A German TV news show did a segment on FATASS, the fat activist radical cheerleaders Bean is part of (FATASS stands for Fat Action Troupe All-Star Spirit Squad). Check it out.
Although it’s very cool that they were on German TV, I found the piece’s emphasis on “fat chicks are sexxee too!” analysis a bit annoying. Sexiness matters, but it isn’t the only possible locus of worth and empowerment, and it’s not all that fat activism is about, but you’d never know that from this segment. (I once had the same complaint about a Michael J. Fox sitcom, oddly enough.)
Pingback: liv - MySpace Blog
Pingback: Evil Lesbian Media Whore
Pingback: feminist blogs
Pingback: FeministBlogosphere
Way to go, Bean!!!
Yeah, I know what you mean about the whole “sexxee” thing: in a lot of ways, we *have* been denied being seen at all as sexual beings, so in a way I can understand the desire to show how false that is. But of course, as you say, taking on the whole patriarchal, male-defined versions of sex and sexuality just to prove we can do it too doesn’t look like anything positive to me. For that very reason, a lot of the fat-acceptance stuff for women I’ve seen has been sort of alienating to me.
Well said, bean. I don’t mind the sexxee emphasis that much in one sense – I really wish there had been even a HINT that fat girls could be sexy when I was growing up, and I’m glad the message is out there now. And I do see kinds of sexy in the fat movement that aren’t patriarchal and male-oriented.
But it’s not an ideal fit for me. A lifetime’s habit of “defining myself by something other than my appearance because my appearance is stigmatized” doesn’t vanish overnight, and honestly I wouldn’t want it to because I do kind of like some of the ways I’ve defined myself.
But one result is that I’m not comfortable dressing up in fetishwear and makeup and I feel like more of an observer than a participant at some fat events. I think there’s a solution, but I haven’t found it yet.
Way to go Bean!
My big gay girlfriend knows some of the women in FATASS, but of course, me being the big absent-minded girlfriend, I can’t remember who. Duh.
I don’t know how I feel about teh Sexee. Sometimes I find it utterly annoying, other times it makes me giggle.
Heh. I could watch the video, but I couldn’t hear the sound very well. We (Walter and I) definitely recognized you, bean.
I remember one of our pseudo-drunken rants at The Alibi having to do with the trap of only talking about bodies in a sexual light. What about health issues ? What about athletics ? What about (NOTA help me) having children, and all the other things we’re supposed to do with these things while we’ve got ’em ? I hope you’ll expand on this further over at your place.
At least we got to see some large women’s rear ends in something other than one of those insulting late night news segments about “OMG !! WE’RE A NATION OF UGLY FAT DISEASED PIGS !! JUST LOOK AT THAT WOMAN’S GIANT UGLY ASS !!”
(Not that I’m bitter or anything. :p )
Bean, and others who seem concerned with the celebration of fat sexuality — I’m the organizer of FatGirl Speaks. I really wish, bean, that instead of bailing the meeting, that you would have either taken me aside, or adamantly made your wishes known. I honestly have no idea who you are – and that makes me feel like, at whatever point you attempted to make your concerns known, that there was either too much going on in the meeting, or some other distraction that didn’t allow you to voice your opinion in a way that got heard. For that, I truly apologize.
I admit that the 2nd year went way too far into the burlesque and wasn’t as political as we’d have liked. Part of that was that we simply didn’t have a budget and the burlesque acts were accessible and available (and, yep, incredibly hot.) Part of it was that, for a lot of us on the founding committee, the concept of fat as sexy was new and surprising and exhilirating, and we were all kind of taking our personal journeys around this to the stage. FGS is largely organized by queer women. I’d say 98% of our planning committee is queer. So the words patriarchal and male-oriented being thrown around really feels gross to me. Our focus was empowerment – empowering women in their bodies, and in their sexuality, to feel beautiful and vibrant and attractive, as they are. One way we thought we could do that would be to present undeniable examples of fat, sexy women.
The first year had some burlesque, had a fashion show, but also had a LOT of spoken word. We received complaints from the audience that it was more like an open mic than a show. So the second year, we tried to bring more glitz/fun. We learned from that as well, because now we’re getting complaints that it’s too sexualized and not political enough. So hopefully, this next event will be more even-keel. We’re a young event and we’re learning. But I’d really hope that instead of writing us off and posting divisive comments in public about the event, that you’d dig your heels in and help us make this event what you’d like it to be. I challenge you to rise above your judgement and join us!
” undeniable examples of fat, sexy women”
But see, to me, that is a big part of the problem: “undeniably” sexy in WHOSE eyes? I can’t help but feel that it’s women who somehow are fitting in to patriarchal definitions of what sexy and even sex are.
