The Shape of Things to Come
A must-read: DeeLeigh's blog entry on the HAES triangle.
[Weight loss programs] treat intelligent, disciplined adults like stupid children and make them feel like failures when they can't succeed long term in restricting an autonomic system.
So perfect. "Want to be treated like a child? Join Weight Watchers! A 'lifestyle choice' since 2007!" And:
...the true rebellion is in making our own decisions and managing our own lives, not in living our lives as a reaction against healthism and the weight loss mentality.
Excellent, insightful stuff.
...And You Will Know Us by the Trail of Ed | Fat Produce
Posted by paul on July 2, 2008
I just want to recommend The Beauty Myth to all and sundry. Many of you have read it I'm sure, but to those of you who haven't, please do it now. I especially like how she compares the "sin" of eating to the "sin" of sex and how people have to be to controlled through one or the other.
I agree. I read it a long time ago, but I still remember a lot from the Beauty Myth. The idea of the "iron maiden" has really stuck with me: that modern restrictions on our bodies' sizes and shapes are even more repressive than the tightly laced corsets of 100+ years ago.
Thanks for linking to my entry, Paul! My blog's kind of obscure, and I don't post very often.
It's not just diets that treat you like a child, it's also doctors/surgeons pushing WLS. If you have WLS, and it doesn't work, it's not because it's a flawed tool, it's because you were a naughty child and didn't follow Mommy or Daddy's orders (the doctor or surgeon). Doesn't matter if you did follow orders, you're either delusional or lying, just like a child caught with their hand in the cookie jar.
WLS - Sorry, not my preferred way of dying. *glares at doctor recommending it*
You make some salient points, but I feel quite a lot of them are misdirected.
What you have to remember is that the idea that we need guidance over and above our own internal tastes and preferences, is just that, an idea, it is not fact.
Of course it's possible to fail at HAES, because in a way, it is dieting lite, it's bedrock so far as I can tell are successful (fat?) dieters who like what they're good at, what attractions for those who failed utterly at it?
If HAES is about intuitive eating then what's to talk about? The more you talk about it to those outside that loop, apart from being tremendously tedious, the more it becomes something to fail at, because of all the showing off and competition that inevitably follows, you 'fail' each other too and it's not always pretty!
The truth is that H/E can trigger exactly the same problems as dieting, it can and does cause endless grazing, binges, BED, bulimia and anorexia, that sound hard to believe if it has been great for you, saying this from personal knowledge, I recognise it's great for you, I like peanuts, I recognise some people are mortally allergic to them. I still like them.
The issue here is that some people are in the category of needing to be indirected when it comes to food, and don't know it, precisely because it sounds so mild and reasonable, but if it's not for you, you need to be able to perceive this.
Talking about this does not mean HAES is bad, it just means you still have to be aware that you may have to seemingly dispense with any rules, you aren't of course, it just seems so relative to the current climate of rules, you are following rules, those of your own body.
I wish to high heaven I'd rebelled, I'd have safed myself a lot of trouble.
My whole point was that we don't need guidance over and above our own internal tastes and preferences.
When I first read your comments, I was confused, because I couldn't see what point you were making or how it was related to my post. I have to conclude that we have radically different ideas about what HAES is, and I think that there's a huge communication gap in both directions. I'm not even sure it's worth debating.
I was objecting to your interpretations of a body trying to restore its inner balance. It is not a knee jerk reactive rebellion and making the connection between HAES and dieting, is not 'being triggered' by pain. It's real enough.
HAES is obviously about many things, but in the main it seems to be dieting and exercise regimes minus the weight loss, I didn't know that wasn't obvious, or that it was offensive. I realise now that your idea of what you are does not match how you are.
You accuse other people of oversensitivity, but in my experience healthy lifestyle advocates within and outside the movement are the worst for emotionalism and underlying fanaticism.
The difference between those who are within FAM and those outside it, is that you part company on pursuing weight loss or slimness and attitudes to fatness, that's about it.
Ditto the people you described and those outside the movement indifferent to H/E strictures, we too part company over weight loss and attitudes to slimness in the same way, this is where you and I agree. If you think about it, that makes a triangle too!
I wondered before why some were trying to set FA as beyond the pale and way outside the mainstream, some the responses here expose the hypocrisy and cynicism of these people, pretending they just yearn for balanced views, when in reality they want nothing short of abject capitulation to the great god of dieting. Responses here show that FA is not really radical, that's one of the reasons why the responses to it are so disconcerting, we know instinctively that we are mostly part of the mainstream.
People here too cannot stand the idea that following healthy eating strictures can cause as much disturbance to our minds and bodies as dieting, the fact that saying that feels like I'm trying to mug you with ideology, shows the singularity of attitude, regardless of the reasons given as to why one must follow those strictures.
I know that the consicous mind has a intrinsic role to play in eating, if you are ill or have a chronic condtion, that is likely to be a greater role. There are people out there in the position of needing to have a lot of conscious imput into their eating and having there body react against it, therefore it would be good if more investigation went into the body attempting to correct or right itself, it would lead to other insights probably, but of course, that must be sacrificed to healthy eating always has to be made to look the best way and everything else must be arranged around that pre determined course. I don't like the term intuitive eating, I find it a bit pretentious, but it is the closest to what used to be normal eating, that is eating from what was available, and most palatable, this has become abnormal, because science apparently can do better.
I know that it's difficult to put your thoughts down and put them out there to be judged. I'm glad you wrote them and that Paul linked to them.
You're welcome to base your strawman on my online identity if you want to ("your idea of what you are does not match how you are...You accuse other people of oversensitivity...saying that feels like I'm trying to mug you with ideology") I'm assuming that you're referring to me, but I have no clue where you're getting any of this from.
But, in any case, I don't think you'll find much support for your view that "HAES... seems to be dieting and exercise regimes minus the weight loss" among fat acceptance advocates.
Are you saying that you think any dietary guidelines or any schedule of physical activity - even flexible, variable guidelines or schedules that a person makes up for himself or herself based on what they enjoy doing - are the same thing as a weight loss diet, even if no weight loss is intended? That just doesn't make sense to me.
Anyone who uses HAES for a goal of weight-loss is, by definition, not doing HAES.
In every iteration that I have encountered, the definition of Health At Every Size involves what early HAES practitioners (before the term HAES was coined) called non-dieting.
Certainly, many people have tried to contest this definition, seeking to re-insert room for weight-loss goals in the HAES approach, but the HAES community has consistently resisted and refused those attempts. One person who has attended ASDAH conferences (Abby Aronowitz) presents herself in the role of victim, because HAES people and community do not welcome her work that involves weight-loss goals. I would say that Abby is bringing unwanted weight-loss atittudes into a space that seeks to be free of such thinking.
