Seriously, fandom?

[nilchance]

Chub!Jensen controversy and now a big-bang set in an obesity research center?

Trigger. Biiiiig trigger.

I am sore tired of catching this merry fat-hating bullshit every time I turn on the TV ("now on Dr. G, Medical Examiner: OBESITY CRISIS OBESITY FATTY FATTY FAT FAT DEAAAAATH!"), but fandom too, for serious?

Argh.

ETA: Also, okay. I understand that the underlying message is that Jensen has to come to love himself. HOWEVER. It comes with the understanding that Jensen is expressing his love for himself by losing the weight "for Jared", to go find Jared and love and enlightenment and that.

Here's the thing. Very rarely do fat people actually get that way by cramming fast food and abusing their bodies. They get there through genetics, or thyroid issues, or antidepressants (hi there!), or a history of yo-yo dieting that resets their resting point of ideal weight. A history of eating disorders. So forcing one's body into a thinner shape by exercising to exhaustion (thus making exercise an unpleasant chore that one HAS to do to BEAT OBESITY), or limiting calories to deprivation, is a shock to one's system. It's not necessarily self-love, though it may be motivated by the desire to be lovable or to live longer (because of fear of obesity killing them) or because they can't be happy until they're thin.

Self-love is unrelated to a number on a scale. It's recognizing one's worth, unconnected to one's weight. The beauty of your body as it is, flaws and all, not as it could be. Pursuing health is an awesome thing, and a great way to love yourself, but pursuing thinness is not the same thing.

Comments

[quiet000001.livejournal.com]

That thing about happiness = weight is what keeps the diet industry going - it's the same basic advertising concept as a certain brand of beer meaning you'll suddenly be surrounded by hot babes, and because of the social pressure about being fat, we're so desperate that we'll believe anything.

Meanwhile, there's plenty of things we can do that make us feel better about ourselves that have nothing to do with losing weight.

Also, I totally agree with your BMI rant. :) (I've had it in for those stupid height = weight charts and the entire concept since I was 12. I was 5'4" and about 150. I could, at the time, carry my 100lb best friend up three flights of stairs, piggy back. I had defined muscle in my arms and legs. Some moron woman at Weight Watchers - I was there with my mom - tried to tell me I needed to lose 60 lb. WTF?)

[siubhlach.livejournal.com]

You're absolutely right. And I, for one, would quite happily see the entire dieting industy crash and burn in a fiery ball of cartoon death. I hate the way they peddle what are often at best dubious quick-fix remedies that are likely to do more harm than good to desperate people. I tend to equate them to somewhere around the same level as drug pushers in my head.

Very much so. I like to find ways to make my life fulfilling and interesting; I find that makes me feel so much better about myself than being 2lb lighter on weighing day does (and I've tried it).

Happened to you too, huh? I ended up going home and talking to my mother, who's a qualified nurse, about it. Her response is actually not repeatable in polite company (and my mother is a classy lady; she never swears!). My current favourite BMI factlet is that the entire England rugby team - professional sportsmen, no less - would register as morbidly obese on the BMI. Moronic really is the best word for it.

[quiet000001.livejournal.com]

The thing that always baffled me was the fact that I had visible muscle in my arms and legs - like, some adult men would be jealous of the muscle definition that I had - and you just don't get that degree of definition if you're at a super-high body fat percentage, which I would've had to be to need to lose 60 lb, right?

Like, does common sense not kick in and some point and say 'wait, this makes no sense?'

[siubhlach.livejournal.com]

Didn't you know? It isn't why you weigh, it's what you weigh that is important *eyeroll*

Common sense? I always liked the line from Men In Black for that: "A person is intelligent; people are stupid, panicky animals and you know it"

[(Anonymous)]

I have defined legs and arms, however it depends where the weight is sitting (ie: hips and abs) That's acvtually the worst place for it to sit. Better to have fat everything else and no fat around the middle - which is perhaps what the doctor needs to explain.

[beanside.livejournal.com]

Actually, what generally matters (if you go looking at some of the less-touted studies) is whether or not you exercise. You can be fat and fit and have less chance of problems than people who weigh less and don't exercise. Also, you missed the point.

The point is, you can be 300 lbs and love yourself, and be happy and healthy.

... or you can be miserable at any weight.

[quiet000001.livejournal.com]

At 12 I did not have a build up of fat to any significant degree around my waist and hips, and certainly not 30+ lb worth of it. What I had, and what I continue to have, which throws off the stupid BMI numbers, is significant muscle mass and big boobs. (Which are genetic - my grandmother was always slim and extremely active, and also very well endowed.)

Furthermore, what bothers me about the BMI and other 'simple' metrics that use height and weight alone is that they are used by people (such as crazy weight watchers lady) who have no education or qualifications in actually determining what constitutes healthy for any given individual. (Which is particularly interesting in light of the fact that recent studies show that as you get older it's actually BETTER to be in the 'overweight' section of the BMI charts - your chances of survival in the event of major health problems goes up significantly, while there is no statistical evidence that your rate of having those major health problems happen is any higher than that of the general supposedly 'normal' weight population.)

And I'm not even going to get into the whole ridiculous issue of encouraging children and teenagers who are still actively growing and developing to restrict their nutritional intake. They didn't need those brain cells they were going to grow with those extra calories anyway! (Or that bone mass, or whatever.)

In short - if my doctor says 'you have issue X for reason Y' relating to my weight, then I will listen and debate it with him, and possibly adjust my behavior if he has reasons for thinking that beyond 'the pretty chart on the wall says so.' Given that no doctor has ever brought up the subject of my weight or fat distribution, I'm going to have to figure that they trump strange Weight-Watchers-Chart-Lady in determining what is or isn't a healthy weight for my body.