Look, to the mainstream, there is no way that at this point in time we are going to be considered “hot,” no matter how much burlesque shows get put on. No way. So how about instead of trying to force our way into what I’ve heard other feminists refer to as “female drag” ideas of what sexual women are/should be, we actively try to redefine female sexuality in the first place?
I don’t see that aping “pretty girl” displays and saying, “Look, see, we can do it too!” helps us: not as fat women, and certainly not as women, full stop. And I also don’t see how the number of queer women involved in all of this changes how patriarchal the definitions are. I know most of us are long-term feminists here, so I apologise if anyone feels insulted by my saying something so basic, but “patriarchy” does not equal “men.”
You’re missing my point. First, I don’t feel that there’s anything inherently wrong with Burlesque. If a woman is doing something with her body that makes her feel sexy, that is sexy to me. I went to a mixed-ability dance performance yesterday where there were amazingly sexy dancers who were wheelchair-bound and couldn’t move more than their eyes and their fingers – but their attitudes and their smiles and their expressions – it was amazing and moving and powerful and, at times, evocative and sexy. And it wasn’t burlesque. It was expression. Burlesque is a form of expression. And simply because the larger “patriarchal” mainstream finds it sexy too, doesn’t mean that it isn’t either sexy or empowering. Loving your body in this day and age is a revolutionary act. Loving it enough that you feel like sharing it with others is revolutionary, too.
I agree that there are many different definitions of beauty, and many different standards, and we should strive not to conform to one in particular. But if there are groups out there that feel called to burlesque as a form of empowerment, I feel absolutely fine with providing them a venue to be seen – just as I would (and have) for performance artists, poets, spoken word artists, musicians, educators and others.
There were 3 burlesque groups that performed at FatGirl Speaks. THREE. In a 3 hour show. They each did 2 3 to 5 minute numbers. That’s a total of, at most, 30 minutes of performance, in a 3 hour show. One of the burlesque troupes did far more of a political theme than an actual burlesque theme for their two acts – one of which included a 300lb woman who did backflips!! Amazing, empowering, beautiful, surprising. “I didn’t know us fatgirls could do that!” I heard one girl exclaim as she was leaving. “Maybe I can too!”
The rest of the performances were other types of dance, spoken word, musicians, marilyn wann leading a game of fat-libs, max airborne leading the fatgirl polka, etc…
If you want something to judge – feel free, judge away. But you’re being counter-productive. FatGirl Speaks is a powerful event that is bringing in folks who are *new* to fat activism, *new* to thinking of their bodies in a positive way, *new* to the entire concept of positive body image. Sometimes it really is a spoon full of sugar that helps the medicine go down, and in this case, our sugar is providing a fun, accessible, non-intimidating venue where each act is revolutionary in its own way, including, but not only, the burlesque.
And I mentioned the queer quotient not because I think patriarchy = men, but because I wanted to explain that we are *aware* of the concept of patriarchy. That we think through what we do carefully and mindfully. We just happen to disagree on Burlesque and whether or not it’s empowering to women. I think it is, and some of the most fierce, intelligent, educated, informed, savvy and activated feminists I know are actively taking part in and/or organizing burlesque troupes right now. Because they want to. Because they feel good when they do it. Because it makes them stronger and gives them a greater sense of ownership over their bodies. Because it’s empowering.
so in summary: FatGirl Speaks – 30 minutes of burlesque in a 180 minute show (and I’m not even counting intermission.) NOT exactly the insane sex-pot some folks have made it out to be. The rest of the show was entirely clothed and uneniably political in nature. Go you for keeping us accountable, but make sure you keep your perspective at the same time.
Wow Bean – I hardly think that coming to one meeting, immediately judging the people who were present and had already had an established relationship with one another for not immediately hearing and/or conforming to your particular ideals giving it a reasonable try.
So I find it interesting that you are willing to put this much energy into judging/being negative about the event, but actually ensuring a dialogue, either individually with me, or asserting yourself to make your voice heard in the group to actually help create an event that was more in line with your ideals was something you don’t ‘care enough’ about to make the effort? I really find this incredibly non-productive.
I also find it interesting that your perspective on the event itself is so skewed.
We had 4 workshops pre-event. One, Queen Size Revolution lead a workshop on “Allies and Rebellion, the fight for fat acceptance.” – Heather MacAllister of Big Burlesque lead a burlesque workshop – Maria Callahan lead a workshop on the H.A.E.S (healthat Every Size) principle about fitness and fatness and how they’re not mutually exclusive – Marilyn Wann lead a workshop on Resistance Isn’t Futile – Resistance is Fun – in which marilyn gave a report on all the radical fat activist activities around the country, how to start your own, and encouraged portland to join San Francisco by joining together to create legislation that bans size/weight discrimination. That was 4 hours of workshops – from 1-5pm.