There's a good list of basic priniciples of HAES on the ASDAH website (Association for Size Diversity and Health): www.sizediversityandhealth.org
I appreciate the insights into diet-think that DeeLeigh offers in this post. I had not seen HAES depicted in triangle form, and think this is a useful representation. However, if I had to pick three points to represent HAES, it would be relating happily to eating and to exercise, and, as a third point, celebrating weight diversity (not mental health). I imagine that mental health can benefit from all sorts of HAES practices. I also imagine that the overall goal of HAES is not just mental health, but a larger and holistic vision of what wellbeing means for people of all sizes: physical, mental, spiritual, social, political, and more. (And on a finer point, I imagine people with various mental health challenges might happily adopt HAES practicies, so mental health is not any kind of prerequisite for HAES.)
I totally appreciate how many people may feel some sort of unwelcome imperative or "should" message in HAES principles. This is really too bad, as I imagine HAES to be a sort of humane prospect for reclaiming all forms of embodiment from just this sort of external control, policing, shaming, and shoulding. (I've never used "should" as a verb, but I like it!!!) I often see this dynamic: when we attempt to liberate ourselves from old ways of thinking and being, those old ways get re-projected onto the very space where we're trying to live more expansively, free from that stuff.
For example, when I try to envision a world that totally and non-controversially celebrates weight diversity, my own awareness of every single fat-hating thing in our current world is heightened. Or when I try to imagine living without food guidelines that are based in weight-loss goals, whatever I put in the place of those guidelines can seem like yet more (and unwelcome) guidelines.
I tend to prefer to stay on target (with embodying fat lib, weight-based civil rights, HAES, etc.) and be gentle (perhaps even not bother to pay much attention to) the inevitable throwback moments. But that's just what's in my comfort zone. I think they're totally important issues to raise, healthism, etc.
Also, if you haven't read his beautiful, humane work, I highly recommend Jon Robison's website. He uses a definition of "health" that, I think, sidesteps criticisms of healthism. I don't have his exact wording, but in contrast to the usual notion of health as "absence of disease" (by which definition pretty much no one is or remains healthy for very long), Jon talks about health as being "the process by which people live well in the face of inevitable illness and injuries."
http://www.jonrobison.net/
This is really too bad, as I imagine HAES to be a sort of humane prospect for reclaiming all forms of embodiment from just this sort of external control, policing, shaming, and shoulding.
Reminds me of those old Stuart Smalley radio ads for Wells Fargo that they used to run in Southern California: "I'm should-ing all over myself!"
And I dig the triangle. Thanks, DeeLeigh!
Thanks, Meowzer!
Intuitive eating is not possible for me due to major dietary restrictions resulting from my health condition. Therefore, my HAES does not include it. Movement is becoming difficult for me, as I often battle horrendous fatigue, shortness of breath, dizzyness and/or nausea. Needless to say, my mental health is not at its finest due to the deteriorating physical health. These conditions will most likely be temporary, but I need to live today, so I want a relationship with food and my weight that works for today.
Perhaps I am interpreting HAES too liberally, but for me there is no triangle, there is just the argument that my weight is irrelevant when discussing my physical health (other than viewing weight as a possible symptom of 'the real problem'). Having had doctors scold me and imply that I was unhealthy simply because of my weight, even though there were no lab numbers or other evidence to back up these clams - that is what screwed me up as a child, and what I want to be able to guard myself against now that I am immersed in the medical system again. I hope I do not come off as being argumentative, because I am not calling this triangle wrong, and were I at a different point in my life, I would find it very useful. I realise that I have a unique situation, but I am certain that I fit into HAES somewhere and that it must be maleable enough to accomodate my circumstances. I have never heard of Jon Robison, but yes, living well despite whatever your obstacles are is a wonderful definition of health. Great suggestions, Marilyn!
Vesta, I hear you on doctors treating you like a child, and they absolutely pour on the blame. When things go right, it is because they are great doctors, when things go wrong, obviously this is the patient's fault. I have never had weight loss surgery, but I can only imagine that those particular doctors would only be worse than what I have experienced. The whole mess reminds me of those revival tent faith healers who blame their failure to cure anyone on a lack of faith on the part of their clients.
Hi, Cariad. I'm sorry that you're facing tough health stuff. That's never fun.
In my political analysis and in my understanding of Health At Every Size, it is not the people who are in so-called "perfect" health (at whatever weight) who best embody body lib and HAES, it is in fact the people who face all of the "inevitable illness and injuries" in life and who continue to move toward a happy, uncomplicated relationship with eating, movement, and their own bodies, who rock totally hard.
For example, I know a fat woman who has been a fat rights activist for several decades. She used to love to go on media interviews and bust stereotypes by pointing out that she's both healthy (i.e., free of disease) and energetic (sometimes working two jobs). I don't think that's necessarily a bad tactic with media, as long as one also makes the point that civil rights must never be contingent on health status. In her 60s, this fat activist developed higher blood sugars and started taking good care of herself using HAES principles for responding to diabetes. For a while, she complained that she missed being able to be a "poster child" for good health. I told her that in fact, she's a *better* ambassador for living out HAES principles because people might argue that she should adopt some other, weight-based approach instead, because people might use her particular health challenge as a way to arm-twist her into renouncing weight neutrality. That she refuses such arm-twisting and maintains what for her is in fact good health, living with diabetes and living as a fat rights activist, is heroic and fabulous.
If HAES means anything to me, it has to be something that I can recommend — in good conscience — to my fattest, sickest, least mobile friend or loved one or family member. Ya know?
I don't imagine that HAES *requires* that people be in good health. I do imagine that, in a HAES approach, no one is excluded from the possibility of enjoying their own optimal or best possible health, based on weight. Holding health as a possibility for fat people, during the alleged "obesity" epidemic [sic] is rebellious and humane, in my view.
I find it particularly cruel to think that when a fat person faces one of these "inevitable illnesses or injuries" in life, that instead of compassion or sympathy or well wishes, these personal facts are used (by strangers, medical personnel, family, employers, etc.) as proof that we must adopt fat-hating attitudes and approaches. Because people are naturally frightened about the future when experiencing health problems, we are especially vulnerable to such hatefulness. That's why HAES is so crucial, in my view, as a paradigm that creates living space for people of all sizes, to go through scary health challenges in a self-loving way and without the added burden of fat-hating messages.
By the way, Jon Robison is totally awesome. He edits the journal Health At Every Size, which is, sadly, on a publishing hiatus right now. Jon gives talks about holistic health and HAES all over the U.S., and always speaks forcefully and fabulously in favor of fat pride. He's one of my heroes. I hope you'll check out his wonderful book, "The Spirit & Science of Holistic Health: More than broccoli, jogging and bottled water; More than yoga, herbs and meditation." I really loved it, and am proud to have given it a blurb. He uses HAES examples throughout the book, to illustrate various holistic health principles. I learned all sorts of cool stuff from his book, stuff that gives me hope for the future of medical science.
I think some of the common misunderstandings of the concept of Health at Every Size come from a fundamental miscommunication about what "health" itself is.
If one imagines "health" to be some ideal state of perfect physical and mental functioning, then HAES starts to sound like a very exclusive/excluding idea, very quickly.
