that this lack of self respect in such a large percentage of the population is going to have on society as a whole. Certainly, many of them are never going to cross over to the SA camp. They'll just do increasingly violent things to their bodies in the attempt to become thin. In between attempts, they'll continue to wallow in despair and neglect their bodies. The whole thing is a mess.

paul March 28th, 2007 | Link | Nicely said.

Most fat people aren't size accepting. In fact, some of the worst anti-fat bigots are fat.

I think part of the bigger issue that you're touching on, Dee, is that if a person is fat that person doesn't automatically become accepting of her size. (I wish it were that way!)

In fact, this is the angle that has given rise to the combo of pseudo-acceptance and dieting. After all, if these fat people liked their bodies, they wouldn't need to diet, right? But they do.

And yes, Stinger, we are the majority. That is true. But, out of that majority, the number of people who are (at least) "okay" with their bodies would be a low number, I suspect. That's, as Dee put it, a "mess".

Meowzer March 27th, 2007 | Link | I don't know that the

I don't know that the increases in the number of fat people have anything to do with "not hearing the propaganda." In fact, there's plenty of evidence that the opposite is true -- the more people diet and become neurotic about food and their bodies, the more the average person's weight goes up. There's little evidence to suggest that pressuring people to become thin, or even people's actual desire to become thin, actually makes them significantly thinner on a permanent basis. There's always plenty of short-term loss, but very few people manage to keep it off.

It may be true, however, that the more we see fat people living to ripe old ages in large numbers -- which will undoubedtly occur as baby boomers move into their senior years -- the more the propaganda will be questioned over the long term. Let's hope.

Stinger March 27th, 2007 | Link | Majority Rules

Consider that fact that currenly the obesity rate is 65% and rising at over a percent every year. Clearly people ARE ignoring the propaganda campaigns.

By 2012 we will exceed 70% of the US population and we will control the power.

If we continue to act like victims by staying of the defensive we further the climate of self loating because by defending it we are giving the impression that being fat needs to be defended.

I am truly inspired by the Marilyn Wanns, the Paul Camposes and the Jennifer Portnicks whose take no prisoners approach tells our detractors where they can stick it.

Marshfield March 28th, 2007 | Link | Body love

I love my body. It's sturdy, healthy, and generally nicely-proportioned. I have shiny graying hair and a pleasant face. I've reached advanced boomerhood with few complaints. That doesn't mean I would preclude modifying the way I look by healthy means (weight training is one I've considered). Commercial media encourage body dissatisfaction in woman of all sizes; it's not just fat women they pitch to. You can pay attention or not. Anyway, self-improvement is a popular human pastime. It's not always pathological.

Stinger March 28th, 2007 | Link | I am not saying that there

I am not saying that there still is not a lot of fat bigotry. I am sure it is worse in other parts of the country than others. I live in the Bible belt, Eastern North Carolina to be exact and the obeisty rate her is way above the national average. As a result it is very fat friendly here. As many of you know the South is not known for its tolerance as they are very anti-gay and anti minority here.

Southerners like to think of themselves as rebels. They are really into this heritage movement ie Southern pride. They simply do not listen to the propaganda. They are firm in their belief of "don't tell me what I "need" to do. I really admire that. It is refreshing.

As the numbers of us increase it is just logical that more people will take up the cause because the majority will control the power.

We are getting accomodation and it is getting better.

As to dieting everyone has their own reasons. Some people have been led to believe that dieting may improve their health. Others do it for vanity reasons but I cannot judge someone's motivation for doing it and i don't see them as a sell out in every case.

DebraSY March 28th, 2007 | Link | Size acceptance: What is winning?

We'll be winning when our society is no longer neurotic about food and weight, and people aren't judged by their size.

Amen to that. We'll be winning when the $50 billion that is spent with the diet industry is redirected to real health issues, locally and globally: clean drinking water for all, health care for all, not a privilege for the wealthy, etc. We'll be winning when fat people are accepted equally in the workplace and academia, and enjoying promotions and salaries commensurate with their experience and expertise. We'll be winning when fat people receive from doctors the same treatment for illnesses that thin people do, immediately and not after they have first tried to lose weight. We'll be winning when fat jokes in movies or comedy routines are considered an outrage and an embarrassment to the teller, not to fat people.

Numbers alone do not define who is "winning." If that were the case, clearly the insects would be declared the winners on this planet.

Stinger March 28th, 2007 | Link | Strides are being made in

Strides are being made in the area of healthcare in response to our needs. Open MRI is one.

Some technology still has not caught up in the case of the super morbidly obese but i don;t think that is a societal thing.

Healthcare in general is not all that good. What disease has modern medicine cured in the last 60 years.

I am a type 2 diabetic and I am getting good treatment form my doctors. I am looking at knee replacement and although the doctors are telling me I need to lose about 100 pound before it will be effective I really cannot complain because it is not thier fault that my weigh exceeds the load limits for artificial knees and we are often in need of joint replacement.

My doc even is looking into an experimental procedure that uses injections and special lasers that amy be effective on a guy my size.

What would you do in my situation? Would you lose weight so that you could get knee replacements? Would you wait for experimental remedies?

I get treated pretty well I think. When I was working I was well respected and I really don't think size was an issue for most people but there are bigots everywhere.

I regect most of what society pretends to be. The charletons in the diet industry they are just trying to make a buck by exploiting the weight issue.

There are people who may not like me because I am fat. I have had co workers offer me diet suggestions because they are worried about my health. They know my list of health problems and they think they are helping. I cannot get upset about that. I love them for it. Even though I am not working they still care about me. They are part of society. They looked past my fat and got to know me. I think they are glad they did.

Stinger March 29th, 2007 | Link | If Ruth Ginsberg, Gloria

If Ruth Ginsberg, Gloria Stienam, Hillary Clinton, Betty Friedan ect.. dieted because they thought it may improve theor health would nayone consider them sellouts?

IMO the feminist movement has sold out the women of the Arab world and the women in Sudan.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.