The first act had 3 “burlesque” acts, one was cabaret-style and didn’t involve any removal of clothing – the rest was music, spoken word, a fat activist quiz for the audience, comedy, and F.A.T.A.S.S. Cheerleading (our local radical fat cheerleading group.) 3 of 11 acts were Burlesque.
The second act had 3 burlesque out of 10 – the rest were song, a magic show, comedy, more cheerleading, more spoken word and Nomy Lamm.
6 acts out of 21 were burlesque. 2 of the 6 weren’t actually burlesque. Marilyn and Coyote wore t-shirts from different fat activist movements off and on throughout the evening, did trivia about fat activism all through the show, FATASS did amazing cheers with incredibly political lyrics (and performed 4 times themselves), TerRa sang and spoke their truths about being fat musicians, Marie Fleischman did spoken word and talked about her experiences with her mother, Marilyn Wann did Fat-Libs with the audience and wrote a fun, positive fat national anthem with our audience, Kristine Levin did fat-positive comedy, Max Airborne (with Marilyn and Coyote, and the rest of her band) did music.
Big Burlesque (including, btw, of Sondra Solovay, author of Tipping the Scales of Justice – who is the sole reason that weight/size discrimination is outlawed in San Francisco. Doesn’t get much more political than that, does it?) – performed as well. Queen Bees, a performance troupe from Seattle made up of folks of mixed-sizes also performed political performance burlesque (this troupe is the troupe that includes the 300lb back-flipping woman.), as well as the chainsaw Chubbettes, who did old-style cabaret and magic. So of the 3 burlesque troupes we had, only 1 is traditional burlesque, and that group is made up of some of the most incredible fat activists that I know of.
I could keep going, but I’m pretty sure I’ve made my point. You’re seeing this event through “SEXEE” tinted glasses, but that is only a small part of what we are. And while I appreciate this dialogue, and while I’m happy to have more understanding to use in the planning of the next event, I still refuse to allow FGS to be smeared as nothing more than a patriarchal, opressive, sex-crazed, shallow juvenile event. We are radically empowering folks and FGS has changed lives. I’m sorry you don’t wish to be a part of it, but instead of tearing it down, I again challenge you to see the event more objectively and to put productive energy into creating change rather than spitting out armchair judgements anonymously on the internet.
Bean – way to make this a personal attack. And way to not hear a thing I’m saying.
If you’ll note – my first post explains that yes, I think FGS went too far the 2nd year with the Burlesque, and that I’d like it to be more political. But the point I’m trying to make is, that’s not ALL FGS IS, nor has it ever been. And your continued “I have better things to do” attitude just continues to prove my point that you’re willing to expend more energy to be negative than to be productive. I’ve stated my case clearly, and I have also heard your point. FGS is not just burlesque, and it’s not just “SEXEE” focused. That really isn’t something that can be debated. The event’s performers and line-up speaks for itself. You can present your opinion of it all you like, but it’s simply not the truth.
I’ve heard your concerns, and have voiced them myself to the committee before this conversation even took place. This event is a committee/community project. This event is what people make it. If you want it to be something other than it is, get involved, make your voice heard. There is no one person who decides what FGS is or isn’t. All I’m asking is that you consider FGS lovingly, with the understanding that we’re attempting to do something that is *good* for people, and stop working *against* us, even if you’re not working *with* us. If you have concerns, make them known to US. Talk to US. not around us, about us, spreading skewed perspectives and negative energy. I’ll never understand why activists pit themselves against other activists, and why with so much anger and destructive energy. We are on the SAME TEAM. Stop bitching. Start helping.
Also – I really hope you’ll talk to me in person, Bean. You know who I am, but I don’t know who you are. I suppose I could figure it out by the process of elimination, but I’d rather just have an adult dialogue, in person, and work some of this out – because this feels *really* gross to me, and the animosity is something I was completely unprepared for, and am highly surprised and irritated by.
Bean and FatGirl Speaks,
This disagreement is very disheartening to see, but I understand to an extent both of your sides.
I was at FGS speaks both years and at the meeting you are discussing. Here are my thoughts:
When bean mentioned not focusing on sexy themed acts, it is true everyone fell silent and I am sure some people might have been momentarily at a loss, but I know I was thrilled with the suggestion as I am sure others were and was simply lost in thought trying to think of ideas of how we could best do this. I have no doubt other people were thinking, too. I don’t remember you suggesting anything, bean, but you may have I don’t recall. I do remember ideas slowley being mentioned and lots of thing written down and remember Stacy saying to directly to you, when perhaps it looked like she wasn’t interested because ideas weren’t flowing, “Can you help me with this and talk to me later, I would love to hear you ideas.” I don’t see that as you being dismissed. It is shame it never happened, though.
A lot was done at this first meeting and we all left really overwhelmed. I know I was very excited about your comments and was looking forward to your involvement. It is unfortunate that you felt that no one was interested, because that was not my impression. FatGirl Speaks is subtitled something like “a celebration of self, size and sexuality,” so we all know there is going to be some of that involved, but I do think there is room for more and I think all of it is a form of activism.