But I like to think of "health" as the ability and willingness to cope with what is, and to live a full, meaningful life (whatever that means to you) no matter what health challenges you might face. Because everyone is going to face those challenges, at some point, simply by virtue of being human -- not because you're a sick, defective Obese. By that definition, it becomes a worthy endeavour open to just about anyone who's interested. (And if you're simply not, that's your perfectly legitimate choice, because you are a grown up adult person. There are no bad fatties, remember?)
To me, chasing some elusive vision of perfect health is about on par with chasing some elusive vision of a perfect body. Unfortunately, that's exactly what happens when some weight loss concern co-opts the HAES message and faux "body positive" talk (e.g. "I'm a size healthy!") in order to sell their restrictive, infantilizing diet plan.
But that is not HAES.
Well said!
Just wanted to say that I wholeheartedly agree with this point, because I believe it's critical to the whole debate about the role of HAES in the FA movement. I suppose my main criticism of HAES is that this is not necessarily always made as clear as it could be, which gives rise to the perception (whether founded or otherwise) that fat people who DON'T incorporate physical activity or eat for pleasure rather than being conscious of their behaviours in one way or another are somehow 'bad' in a moral sense.
None of us have any obligation to anyone other than ourselves to be healthy or actively pursuing whatever definition of 'health' is being promoted at a given point in time - maybe it's the libertarian in me speaking, but like religion, politics and all the rest it should be entirely a matter of individual conscience, with no wider ramifications for other fat people or society. In this case the personal should remain personal but to me it sometimes seems that one's health choices / regime or lack of it are becoming political issues in their own right, within as well as outside fat acceptance circles.
And I've said this before, but if the conscious (and as importantly, demonstrable) pursuit of health, physical fitness etc becomes almost a prerequisite of fat acceptance, and if people DO feel obliged to be strive toward a 'healthy' (if not thin) state in order to help vanquish all those bad stereotypes of fat people as being irresponsibly blase where health is concerned, THAT can become every bit as oppressive in my mind as weight-loss mentality, because one is simply swapping one set of culturally-imposed expectations for another.
I have to say, the 'cult' of healthism that seems to be finding its way into everything recently does bother me, though I can't put my finger on the reason; maybe it's partly to do with coercive way in which it is discussed and the co-option of moral concepts. Whilst I wouldn't want to live my life as a 'reaction' against this trend, neither do I see why I should be obliged to buy into it, and I certainly think it needs to be critiqued and deconstructed to a greater extent than at present.
On a related note, I love that Jon Robison site linked by Marilyn. It's very inclusive and flexible in its application of HAES principles, and it's laid out in a very clear, logical manner. Moreover it serves not only as a well-structured discussion of HAES but also as an introduction to many of the critical concepts underpinning fat acceptance as an approach. Spending half-an-hour reading through it has certainly helped clarify one or two things for me.
"if you think fat people have no self-discipline, consider the fact that they haven’t killed you yet." - Miss Conduct, Boston Globe
Yes, HAES has a lot more to do with how you treat your body than it has with specific health outcomes, since your control over the latter is fairly limited apart from not doing anything recklessly stupid like riding a motorcycle in the rain when you're seriously inebriated. I certainly know thin people who did everything "right" and still got cancer, Crohn's disease, heart problems, what have you. So if fat people get sick too, it shouldn't surprise anyone, but for some reason, thin people's illnesses are regarded as flukes, while fat people's are supposed to be "earned" by our relentless self-indulgence.
My main concern is that it not become a classist thing. Our society's concept of "healthy living" depends greatly on being able to afford the time, energy, and money for exercise and high-quality food.
@MichMurphy:
"I'm a size healthy!"
In addition to being faux body-positive, it is also nonsensical. "Healthy" describes quality, not quantity. "Size" describes quantity.
*smacks Weight Watchers with a clue-by-four*
Weight Watchers is always trying to say that they don't promote a diet, but that's obviously a bunch of bull. In the eighties and nineties, they used "lifestyle change" to mean "weight loss diet." As a result, the expression "lifestyle" is hated by many fat acceptance activists because it's seen as part of a euphemism for dieting.
Now Weight Watchers is co-opting language from HAES and body image activism. It could be viewed as an aggressive move, meant to wipe out the idea of HAES by co-opting and misusing the language associated with it (or, maybe that's not the intent - just the likely result). In any case, it's already happening. Some people are starting to think that HAES is "dieting lite" and evidence to the contrary just doesn't register with them. It will be horrible if this continues. The idea of HAES is too valuable to lose to a war over semantics. Unfortunately, Weight Watchers and the rest of the diet industry have much louder voices than we do.
And it's not just WW -- Jenny Craig is doing it too. In fact, theirs is the commercial with the "size healthy" bull-puckey.
Because Heath at Every Size is such an elegant, attractive idea, even the weight loss concerns want to buy into it and own it, in order to profit and, unfortunately, warp the entire concept. Which appears to be working, given the magnitude of the defensiveness and misunderstanding that arises anytime someone mentions HAES in conversation with other people in fat acceptance.
Linda Bacon will have a book out soon entitled "Health at Every Size." I hope it will help explain the concept better, and promote an understanding of HAES that has nothing to do with restricting your food, controlling your body, aspiring to an ideal state of perfect health, or pressuring yourself to do things you don't enjoy. Because all of that is completely antithetical to what HAES is really about.
"My main concern is that it not become a classist thing. Our society's concept of "healthy living" depends greatly on being able to afford the time, energy, and money for exercise and high-quality food."
I certainly don't want to see this happen either, Meowser. But luckily I don't think it has -- Ellyn Satter, one of the earliest dietitians to promote a HAES approach to eating, is actually really, really adamant about the point that feeding yourself well doesn't have to mean doing anything expensive, and she has excoriated the nutrition establishment for making poor people feel like they're doing it wrong -- for example, discouraging the use of canned fruits and vegetables, which are actually quite nutritious (in some cases, moreso than fresh items.) I'd recommend anyone, especially parents, read her book entitled "Secrets of Feeding a Healthy Family."
The basic staples available in your local market are all anyone really requires to eat a nutritious, nourishing diet, and people who can't afford to buy the expensive luxuries labelled "health food" should not have to feel bad or guilty about that. Neither does there have to be an expensive price-tag on fun physical activity. If people believe there is, it's the fault of an intensely consumerist, profit-driven culture that's heavily promoted ideas like: only exercising at the gym "counts," you must buy expensive toys and clothes to work out, you can only eat healthy by going 100% organic (or similar.) We don't have to believe or buy into that rhetoric.
I really don't believe a classist approach is compatible with true HAES. If it were, I'd have nothing to do with it -- I certainly couldn't afford to do all (or ANY) of those things.
Your points about class are really important, and thanks so much for introducing Ellyn Satter's and Linda Bacon's work into the conversation. You're right - big difference between "health food" and healthy food (which can mean a variety of things).
