Organizing the Carnival of Fatty Goodness
This is a post where I’ll be discussing the Carnival of Fatty Goodness, a proposed blog carnival for highlighting posts written from a fat pride or fat acceptance point of view.
This came up in the discussion on this thread. Here, based on what we discussed and also on what I’ve been thinking, are my proposals. I’m putting these forward for discussion; they are by no means writ in stone.
The Carnival should be named “The Carnival of Fatty Goodness.” Or maybe the “Carnival of Fat, Fat and More Fat.” If everyone hates those ideas and no other suggestions come up, then we could just call it “The Carnival of Fat,” but I’d personally prefer something less bland and more striking and in-your-face.
The Carnival is for posts discussing fat pride; fat acceptance; critiques of anti-fat bigotry, attitudes and research; celebration of images of fat people; practical difficulties of being fat; fat love (queer and otherwise); feminist views of fat and fat acceptance; the health at every size movement (HAES); and whatever else each edition’s editor deems appropriate (apart from the topics noted below).
The Carnival is not open for advocacy of weight-loss diets, weight loss surgery (WLS), or feederism.
Discussions of fat fetishism (pro or anti) are on-topic so long as they are written from a fat-acceptance perspective; in contrast, simple fat fetishism (for example, “Here’s a fat fetish story I wrote that’s really hot!”) is not on-topic in this carnival.
The Carnival will initially take place once every two months.
Please let me know what y’all think. I realize that the bit about fat fetishism may be particularly controversial, so please don’t feel that you can’t argue against that if you don’t agree with it.
This entry posted in The Big Fat Carnival. Bookmark the permalink.
Pingback: feminist blogs
I like “Carnival of Fat, Fat and More Fat.”
Or maybe “The Big Fat Carnival of Fat, Fat, and More Fat”
“Carnival of Fatty Goodness” sounds too cutesy to me.
I like “Carnival of Fatty Goodness.” But, then, I’m also partial to Apu’s line. You know the one. “Oh, you got the head bag. Chock full of heady goodness.” So my opinion may well be irrelevant.
I think “The Carnival of Fatty Goodness” sounds more like it could be about cooking. “The Big Fat Carnival of Fat, Fat and More Fat” sounds more like it’s about fat pride.
I like “The Big Fat Carnival of Fat” the best. I’m so excited and already thinking of what I can write about. When it’s finalized is it ok if I call for submissions on the fatdykes list I belong to?
It’s not just “ok” for you to do that; it would be WONDERFUL if you did that! :-D
And I agree, “The Big Fat Carnival of Fat” is the best title idea so far. (IMO)
If no one objects to the rules as laid out in the post, or offers any suggested modifications or improvements, I’ll go ahead and start putting it together later this week.
Not that there’s been any controversy yet, but I wholeheartedly support your position on fat fetishism.
It’s one thing to fetishise objects or activities, but fetishising something that’s part of a person as integrally as their size (or race or dis/ability) is downright creepy because it denies them their whole humanity. Discussion of fat fetishism would be fine with me, but plain old fat fetishism for the sake of fat fetishism I would not be okay with. I would not participate in a carnival where that was welcomed.
Another vote for “Big Fat Carnival of Fat”. “Carnival of Fatty Goodness” makes me think of Mardi Gras, not weight.
Amp, on the subject of fetishism, there’s a dynamic I want to point out: some folks are so wedded to the model of fat as asexual or unappealing that they think anyone with a larger partner must be a fetishist. My wife is a BBW (she is not very accepting of her own size, however) and I have had sex partners from the very thin to the fairly fat. Some folks have assumed I fetishize my wife’s size, when this is not the case at all. It’s a sort of anti-fat prejudice by proxy.
The Carnival is not open for advocacy of weight-loss diets
This reminds me of something that has been on my mind for some time: I like the fact that you explicitly label weight-loss diets as such rather than just calling them “diets.”
Generally, most people assume that the default meaning for “diet” either is synonymous with “weight-loss diet” or that the default meaning of “diet” is “weight-loss diet.”
I generally consider the term “diet” to refer to any attempt to regulate one’s eating to achieve a particular end, which could also include regimens for weight-gain, or that are designed to relieve food-related conditions [e.g. more fiber for someone who is constantly constipated].
It would seem to me the automatic assumption that diet = weight-loss diet would tend to discourage people who want to eat healthier, but who are not interested in weight loss; and would cause people to give up on trying to eat healthy because they associate all attempts at regulating their diet with attempts [presumably unsuccessful, uncomfortable, or both] to lose weight. That is, they decide that eating healthy = weight loss, so they give up on any attempts at eating healthy either because they are not leading to weight loss or because they assume that they will be as uncomfortable as diets for weight loss tend to be.
Count me in if there are going to be carnivals! Even if I don’t have something to submit right away, this would be something I would love to read.
FWIW, I like “Big Fat Carnival of Fat” too and I will be a loyal reader.
Has anyone else had some trouble tracking down actual fat acceptance groups in the midst of all the fat fetish, dieting, and singles dating groups? I read Big Fat Blog (found it through Amp’s links list) but I just have not had much luck finding others that see much regular traffic. Anybody have reccomendations?
How about, instead of “Big Fat Carnival of Fat”, just “Big Fat Carnival”?
carlaviii – here are some web sites for size acceptance/fat acceptance groups.