As for the show itself, maybe all the sexxee (why the spelling, i don’t get it?) ness that bean is referring to is not just the acts but the overall feeling. The audience, in both shows, were charged up, there was a lot of sexual, flashy, show -offness in the air. Women yelling at women they just met:, “You’re hot!’ “No, you’re hot” Yes, everyone was on and flirting and there was cat calls from the audience at the slightest provocation.
But, isn’t this the point of a “celebration.” To let go and have fun. Perhaps some women (and men) were not doing these things, perhaps some people really got the most from the workshops or maybe the Sing-along really affected them (I know it did me ), but this is not as verbal and visible, but it is still there.
And really, why are we making one lesson more valuable than another? A fat woman seeing another fat woman shaped like her in a burlesque outfit and realizing, “Wow, she is really sexy,” can be just as revolutionary to that persons thinking as a HAES workshop. It depends on where she is in the process and what she is dealing with in the present moment. (I know I keep learning the same lessons over and over.)
I understand it isn’t the ideal. But, we are all at different stages, that burelsque act could be the first stage for many women. Don’t we want more open paths, so everyone can get to the self-loving destination?
This argument is disheartening to me, even as one of your (generally) political opponents. We are in general agreement on the desirability of fat acceptance. I don’t generally chime in on those discussions because I don’t have a particularly informed viewpoint, but I do read them with interest. On this thread, I’m sorry there is this disharmony between people who could be friends.
I don’t agree that “having fun” is all that FGS is. Also, this is a prime example of the personal as political. Marilyn Wann made a great point in conversations we had about this very thing. People need a doorway into fat activism, and if that doorway is too daunting/intimidating, folks aren’t drawn to it, don’t get excited, don’t get involved and things don’t change. FGS may be a celebration, but that’s not all it is. It’s a doorway into a new line of thinking. It’s a way to activate people who can then go on, once they’re feeling personally empowered, and enter into more layers of activism.
ALL types of activism are necessary and valuable.
And I won’t restate my arguments around that since all you need to do is scroll-up and see it. 30 minutes of burlesque, 180 minutes of show, the vast majority of which was highly political in nature – not to mention the 4 workshops previous to the show itself.
And Bean, I never said or thought that you don’t do anything but write on blogs. I was talking about this specific situation. You made that assumption, and while I’m sorry that my language wasn’t clear enough to make that obvious, that was certainly not my intent. I challenged you to turn the energy you were using negatively around FGS *in particular* in a productive manner instead to help make change. You came to one meeting – one meeting that was overwhelming and busy – and you made one point that was too large of a concept to be discussed inside the space of a planning meeting. You were heard, invited to help and to talk more about it outside the swirling energy of a busy meeting (something that is not unique to you – all sorts of conversations happen outside the construct of our meetings. This is a big topic and deserved more attention than could be given with our focus so split.) You made the choice not to do so.
And I’m absolutely fine with criticism – and I have said this several times now, but your point was heard and I agree with you that FGS could stand to be a bit more political. And we are working on it. The first year we heard lots of folks complaining that we were too much like a political open mic – so we added a bit more glitz the second year. Other folks didn’t like that. Now we’re going for somewhere closer to the middle. We’re learning. We’re listening.
However, I find that criticism that’s not delivered to the folks you’re actually criticizing is not helpful or productive. And while I obviously can’t control what anyone says or does, nor would I wish to, I simply saw an opportunity to present you with a challenge and an invitation to actually have an impact in a positive way instead. If you were someone who lived in another city, another state, who wasn’t actively involved in the portland scene, someone for whom it wasn’t feasible for you to actually have an impact in the manner to which I’ve invited you – then I’d not have said a word. But you are uniquely positioned to impact the thing which you are criticizing, and how many folks get that opportunity? I thought you might like to take us up on it.
Bean, I’m done with this conversation save to make one point –
The info you got from your “sources” is absolutely untrue. I don’t even know who you are. Whomever posted above that was also at that meeting has a clearer recollection of what happened than I do. You can’t expect someone in a leadership role who is helping to engage with several committees and subcomittees and who has way too much on her plate as it is to chase you down to hear your ideas. One person can only do so much. You were given an opportunity to engage. You chose to make no further effort. I can’t and won’t take responsibility for that. I’m glad that you’re out there doing your work – but so am I – and I have the same limited emotional and energetic resources that you do.
I’m sorry that you don’t feel that FGS is for you – but what we’re doing is worthwhile and valuable and I plan to continue doing it and my other forms of activism with as much zest, energy and compassion as I can muster. You can see me and us as some sort of malevolent force if you choose to, but that’s not going to do anyone any good. *shrug* I throw in the towel. Take care.