Oh, and also...your brain counts too. The reason HAES is, to my mind not "dieting without the scale" is because I let myself have what I want. There's no "I shouldn't eat this, this is bad." I might ask myself, "Is this going to be the right fuel for me today?" based on the state of my digestive tract, my overall energy level, my planned activities, etc. (Because of my PCOS, I find I have to be careful with undertaking sedentary, brain-intensive activities under the influence of a donut or a turkey sub, but a donut might be just fine if I'm running around, or a turkey sub might be perfect if I want to really relax.) But nothing is forbidden as such.
Someone who has a hardcore, intractable ED might need to work with a professional on developing a more structured eating plan. That's fine. That's still HAES. You're calibrating your intake to how you feel, not to how you look.
People who have medical contraindications to eating certain foods might have to put them on some kind of restricted list, but that's HAES too; if you know your body is not going to process something right, you don't eat it. That's not a "diet." Ditto people who have moral issues with eating certain foods (as in kosher or vegan/vegetarian diets); same deal, if it makes you feel uncomfortable to eat it, you don't eat it. Your brain counts too.
This is an excellent discussion and gives me a lot to think about. I am born to guilt - you name it, I feel guilty for it, so that's a demon I've been fighting for a lifetime. But I'm also diabetic, and while I've cut out refined sugar, I know I should also be sparing with the fruit, particularly melons, and severely restrict my carb intake. That's where it gets tricky. I've done very low carb before, and the thought of having bread, potatoes, rice, peaches, and melons on the "forbidden list" just makes me sad. I have NO source of gratification in my life - I don't smoke, don't drink, and don't take drugs (quit the cigs when I felt wheezy, and quit the booze and recreational drugs due to a tendency to over-indulgence), I'm off sugar and caffeine, and, well, let's just say I don't have a partner and haven't in many years - so sometimes the only thing I have to look forward to at the end of the day is a box of Rice-a-Roni. And of course the guilt hits, because I know my blood glucose is going through the roof, and meanwhile, the insurance company is paying hundreds of dollars for my medication. It righteously sucks. I really try to control my blood sugar, I take the meds, deal with the nausea, and really try to limit my carb intake, but there are times the only thing between me and utter depression and hopelessness is an English muffin or some sugar-free cookies. (That sounds pretty weak, I know.) Oh, and I don't exercise. I clean the house, that's it. I used to go walking, but being in an exercise mode in public is too much. (I mean, they despise me because I'm fat and apparently commit the sins of the fat, but when I go out in public and exercise, they point and laugh. God bless if you can handle that, but I just can't. It started in the 2nd grade and it has never gotten any easier.) Finally, the oppressive pecking away via TV, radio and internet and I'm left feeling as if my very essence, my being and existence, are just plain WRONG (have you noticed that when you look up recipes on just about any web site, including Food Network, right next to the recipes are Google ads like, "Erase Belly Fat!!!!")
What's been said here - I'm not sure if I'm HAES worthy or not, because I AM conflicted. I mean I try, albeit in a limited way. I won't be going to the gym or going for my walks again any time soon, and though I still see a "someday" in going low carb again (for glucose control - seriously - I fear losing weight because I know about the inevitable Regain All +20 deal that my body came equipped with), I am not ready to tackle those things right now. I know that I COULD and SHOULD do more, but I also know that attempting those things right now will leave me feeling cheated and depressed. On the other hand, the growing neuropathy in my feet is a constant reminder that I need to move on this sooner rather than later. Conflicted - you bet.
When faced with the health conundrum of "you gotta quit drinking or it'll kill ya," my uncle chose the latter. Now the cirrhosis has advanced beyond the ability of his body to heal, and he only has about six months left (he's 62), and I wonder if I am making the same choice he made: I'd rather eat potatoes and rice and fruit rather than get a tight control on my blood sugar. It's alarming, and boy do I feel mortal these days.
So yeah, I have to say when I read about the triangle of HAES, I felt like a failure. Not angry, not excluded, but just one more thing I can't attain. I don't know, but I wonder if this conflict in my life is similar to what wriggle99 was writing about.
It sounds like you're working on the foundation: mental health. I don't really think of HAES as something to attain. It's more of a juggling act. I'm in a little of a lull right now myself. Still, things always change, and sometimes they get better.
I'm kind of new here so no one bite my head off with my first post, lol. I too suffer with type II diabetes and depression and anxiety. I've been struggling with my own battles with my size since I was very young and am now 48. Was the only fat child out of five with a mom who really didn't want a fat daughter so I'm sure you know the drill.
I'm still learning and struggling with accepting myself as I am and I didn't come to terms with this until after I actually went through lap band surgery a year ago. I know many of you probably think I shouldn't even be here but trust me it was because of the lap band or the $30,000 failed diet plan as I call it that made me come to terms with the fact that all these years I've put my life on hold because of my size and self hatred that I picked up as a child and it snowballed through the years.
Anyway after trying to figure out why my lap band didn't work and being attacked by others on the lap band type forums for being a "failure" and I don't even want to get into it because it's only so insane, I started finding books that were relative to what I had been going through all my life. There were others out there like me, and being the only fat person in a family made me feel like an outsider of sorts and secretly wished I had a fat mother who I could look at and say I am part of her because there were not many things that I could look at that would suggest we were related except for our curly hair. I must take that back, I did look like my dad in many ways.
Anyway I don't know much about you personally but I found the book "Self Esteem Comes in All Sizes" to be a really helpful tool in my own journey of self love and dealing with those around me who in my "head" at least I'm always assuming they are judging me because of my size. Of course many are but who the hell cares is where I'm coming to so far in my life.
Anyway I know exercise does help with diabetes and I'm lucky enough to walk on a treadmill in my home. I'm on metformin now which has helped me with my blood sugar. Go figure my diabetes got worse after I was lapbanded! Anyway I'm kind of new here and don't want to step on any toes but I just thought I'd put that out there.
Anyway you sounded so down and I didn't know if you have read any books out there like that, mabye I'm just being redundant I don't know take care Moxie#
Thank you for writing this pj, your feelings of being averse to low carb are the kind of thing I'm talking about. The main differences between you and I is that I don't have Type II so I can just accept I have to let go of trying to regulate my diet and try to see where that leads me. Whereas you don't have that same choice, as I said I think that this 'resistance' should be investigated hopefully finding a way to help you find that proper balance in a way you can live with.
But instead because 'healthy eating' must be the acme of all eating, you feel like you are failing in some way, these feelings wont go away because you are told, don't worry, they need to be explored not trivialised. You are not failing, your body is not behaving in the way it is 'supposed to' is all you can't help that anymore than I can or anymore than some people need flexibility 'cos they keep falling off their plan.
I hope I'm making sense when I say if you want to walk you should walk -stop thinking about it as exercise, think about it more as physical expression- and walk at your own speed, notice how you body is feeling as you are walking and make slight adjustments to your posture and gait until you can relieve the tension as possible-this will get better with time- the aim is for it feel as effortless (efficient) as it can.