International size acceptance org:
National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance (NAAFA):
No lose the national organization for lesbians of size
Largesse the network for size esteem
I’m personally not found of regarding a perference for a fat partner as fat fetishism. No one regards preference for thin women to be a fetish. It seems to be playing to the powers that be to regard oneself as a fetishist for simply being physically attracted to fat men and/or women. I continue to be perfectly content with the community’s adopted term “fat admiration”. It simply defines a notable point of difference without getting into any termnology which may seem weighted to anyone like fetish.
Personally, I see fetishes as a sexual interest that is directed outwards towards an object. When this object of desire is part of another person’s body, I think there is a distinct danger of objectifying that other person. By this understanding, fat fetishists certainly can exist, but is a far different beast than someone who is just physically attracted (even unabashedly so) towards a fat partner. This is not to say that I think that fetishes are bad, but that when the object is another persons body, I think the standard we seem to apply for a fetish ought to be raised. Perhaps this is born out of interaction with communities where fat admiration and the objectifying and frankly dehumanizing interest in feederism is often confused and where feederists regard fat women’s bodies as little more than an end from their means and most severely objectify women.
Oh, and I concur with not being as much a fan of “Carnival of Fatty Goodness” as the other suggestions. Am quite a fan of the idea, however.
I’m personally not found of regarding a perference for a fat partner as fat fetishism. No one regards preference for thin women to be a fetish. It seems to be playing to the powers that be to regard oneself as a fetishist for simply being physically attracted to fat men and/or women.
It’s a fine line, sometimes, though. I know that as a fat woman who dates, I’ve run into guys who seem to be more focused on my fat than on me. As a result, I’m a bit wary of the whole dating thing.
Whatever you call it, this is certainly a great idea! And needless to say, Body Impolitic would like to be part of it.
It’s a really excellent list of topics.
I rather like my misread of the title, “Carnival of Fatty Goddess”.
I’m looking forward to the Carnival.
I think we all (okay, many of us) probably have fetishes of one sort or another. The “creepy” factor comes in when the fetishized part is all the fetishizer seems to see.
I dunno. I mean, personally, I’d be fine with someone who thought my ample belly was hott, even first gave me a second glance because of it. I just really wouldn’t want it to be, like, all she (or he, I suppose) talked about.
I’m not sure its such a fine line, zuzu. I think a problem exists in my gender, no matter what the object of attraction, to focus too much on a woman’s body. When paired with a non-standard attraction, I can see it developing into an objectifying fetish. But, there is a world of difference between dating someone because they are fat, and dating someone inclusive of their fat. I think often things are painted in terms of “because of” vs. “in spite of” and the idea of “inclusive of” is not acknowledged. But it certainly is possible to be anything but shy about expressing one’s attraction physically, without focusing on fat to the detriment of all else a woman is. I’d like to think that as a man who dates fat women that this is what I do. I fear, though, that encounters with the kind of men you describe has turned off many women on the notion of a man being physically attracted to them. I’m happy that the women I’ve been involved with as an adult appreciated being with someone eagerly attracted to their bodies but that appreciation is possibly precisely because that was one facet of a complete relationship. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing, but I’ve encountered an alarming number of fat women who feel those are the options available.
I like “Big Fat Carnival of Fat” best of the suggestions so far. I think the “Fatty Goodness” title sounds like a celebration of lard, but that’s just me.
Another suggestion: Vanity Fat Carnival. (If you want to address the fat vs. appearance matrix more than the health issues.)
I fear, though, that encounters with the kind of men you describe has turned off many women on the notion of a man being physically attracted to them.
You know what? You’re right in a lot of ways about that. And I have issues with the idea that, if I became thin, the men who would be attracted to me then wouldn’t have given me a second look if I were fat.
Personally, I think there is nothing really wrong about being attracted to thin women. I am concerned that a lot of men adopt that attraction out of cultural pressure rather than actual interest, but I don’t think it is in any way morally inferior to my attraction. I mean, its not like I se being a “fat admirer” as some kind charity work. If I’m going to ask for respect for my attraction, I need to respect others’ as well.
The big difference is in those who regard their attraction as morally superior or who view a lack of subjective physical attractiveness as a moral failing on the part of the gender they desire. That’s a mistake that I’m afraid seems to be quite common among “Thin admirers” and I see no reason to respect or tolerate that. Everyone has a right to be attracted to what they will be attracted to, but no one has the right to condemn people for not being attractive to them.
Pingback: Body Impolitic - Blog Archive - » Fat Carnivals, Stupid Fat Laws, and Fat Suits - Laurie Toby Edison: Photographer
Opps — did you mean to say that “a lack of subjective physical attractiveness” is automatically assigned to fat people? Because your really good point seemed to get lost in that phrase, at least for me. (Even though you used the word subjective; your comment seems to place the lack with the person being viewed.)
In that construction, the lack is with the person being viewed, but I do think it was implied that the lack originates from the viewer as it is a subjective standard being applied. It was clearer to me to say that rather than deal with the cascading pronounds of saying those who view those who aren’t attractive to them meaning the first those and not the second those which is subjectively founded by them in the continuing reference to the first those. If something can be clearly implied with a word like subjective, I’d just as soon avoid a structure which uses the same pronouns to refer to different groups. Can’t always avoid it, but here I think you can.
I am a rapper named fatty goodness and I appreciate and fully support you all throwing a carnival in my honor.