I’m ashamed. I didn’t even send an email. :/
It’s true. But if you want a messy fight to distract the crowd, there’s always the whole housing issue to pull from up your sleeve again.
I’ll wear my spangled tights and my baggy, shin-length flannel nightshirt when we do our public debate. I like to keep people guessing. :D
You’re not the only one getting emails, bean – and way to be sarcastic. I tried to engage with you on an adult level, to let you know that I was willing to discuss this subject with you, in person, no less – to let you know that you were heard and that we’re actively working to listen, learn and be an event that the most people possible can get behind. Your continued bitterness and the obvious grudge you have has made that impossible.
And frankly – If you *have* a volunteer coordinator, that’s really great that you have that resource. We didn’t have that luxury and we all were doing the best we could with the limited energetic resources we had. You can hold us at fault for that or you can realize we were doing our best and that we needed to be met halfway. I’d have loved to have had the time to chase people down – but I didn’t. Work with us, or continue to be divisive and work against us. But the latter isn’t going to help anyone.
I have to add something more to this that keeps bothering me. After that initial meeting that we were all at there were no more meetings for quite a while and the plans for FGS were changed and rearrange due to people leaving and other issues.
I have to say that if we had met right away again and immediately started working on acts for the event, I do think bean’s points would have been discussed more and her input would have been asked regarding this issue. This never happened because the meetings didn’t happen in the same way they had in the past.
I know it is a small point and not the bigger issue, but I do think it affects the issue of FGS and/or bean “chasing” each other down.
Thanks for posting that fgsplanner. I’m glad you have such a clear recollection of that time. (I was in the middle of an unexpected break-up with my partner of 6 years at that time, so it’s all a blur to me. I was kind of in a state of personal shock and functioning on auto-pilot to some degree. I didn’t want to bring that up, since frankly, it’s no one’s business – but it does play into emotional/energetic resources and their availability from my end.) All I can say is, I and *everyone* involved actively in FGS have now, and have always had, the best of intentions. With people moving away, people getting overwhelmed with school, getting married, new jobs, etc…our committees were small and overtaxed. At the end of the day, we’re all people with personal challenges, daily lives and a passionate commitment to making life better for the people around us. We’re all volunteers. None of us made a dime (in fact, I personally lost a great deal of my own money funding the show.) and we’re all doing this out of love and dedication to the empowerment of women. It’s amazing, given our limited resources, and a testament to our commitment that we pulled off such a successful event. This conversation has made me really sad. But I also think that this is one of those ‘you can’t please everybody’ kind of things. I’ve given strong and powerful examples of just exactly how relevant FGS is, and how it has so many more facets than the ‘sexee’ aspect that’s been so focused on here. I’ve done my best to explain that, regardless of how passionately I (and so many others) feel about FGS’s other completely ignored merits, the points made here have been heard (and were discussed even before this conversation took place) and that we’ll be actively working to create an event this year that swings the pendulum back towards the middle. I’ve extended an open invitation for folks to get involved, to have an impact, to dialogue in person, etc. etc. etc. I honestly don’t see, at this point, what else could be done to create a more positive environment for healthy and productive conversation to take place. I’ve even made myself vulnerable by sharing intimate details of my own personal life just to give a clearer picture of exactly how grassroots, blood, sweat and tears this project is. That’s all I can do. If others aren’t willing to open their minds and budge even an inch on their negative stance, given *all* of this information – then there’s absolutely nothing positive that can happen here.
Bean,
I understand how frustrating it is when people refuse to hear what you are actually saying. I always wonder about folks who respond that way and what it is that they are perceiving.
This thread is a textbook example of how not to represent an organization. Does fatgirlspeaks think that her responses help her group in any way? Lots of people, I’m sure, have read through this dialogue. If it were a group that I was interested in, I would be hesitant to join given the response to criticism/differing opinion. It seems to me that, as a general rule, it is best to just say, “I’m sorry that you didn’t get a satisfactory response from us. We’d really appreciate it if you’d give it another try. If you do try again and you still feel excluded, please at least let us know.” That approach works for everything from retail to international diplomacy to personal relationships much better than defensiveness and lack of listening.
But, once again, hey! that’s just me.
Although fatgirlspeaks’ last comment moves greatly in the direction that I’ve endorsed.
I will readily grant that the primary failure of the fat acceptance movement has been taking it beyond social needs and into political activism. While there exists a much more wide spread “fat community” than perhaps ever before, it is nearly exclusively occupied with social groups such as dances or pornographic websites. While the pornography side is far more driven by women than it was when it was the exclusive occupation of a few hard-core magazines and a male “fat activist” who spent most of his energy providing a forum for anti-size acceptance feederist advocation, this isn’t really a major step forward. The fact remains that both arenas are at best indifferent to political activism and at worst openly hostile towards it and aggressively defensive towards status-quo ideas about fatness. They are, indeed, about sex and nothing more. This is a shame and this is a problem.