Also you can experiment with whether you like to take the scenic route to walk or whether it helps to walk instead of ride to get somewhere.
Compare yourself to no one, it's your body and how you feel is the law. When you get the urge to walk, walk until the urge goes, then stop. I supposed you could call it intuitive movement if you want to be a bit poncey!
I wish you well.
Oh, and I don't exercise. I clean the house, that's it. I used to go walking, but being in an exercise mode in public is too much. (I mean, they despise me because I'm fat and apparently commit the sins of the fat, but when I go out in public and exercise, they point and laugh. God bless if you can handle that, but I just can't. It started in the 2nd grade and it has never gotten any easier.)
That is what burns me SO MUCH about fat haters. They want us to "get up off our butts and quit being so lazy," but only where we can't be seen. I personally don't get a lot of shit from people when I go out and walk, and I'm not sure if it's because I'm old enough to be invisible or because I live in a part of the country where that sort of thing is rare or if a size 18 isn't "fat enough" to incur people's overt wrath, or some combination of the three. But I know that kind of abuse does happen and it really sucks.
But EVERYONE is "HAES worthy." Can you start by accompanying your carbs with fat and protein and fiber? That sounds like it would be an easier place to begin than going "cold turkey" on them, which sounds like it's not gonna happen while you're in such a depressed state. And any kind of movement, even if you do it at home, is better than none. (Yeah, housework is exercise, especially if you do it with hot music on.)
Amen to that; it's about the only thing I do that brings me out in a proper, all-over sweat these days. If HAES is all about what works for you, in the privacy of your own home if necessary, I can go with that. If it means that I can justify my sudden (and yes, sometimes emotional) craving for a king-size calzone or a triple cheeseburger in terms of taking care of my mental health then all the better. I don't believe in 'could' or 'should' anymore because I've realised that they only breed guilt - and whose standards are we trying to meet anyway?
As for Google ads (and all other forms of internet advertising) I've said it before, but Firefox with AdBlock Plus has done wonders for my surfing sanity. My browser view now looks like an online equivalent of Sao Paulo, with lots of lovely white space to remind me when I'm not being sold something against my will. And it seems particularly good on those horrible little tracking cookies that seem to reward your patronage of fatosphere blogs with endless diet and WLS ads
"if you think fat people have no self-discipline, consider the fact that they haven’t killed you yet.”" - Miss Conduct, Boston Globe
PJ -
I don't know if you've tried this, but you might want to consider being treated for depression. One reason that some of us crave sweets is that we're self medicating in the sense of boosting our serotonin levels. From what you said about your uncle, it's entirely possible that depression runs in your family, since drinking can also be a form of self-medication. It's hard to take care of yourself when you're not feeling worth the trouble.
Oh, about HAES: the fat-haters say we should take responsibility, right? With HAES, that's exactly what we're doing.
Actually, I've been treated for depression since I was 16 (now 48), and I do eat much more protein and fat (but not much fiber) than I do raw carbs. I pretty much know what I need to do, it's just a matter of implementing something that will work long-term for me. As for exercise, my roommate and I have been kicking around the idea of throwing in on an exercise machine but we can't as yet agree on what kind (he wants weight training stuff and I want something more "walky.")
And really, I'm not that depressed - or not as depressed as I sometimes am during the really bad times. I think there's a certain amount of coming to grips with one's mortality at this stage of the game anyway, but in light of my perpetual self-loathing, the actual physical issues that have arisen within the past 5 years, and my uncle's slow dance with death - it's all closing in. (My type 2 diabetic, size 30, 48 year old self looks back at my healthy, size 16, 20 year old depressed self and wonders what the hell the problem was.)
The strength I find in these blogs is wonderful - I love feasting on it - and I'm working on finding that within myself. (It's slow going.)
@PJ:
*hugs*
Are there any support groups for diabetics in your area? You may consider one if there is.
'Are you saying that you think any dietary guidelines or any schedule of physical activity - even flexible, variable guidelines or schedules that a person makes up for himself or herself based on what they enjoy doing - are the same thing as a weight loss diet, even if no weight loss is intended? That just doesn't make sense to me.'
A weight loss dieting, without calorie restriction, is an eating plan, I wasn't aware than that was a point of view, it's obvious, unless it's triggering for you.
Also if it's so flexible and individual to you based on what you like, what do you need it for? Why don't you trust yourself to eat what you want when you want, do what you want when you want to do it?
I also don't have a problem with people who like to experiment following this or that eating plan. I define HAES as what it tends to be in reality, because of the type of people it tends to attract, not what it could be theoretically -which would include me- I don't feel it's got anything to do with me because of the reactions you described on your livejournal post, I cannot relate to it much, so it's not going to attract my input and interest on the whole.
As I said again there is an overlap, between restricting calories and restricting what you eat, like it or not and you obviously don't. That which is normal, eating according to hunger appetite culture etc, has become demonised as a source of fatness and eating and exercise plans have been venerated as the solution to this, meanwhile the problems that come with the latter are ignored or papered over. So that if you can't make them work, you feel like a loser.
You say that WW makes you feel like a child, but having an eating plan appropos of nothing can make you feel like that also, as you are not ill but somehow you fervently believe that you body cannot be trusted to properly meet your needs, that sows a sense of mistrust of oneself in your mind, some feel this more keenly, but the potential is there.
But you reaction to me stating the obvious, a WL diet without the WL is an eating plan proves that directing the accusation of neurosis toward those who can't hack eating plans etc is partial. The reason for this partiality is that you're sure deep down that you're right and health conscious and others are less so, you just don't like to see yourself that way.
wriggle99, I realize you're trying to provoke me, but you're shooting so far over the mark that it's absurd. No sane person could have read my blog posts and comments and come up with such extreme misinterpretations. At first, I thought that you were just clinging to some mistaken impressions. Now, I'm questioning your intent.
However, I'll clarify: I am not and never have been on a diet or "eating plan." In fact, I've even never read a diet book or a book that discusses a "way of eating." Also, I don't have diabetes or any other health concern that might be affected by diet, so that's not something I need to worry about right now. I support other's decisions to add more structure (such as, for example, low carb for diabetes or vegetarianism for ethical reasons), but I've never done it myself.
What I did do for many years was exercise regularly. I've had dance classes, squash games, and rollerblading with friends (for example) scheduled several times a week, along with light resistance training. Nothing extreme - just 2-5 hours a week of active hobbies for most of the last 15 years. However, I'm currently trying to adjust to a new situation, which you'd know about if you'd read my recent blog posts. My left hip was broken and dislocated in a car accident 20 years ago, and now the joint has deteriorated to the point that I can't be as active as I'd like.
So, I'm neither claiming perfect health nor restricting my eating. Please stop assuming things that I didn't say - and that in fact are the opposite of the facts I've laid out. Thanks.