I would question, however, whether FatGirlSpeaks is an appropriate target for such deserved ire. Forums for fat sexuality have normally been politically hostile, but this does not mean that is a flaw in exploring fat sexuality itself. Sexual oppression is a major factor in fat discrimination and one we cannot very well ignore. Reclaiming our sexuality is a genuinely important fight in the broader battle against fat oppression. I would say that it is vital that we make such approaches from a foundation of political activism. What Fat Girl Speaks does is a model of how to approach reclaiming fat sexuality. Doesn’t mean its not a model that can be improved upon, but we should recognize that enormous gulf between what they are doing and the fat social clubs that dot the nation that are filled with people who loathe their bodies and bitterly resent the suggestion of another way of living. No, it shouldn’t be all that Fat Acceptance is, but looking at their 2004 schedule, I see that it isn’t all that FGS set out to be. I hope they seek to do the same this year. An organization like FGS serves an extremely vital and meaningful service. As does Big Moves in Boston or the Fat Girl Flea Market in New York. They aren’t the limits of fat acceptance, though. Nor should they be. But we shouldn’t cut off our nose to spite our face here. We ought not lose a valuable and meaningful service just to provide a different valuable and meaningful service.
If Fat Acceptance is going to make advances, there will be many different organizations doing important grassroots work. The major institutions of fat acceptance have failed to lead, so many different local groups have sprung up to try to fill that void. I’d suggest that rather than expecting one outlet of this to be something that it isn’t, that we seek to create a new outlet to fill that void for a more political approach to fat acceptance. Not as a rival to FatGirlSpeaks, but as a complimentary peer organization. Indeed, I would hope that such groups would draw upon a largely similiar group of interested people, though clearly not everyone would overlap. Some may prefer the political activism and others may feel more comfortable with the empowerment of sexuality. That’s fine. But neither need look at the other as an enemy. I don’t think FGS is an enemy of Fat Acceptance. Its a different, but still very productive, expression of it. There is room to be radical and inclusive in the fight to reclaim fat sexuality.
While there exists a much more wide spread “fat community” than perhaps ever before…
I’m sure there was another way to write that. ;P
umm, Bean – I’m not understanding this analogy. What part of what FatGirl Speaks does is in any way saying anything negative about anyone? This is a genuine question. I *really* want to hear your answer here.
We encourage *all* women, of *all* shapes and *all* sizes to feel empowered and sexy in their skin…I’m not really seeing how this is a bad thing? Perhaps there’s some avenue of this I’m not seeing? Please understand that I’m not asking this with sarcasm. I’m genuinely interested in hearing your response. Even in terms of the burlesque, we ended the show with anyone and everyone from the audience who wanted to take the burlesque workshop getting a chance to dance and have fun and channel their own fun and sexy energy… I’m not really seeing how that is about societal norms of physical attractiveness? It’s about each individuals own exploration of their own sexuality. And yes, some folks won’t choose to do that with burlesque. Some folks don’t find that energy connects them to their own sexuality, some do. I just…I guess I really don’t understand your analogy. Who are we calling unattractive? Who are we attempting to portray in a negative light? I genuinely want to hear your answer.
I would like to introduce myself Bean…my name is Kina Williams and I am the volunteer coordinator for Fat Girl Speaks. I moved to PDX 2 years ago (just after the last FGS that is being talked about) and I haven’t actually attended either event. I became the volunteer coordinator just this last year and am very serious about this role.
I would like to invite you to our next planning meeting which is tentatively being held on July 12th from 7-9pm at Outside in (downtown location).
I did also attend the meeting last summer that has been talked about here in your blog…and from my memory of that meeting, it was long, intense, involved, emotional, and sort of chaotic in a certain sense. I just remember walking away from there feeling exhausted and overwhelmed…but determined to help make FGS be something great and empowering for our target audience and allies alike.
There have been some very significant changes in the way FGS is being planned, as well as who is doing the planning. I invite you to our next meeting because I value peoples opinions and I am of the belief that in a world full of activist groups if we keep subdividing, we lose our power. If we can find a common foundation (oppression) with which to come together, our chances of propogating actual change is not only possible…but overwhelmingly powerful.
This next meeting we will be discussing the mission statement of FGS as well as a possible name change. If you are not already on the FGS mailing list through Yahoo! groups I would really like to encourage you to sign up so you can be more informed on what is happening currently in this organization.
The “mothership” …if you will…of FGS is the F.A.T Pdx organization. This is their mission statement….
The mission of Fat Action Troupe Portland (F.A.T.PDX) is to foster positive body image build self-esteem and to promote mental and physical health in women of size and or allies. We seek to advocate for women of size by educating ourselves and our communities to combat negative stereotypes and to dispel myths promoted by the media and the diet industry. Through social action, political education and media domination, we seek to empower, entertain and energize women of size and our allies.
I would very much like to point out that this is the MISSION of FATPDX…which means that we have not in any means totally accomplished all of this, and in the infancy stages of FGS we are striving to live up to these ideals and standards. This next meeting is to determine if this mission statement works for FGS specifically..and if not…to create a mission statement specifically for FGS. We will also be deciding if Fat Girl Speaks still works for us as an event name.
This is your opportunity to come and be heard. It will be a structured meeting in that there will be room for monologueing, discussion, and debate in an environment where you can be heard and your opinion respected. It is also a true democracy.
If you are willing to totally give up on an organization that is just starting out because of your past experience with one event, and one meeting, then I am sorry it affected you that way and sorry to lose your suppport. If you have the ability to give us another chance, come help be part of the solution, I can personally guarantee that you will be coming into an environment where you have my personal support as a human being with experiences and opinions that matter and will be respected no matter who agrees or disagrees with you. That is my mission as the volunteer coordinator…to ensure that we have volunteers, and that there is respect regardless of level of involvement.
I hope you can join us that evening. I will repost to your blog once we find out if the meeting is a definite…we have to wait to hear from the person who is scheduling the conference room at Outside In.
Cheers,
Kina
So bean, would you be willing to dialogue with me in email about some ways in which you feel exploring sexuality in terms of fat might not be harmful? I think we will have to agree to disagree (or not?) on some parts of this, but I really would like to hear your ideas on some ways that we could explore sexuality without being as offensive to you and those who feel similarly. To me, it really isn’t about how other people see fat women. It’s about how we see ourselves. It’s about how we feel inside our own skins, our ownership of our bodies, and our connection to our own sexuality. As many ways as it’s possible to get there – I want to hear about them. I still feel really attacked and misrepresented by your continued use of the word patriarchal – but I really feel like this conversation could be had productively and I really do want to listen to you and hear your ideas. You can reach me at stacy *(at)* fatpdx (dawt) org if you’re willing to have this conversation.
I support Bean’s opinions of Fat Girl Speaks Sexee. A couple of years ago I went to a planning meeting and LOVED the grrrlz there. Thank GOD I didn’t participate ’cause the Roseland “fashion show” ended up being a strip tease complete with men giving money to the cute fatties. How do I know that the fashion show turned into a sex-club atmosphere? Pictures were posted on the internet.
Hey, I’m up for fat activism. I refuse to be a participant in an organization that sexualizes women to that degree. Sexualization does not empower a fat woman! Sexualization does not empower fat activism!
Again, thank god I didn’t attend/participate. I would hate my daughter to find pics of me online, in lingerie, with men drooling and handing me money.
I feel that the PDX Fat ass cheerleaders do a good job of walking the fat activism/sexual hotness line. They use a normally sexualized activity to get the fat activism message across. Good Job!
I’m hoping that the PDX Fat Girl Speaks movement matures into less sexualized activism. “Fat and easy” is a stereotype that needs to be abolished, too. Women comfortible with their sexuality (like me!) don’t need to flaunt it publically.
I’m sorry, but how was the FATASS Cheerleader’s highly-sexed dance routine to the “My Milkshake Brings all the Boys to the Yard” (performed at FatGirl Speaks) any less “SEXEE” than the fashion show where the VAST majority of the show was everyday clothing that fat girls are told they can’t wear (shorts, tank tops, spaghetti strap gowns, white pants, swimsuits) because it’s an “assualt” to the senses of “normal” people, and where the lingerie portion of the show was introduced with folks coming out sad-looking in muu-muu’s and baggy clothes that hid our frames, the clothing we’re told we *should* wear so that we don’t offend the eyes of the people who “have to see us” — and then taking them off in an act of defiance to show that we are allowed to wear whatever the hell we want, and whatever makes US feel good in our skin? Is that your definition of “strip tease?”
Is that your Sex-Club Atmosphere? You’re missing the point. And what on earth were y’all expecting? The tagline for the event, which is on every piece of promotion we do, and the website itself, is “FatGirl Speaks; A celebration of Size, Self and Sexuality” — It’s in the TITLE, y’all. We’ve never professed to be anything else. We do an exploration of fat sexuality as part of this event because we believe it to be empowering. Our exploration of sexuality is very personal – it’s about each individual woman and whatever it takes to get her to take ownership of her body and to address herself as a sexual being. That is revolutionary for fat girls.
Aly said: “Women comfortible with their sexuality (like me!) don’t need to flaunt it publically.”