Hey PJ,
My advice about people who stare or say things when you're trying to walk outside? F*ck 'em. You have a right to be there, to walk, to run, to sit down - whatever - that's why we pay taxes. Same thing with dining out, grocery shopping, fast food. You're paying the bill, so what should they care?
I go to a gym where I'm clearly the largest person there, and that was scary at first. But you know what? I pay my membership fees, too. I don't have to care about what they think, good or bad. I just have to get my money's worth.
Good luck to you. I know it's difficult right now, but eventually you'll find the resolve to do what's right for you.
secondhelpinglaura (2nd Helping, my fav phrase): I really do try to instill in my mind the MANTRA "f*ck you." And now, thanks to Miss Conduct via richie79, I've got a new mantra: his sig line ("if you think fat people have no self-discipline, consider the fact that they haven’t killed you yet." I SO love that!) Thank you richie79, thank you Miss Conduct, and thank you secondhelpinglaura. I really do keep these things in the front of my mind (I have to engage in public regularly else I would become a recluse, which is not my first choice). Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. It is nice to know, though, that there's a whole mess of people on my side.
I want to mention that we are being naive if we think that health can be easily decoupled from what some like to call healthism. As numerous academics in the Humanities have demonstrated, the concept of health has emerged in a very specific cultural context and has been promoted by certain institutions and a certain power regime. I would propose much more rigorous criticism of health and of its association with other forms of privilege, including thin privilege. I would also propose that we become much more autocritical about what might sometimes be behind our own desire to assert our health. At the very least, to speak more locally, I am disassociating myself from other "unhealthy" human beings, including the crips (as some disabled defiantly call themselves). How much does the "me too" approach depend on leaving privilege intact? The only way I find to rescue Health at Every Size is to say that it is one approach, but when HAES people talk, they often talk in exclusionary ways. If HAES people would admit that health has a history and historicity and that it has been and continues to be used to oppress certain people deemed unhealthy, then the movement would at least leave open the revolutionary idea that the thin norm and health norm need to be questioned. If HAES tries to rescue health as a neutral term with no history and thus presumably no involvement in oppression, then it will inevitably work to reinforce certain oppressions -- indeed, even oppressions that don't currently exist.
You make some interesting points, but not everyone views the world in terms of privilege and oppression, of inclusion and exclusion. I guess your point of view could be seen as "privileged" in the sense that only liberal arts majors with a strong background in (I'm guessing) sociology, anthropology, and/or women's and African American studies have been educated in the vocabulary and concepts.
People with a background in science, medicine, engineering, and other technical fields don't think that way. People without a post secondary academic background don't think that way. Not everyone involved in the fat acceptance movement has a background in social justice theory. Those of us who've become familiar enough with it to understand the main points still don't necessarily embrace that way of thinking wholeheartedly.
Concepts like health and beauty have a long history and many definitions; you may view them mostly in terms of oppression and exclusion, but most people see them - at least principally - in other ways. For example, health could be described as "a feeling of physical comfort and well being." Beauty could be described as "that which provides sensual pleasure." To me, the second set of definitions seem more positive and more useful. When some segment of society uses health or beauty in a way that excludes or oppresses, then I'd view that as a misuse and/or an unfortunate accident - not as something that invalidates the true meaning of the concept. For example, fat people are excluded from our society's dominant template for physical beauty. That doesn't mean that beauty doesn't exist, that the people who fit the standard definition of beauty are not beautiful, or that beauty is, at its core, a harmful concept.
Yes, I now see that health and beauty can be universal concepts and that any celebration of my own health or beauty has no impact whatsoever on other people. The real question becomes what kind of movement are we building when we assert such notions and what people are we excluding from the movement? Of course, those of us who simply want to assert our own virtue as healthy or beautiful don't want to think about such uncomfortable questions. Simply assert the command, "Health at Every Size," and say that as long as we add the proviso -- of course, don't treat the presumptively unhealthy poorly -- that will solve the whole problem. Sounds a whole lot like the Seinfeld episode when George and Jerry keep insisting "we're not gay" and adding, "Not that there's anything wrong with that."
Wow! You can use sarcasm as well as oppression-speak. That must mean that you have a superior understanding of everything.
But, seriously, who are you trying to exclude from the movement? Because you're the one who's implying that other people's ideas are worthless. All I said was that yours wasn't the only way of looking at things.
I suppose I have to accept that when I ask for moderation and a little introspection about how our concepts affect others I will be demonized. I would only humbly suggest that you not call your ideas, as you did, a "true rebellion." My original post never said anything about setting up my ideas as the singular approach. All I was asking is that HAES accepts and even acknowledges multiple approaches to fat activism. Certainly, the "me too" approach can be one approach, but it should be accompanied with more discussion of the oppression, discursive and material, which hurt certain people even as it privileges others. That word, "privilege," I see from your response is to be seen as all in my mind, and I am not to think about the ways in which the concept of "health" leads to certain people being given access to material support and certain others being denied access. Given this, we need all kinds of strategies. I can, then, allow myself to inhabit the position of the "unhealthy" so that I create common cause with others who have the misfortune to be labelled "unhealthy" (sometimes with murderous consequences). The movement then is fattened, at least temporarily in such actions, to include more than just fat people.
You lost me there. ("That word, "privilege," I see from your response is to be seen as all in my mind, and I am not to think about the ways in which the concept of "health" leads to certain people being given access to material support and certain others being denied access." Huh?)
Do you have a blog where you discuss your ideas in a way that's easier to understand? Because, that would be helpful.
Well, why don't you explain what you meant by this: "not everyone views the world in terms of privilege and oppression, of inclusion and exclusion. . . . "
Just what I said. When I think of "privilege," I think of wealthy people. It's only after having read forums that include former liberal arts majors that I found out it can also mean "anything that could confer an advantage." Oppression is certainly a reality, but I don't think it's particularly useful to think of myself as oppressed. It leads to a feeling of powerlessness that can be self defeating.
As for inclusion and exclusion, to me they refer to rules that actually include or exclude people. For example, people who haven't sent Paul an essay and been accepted are excluded from posting at BFB. I am excluded from buying clothes at Banana Republic, because they don't have my size.
I take it that "exclusion" can also mean "saying anything that could alienate people." I do try to anticipate how people are going to interpret things and avoid misunderstandings, but I'm just not sophisticated enough to catch everything. I have to write and think chiefly from my own perspective. If I thought it was necessary to speak for everyone, I'd have to stop communicating. As it is, I hope that people who don't find any value in what I post - or who find my perspective obnoxious - avoid my blog and find other things to read that they enjoy and/or find useful.
Also if it's so flexible and individual to you based on what you like, what do you need it for? Why don't you trust yourself to eat what you want when you want, do what you want when you want to do it?
Boy, if everyone COULD be like that, without having to work at it, and that was the default mode for everyone at all times, life would just rule. But women, especially, are pressured from every possible direction NOT to do those things, and triply so if they are fat. People are shocked when they find out we are not making it a priority to get thin.
This isn't directly related to HAES but just what you said about women and the pressures we're under and how difficult it is for us to accept our bodies as they are and not feel the pressure which is hitting us from every direction internally as well.
I previously made a comment about how I was lap banded a year ago as my last ditch effort to "diet" and lose the weight I felt I should lose. Well it was unsuccessful, most people would say "I" was unsuccessful but that's debatable at this point or actually not because I'm so over that, lol!
Anyway I hadn't seen my mother in law in a while and she knew I had the lap band surgery. She had always been very critical of my weight and I tend to be the type of person that people feel free to comment on my weight for some reason like I enjoy it and obviously need to know that I'm fat because I am not aware of that fact.
So I was a bit apprehensive of her
upcoming visit along with her eldest son who can be a chip off the old block. (he's a raging alcoholic but that's another story) This visit was also prior to some of my new awakening of things like the FAM etc..., although I had joined naafa but flashing the card for protection wasn't really going to help me fend her (them) off!
They were coming for a week and I greeted them as charmingly as I normally do and things went as well as could be expected. The whole week I was waiting for the "comment" something, she's a Leo dammit she had to say something derogatory about me. Nothing, so they fly back home and I can breath again and don't need to see my therapist for a while as that stress was over
She finally calls my husband the following day and says "why can't "moxie3" lose weight on that lap band, I just don't understand, she used to be a size 6!"
Now my husband is a great guy but he finds dealing with his mother difficult too and sometimes you just aren't prepared for quick comebacks or are just too shocked to say anything so being that I know him and he me it doesn't anger me that he didn't put the 81 year old in her place, (she's a very healthy 81 year old).
In a weird way I was relieved because I knew it was driving this woman insane, first that her son was married to a "fat" woman, although she has seen me fat, thin, fat, thin, fat, fat, fat, during the 28 years I've been with her son she just can't accept the fact that I'm fat now and especially since I've had WLS that should have solved "the problem". I could tell it was eating her up inside but she at least had the decency not to insult me to my face this time. She usually makes comments to me when it's just the two of us.
So one thing I really need to work on is my fear of what "others" are thinking or will say to me. I know it's weird but I've come to actually love my fat body what I don't love is the treatment by others. How I shouldn't love my fat body that I should despise it. Maybe now that I'm 48 and I think it's easier in a way to finally find the confidence in my own skin. I am very impressed by the younger generation who have found this self acceptance of their bodies as I couldn't at that time. I'm still struggling and still have to face people who judge me and I've just got to learn to toughen up. I'm not always good with words or comebacks but I can still feel tougher inside so that I'm not as fragile as I used to be. Sorry to be so wordy but I kind of had to get it out, Moxie3
PJ, I'm not sure if I'm missing something here, and of course I don't know your whole situation, but I do know a little bit about diabetes, and a diabetic eating carb is in NO WAY analogous to someone with cirrhosis drinking alcohol. I really don't think the guilt you feel about your eating habits is appropriate. I think there's a deeper issue at work there.
Everyone needs carb to function, even diabetics. In some ways, especially diabetics. I know that, for some people, cutting down to a very low amount of carb feels better and maybe it helps them -- but that's their individual situation, and is not a standard you should be holding yourself to if it makes you feel worse. The basic thing I've learned about diabetes is that consistency and timing of carb intake, relative to insulin, is really the key -- not eliminating carb intake altogether.
If medication (I'm assuming oral) is not controlling your blood glucose the way it should, you might consider insulin -- it could be a blessing. With technologies like insulin pumps, many people can free up their diet a lot. That said, I, of course, am not a doctor and have no information about what you've tried or not, or whether there is some other crucial reason for you to avoid carbohydrate. But in my personal opinion, the medications and technologies are there to serve you so you can live a good life (that includes eating Rice-a-Roni, for Pete's sake!) Your life and your happiness should not be sacrificed to controlling a disease for which effective treatments exist.
(Pardon my rant, but it's pet peeve of mine how certain diabetics, who are more likely thin and/or young, are often given insulin, and the freedom to adjust it to their lifestyle, right off the bat -- and certain other diabetics, more likely to be fat and/or older, are exhorted endlessly to try to control their disease through "lifestyle alone," and will be treated as failures when their pancreatic function declines to the point where medications and insulin are required. It's a bullshit double-standard, in my opinion, and fat hatred has more than a little to do with it. It's an effing disease, and people should be given the meds they need in order to live a good life. Diabetes shouldn't be used as a stick to beat the fatties into submission for their presumably slothful, overindulgent habits.)
Anyhow, it is not even remotely sad to find food as a source of real joy in your life. Food is a source of joy and pleasure for everyone. It's a very clever biological mechanism developed through the infinite wisdom of natural selection to get us to enjoy doing things that are beneficial to our survival. Eating, breathing, having sex, drinking water. You really have nothing to feel ashamed about.
My husband is an interesting example. He has always been thin, and has an entirely non-neurotic relationship with food. For health reasons, he had to go on several restrictive diets as a trial for a period of time, and it depressed the holy living hell out of him. Not because he is a gluttonous, wanton, fatty-fat overeater, but because food is pleasurable, and missing out on it, even on just ONE food group or macronutrient, sucks big-time. Not because it's an addiction, but because it's the freaking staff of life. Really.
I am sorry you are struggling so much with this, and even though I don't have diabetes, I have had similar feelings about my habits and body. So I know that even reading all this can't fix it, but I hope it gives you reassurance that there's nothing WRONG with you.
And, I know I plug her endlessly, but no one else does, and it might help you: Ellyn Satter is the dietitian I mentioned earlier who promotes a non-restrictive philosophy about food. You may have to stick to certain boundaries to deal with your diabetes (though I would definitely encourage you to look for ways to widen those boundaries, as it sounds like you're trying to be awfully restrictive), but I really do think you can put her philosophies into practice.
You can send an email to inquire if there are any RDs trained in her method in your area. There is one in my city who is also a Certified Diabetes Educator, so I know the two can and sometimes do co-exist.
Ah, Deeleigh, you know I think you are a goddess. And I like your triangle -- especially the revised one -- and I am happy that HAES, as you define it, works so well for you and many others, but as I read your original post, I infer a sadness for those of us who have accepted the title "failed HAES." Please let me give you permission not to cry for me. I have found it helpful to use a meat cleaver to separate HAES from SA/FA, and throw myself whole-heartedly into the latter camp. HAES, however, bamboozles me.
The part of HAES where I fail is intuitive eating. I don't have a diagnosible explanation, such as diabetes. However, I have come to the conclusion that some of us, for whatever reason, cannot trust our bodies entirely to send us perfect messages that lead us to well being. I "hear" my hunger cues, loud and clear. My satiety cues are something else. There are no grades. I can be satisfied almost immediately with something as small as a banana, or I can eat a five-course meal and feel exactly the same. Perhaps I produce too much Leptin? Perhaps one of the other dancers at that chemical Cotillion in my body is misstepping -- Oxymontulin, PeptideYY, Aghouti-Related Protein, Ghrelin, Insulin, Seratonin, and on and on. After trying and trying and trying to "hear" my satiety, I finally decided that it's okay to be "failed HAES." In as much as some people should not trust their intuition alone to help them select their life partner, I am a person who should not rely solely on internal cues to select my food and the quantities thereof. I've decided it's okay to research foods and try them based on outside cues and see how they make me feel. Your philosophy is a triangle. Mine is a four legged stool: Live joyfully most of the time is number one. ALWAYS. (Trying so hard at HAES intuitive eating got in the way of that for me.) Eat healthfully most of the time is number two. And that looks different for everyone. I am a bit jealous of HAES intuiters, I must admit. But I think the key is to find a way to eat in which you eat everything you could want, in satisfying amounts and WHICH OCCUPIES THE SMALLEST PLOT OF PSYCHOLOGICAL REAL ESTATE you can afford it. Intuitive eating took too much real estate for me. Exercise nearly daily is number three. For me, exercise ended my insomnia. I understand it also alleviates depression. Finally, Treasure whatever body God gives you. The most difficult thing to accomplish in our "Obesity" obsessed society.
So, don't cry for me. I'm failed HAES, or "HAES lite." I no longer accept those terms as perjorative. But please save me a place at the SA/FA table, regardless.
Debra, from my perspective, if you're not purposely restricting food to lose weight, and if you're interested in doing things that are pleasurable AND beneficial to your health...then it's still, by definition, HAES -- even if you'd rather reject the label. Satiety signals be damned.
Some people simply will have a hard time finding those signals, especially if they have a history of repeated dieting. Or maybe just because they were born that way. Mindful eating is great and all, but as long as a person makes a reasonable attempt to ensure they're getting enough food by making sound portion-size guesstimates, I really don't see it as failure.
People push the "hunger and satiety signals" thing a lot because most of us do have them, or can develop them with practice, and because it's such a better alternative to counting and measuring things (which most of us associate with control-model "nutrition" and dieting attempts.) But a person who doesn't feel those signals is no more "failed HAES" than someone with diabetes who has to count carbs in order to give the right dose of insulin, or whatever. I think Dee's point is that we all have limitations, and HAES can work within them, whatever they are.
(I actually have a hard time with satiety signals, myself. And as for hunger -- TMI warning -- when I was a teenager, I didn't get hungry: I simply threw up and passed out. Totally inexplicable. But I've made damn sure to get myself on a regular meal schedule, and my portions are relatively stable. Those are my limits. People have certainly questioned them, especially in a fat acceptance context, but fuck 'em. Those are simply my limits, and I know my own intentions. I enjoy my food AND pay attention to getting nourishment. I don't eat "perfectly" by anyone's definition; but I still win HAES.)
Your quote:
Actually reminds me of a classic HAES quote from Ellyn Satter (AGAIN, I KNOW, I SUCK):
And I totally agree: eating should only take up so much of your mental real estate. I really think that some of the recent books and theories that have come out about intuitive eating have done HAES a disservice, by making the whole thing sound way more complicated than it has to be.
Everyone is different, and "eating well" doesn't necessarily have to mean following Hirschmann and Munter rules, or Tribole and Resch rules, or whatever. I actually read the Tribole and Resch book, thought "huh," to myself, then put the book away and never thought about it again. Didn't take anything lasting away from it, but I certainly don't consider myself "out of the club" or something because of that. Some people may benefit from doing more intensive eating exercises, but surely not everyone. Theories are nice and all, but really, how complicated does it have to be to just eat food?
Not very.
HAES is nothing if not inclusive. As far as I can see, there are only two rules:
1) Be interested in accepting your body (NB: sometimes your body might change, and that's ok too), and
2) Be interested in doing things that are good for your health (NB: it is good for your health to eat yummy food, in the amount that works for you.)
I found Wriggle and Levye's comments interesting and bemusing. As an Aspergers syndrome/ high functioning autistic,I find most things Real Humans do interesting and bemusing until things become truly dangerous.
Wriggle, you have said that you knew what someone else was thinking or feeling even when she did not know this herself. Are you a telepath? There aren't many people who are, and the one (two?) I have met needed to be physically near people, or to have met them and established some kind of connection, to detect thoughts. Since you can read people at a distance, or have some way of "knowing people for who they truely are" of a kind usually associated with Gods rather than humans, I would like very much to know more about what you do, if you are willing to discuss such a thing with a stranger. I know you may not be willing to talk about it . I won't be offended if you say no. I am not being sarcastic. I really do believe you're a telepath.
Levye, that is a very well done Real Human mind game. Finding things that are not there, abuser/victim roleplaying, the ever-popular "you don't speak for me, so shut up" when someone is speaking only for themselves,
and "how dare you refuse to assume guilt when you're told". I've had that done to me and been badly damaged by it, but as a wise man once told me, "you have to admire anything that's done brilliantly, even burglery". Again, I am not being sarcastic. You really did a good job.
Oh, and DeeLeigh, is that picture from Doctor Who? I like that show so much. Have you seen the Torchwood novel where someone puts alien parasites in people to cure fat, and a lot of people die because of it?
If Wriggle is a telepath, then she's not very good at it. To give her the benefit of a doubt, I think her assumptions might come from interpreting things I've said in the past as being about me, when they weren't - things like "People have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies, but if they diet, of course they shouldn't talk about it in places where diet talk is banned." Perhaps by Wriggle's logic, anyone who says that must be on a diet.
The attacks in this thread seem awfully personal, and I really don't understand why those two seem to have such huge problems with me. We don't even know each other. I've been wondering if they're trolls, actually - people who are hanging out here to try to make FA advocates look crazy and bitter. They've certainly been writing long posts that could be interpreted as attempts to dominate the tone of the conversation. I don't know. Maybe I'm just being just paranoid. If that was their intent, surely they'd post more often.
Yes, the picture is from Dr. Who. My husband and I love that show. I haven't read any of the novels. The show has done some interesting things with weight and size issues, actually. They use fat people (and monsters
) in negative ways too often for my taste, but they occasionally show some consciousness of size issues, and I think that the use of Cassandra as a parody of the whole "must be as thin as possible" attitude is hilarious.
MichMurphy, I'm so glad you're in dietetics. I think you are extraordinary, and will blow the field open if given the right platform. I'd love having you as my dietician. Most of the dieticians I've dealt with have trouble with shades of grey. Conversation is a bit one-sided -- not mine, of course.
I've had a pretty big HAES figure (a name you would recognize) tell me I don't qualify, and at first I was really bummed. Then I got to thinking that maybe it was okay. I yam what I yam. True confessions (triggering alert), I count calories. I count them higher than any weight-loss program I've ever seen, and I don't have weight loss goals (or I fight them when they try to emerge), but my head has an abacus in the back, implanted by my mother early in life. I have forgiven my mother for all the other weight-related baggage she encumbered me with, and I rebel by being foaming-at-the-mouth SA.