Right. Exactly. Women who are comfortable with their sexuality probably *don’t* need to do this work. But the vast majority of fat women ARE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THEMSELVES AS SEXUAL BEINGS. And that is one (OF MANY) facets of empowerment that FatGirl Speaks explores in as responsible and mindful a way as it can. Short of not exploring this topic at all, I don’t see how any of the dissenting voices in this thread can be appeased, and that’s simply not going to happen. Sexuality is an important facet of empowerment, in FGS’s opinion, and worthy of exploration. Y’all have been offered a chance to give your voice to the ways in which this is explored, and that’s been categorically denied. We will continue to explore this topic on our own and attempt to make the most responsible and ethical choices we can around the ways in which we explore fat sexuality. But we *will* be exploring it.
What we have here is a basic disagreement on the relevance of sexuality inside the political arena, especially in terms of fat activism. We’re not going to agree on this stuff, and that makes me sad. But you all are seeing what we’re doing with very tinted glasses, and since we have such a huge chasm of disagreement between us, and since no invitation to dialogue, to make suggestions, to have a voice, have been accepted or pursued, there’s nothing more that can be done here.
A dialogue doesn’t mean that I*just* sit quietly and listen. A dialogue means a two-way conversation where both sides are challenged to see things from other people’s perspectives, to open their minds, to attempt to come to some sort of agreement. I’ve not been ‘on the attack’ – i’ve been running defense against skewed perspectives presented in a public forum about an event that a great deal of love, energy, passion and mindfulness went into. FGS has been slammed in this forum and called patriarchal, oppressive, a sex-club atmosphere, damaging to women, to feminism, etc… The validity of my own feminism has been questioned on a personal level… Shall I sit mutely and let that pass? I love FGS, I love the people involved, I love and respect their work and their passion and their commitment, and I in no way feel it would be appropriate to let that be entirely dishonored in this discussion. I have presented side 2 of a 2-sided debate, and that’s all. I’m sorry that you feel the way that you do. I have said several times throughout the course of this debate that your concerns have been heard and that we will be working dilligently to be even more mindful in our explorations of sexuality. That, however, has fallen upon deaf ears. This will be my last post in this debate.
Bean, you’ve not budged in the slightest, shown an ounce of kindness towards the obvious good intentions that FGS has as an event, you’ve been bitter, angry, condescending, provoking, name-calling, etc, etc, etc… throughout this entire exchange. You’ve shown no interest in anything other than BEING RIGHT. I have listened to you, I have heard your concerns, I have tried to reassure you that we’ll be trying to incorporate these concerns into the planning of the next event. I have also, during the course of this, invited you over and over again to have a voice, to engage with me in an honest dialogue, to meet with me in person, to come to meetings, over and over and over you’ve been offered many and differing chances to be heard. I have also, while attempting to stay open to dialogue with you, attempted to defend the thing that’s being attacked in order to offer you insight into our motivations and our intentions, hoping to soften you enough to simply be willing to acknowledge that we are *TRYING* to do something good. Not even that much has been acknowledged. Your anger and your need to be right have completely voided all the time and energy we have both spent on this exchange. We are not your enemy. We are your sisters, attempting to create something positive in a world of size/appearance-based oppression. Yet you have treated us like a plague upon feminism and you have created such a spirit of animosity with your judgement that it’s been completely impossible for *anyone* to feel heard. I’ve gone back on my “this is my last post” to post this, because I’ve reached my wit’s end with this exchange. But this really is my last post. I’m not even going to come back and read the responses. It’s too frustrating for me. If you change your mind and you’d like to actually dialogue with me, I’m wary but still open – stacy (at) fatpdx (dawt) org –
FTR, I don’t remember anyone putting dollar bills on women during the fashion show! I think what Aly saw was pics of when the people who took the burlesque workshop danced for the audience.
Again, a small point, but it bothers me to see conclusions made about things that are misread.
I just read the whole of this discussion and I want to say just a few words.
I was in attendance at FGS 2. It was my first fat positive event. And I was floored. What an amazing event. As a whole.
Maybe it isn’t about sex, and maybe it isn’t about feminism, and maybe it isn’t about activism. Maybe it is about combining those things in the way only a diverse community can. I was there for the burlesque, I was there for the discussion on how we can take steps as a community to change laws, I was there to cry and see beauty in a way that had never been shown to me before.
I know people have different positions on what is empowering, and what is hurtful, and I know that there won’t be understanding or agreement on what is ‘hot’, ‘sexy’, ‘productive’ or ‘beautiful’. As a celebration of size, self and sexuality, we’re going to see things that we don’t like or agree with. In removing boundaries from women and allowing them to explore themselves, people are given the gift of self-expression. That is what I felt and saw as so important in my experience with FatGirlSpeaks.
FGS, the point that seems to be getting lost is that the concept of “sex” that you all are putting out is the mainstream, male-defined, women-as-sexual-objects-not-subjects one. And that is only ONE way of conceiving sex. It is a male fantasy of women and women’s sexuality. There are others ways of thinking about sex.
So, in order to be sexual beings, and enjoy sex and our own sexuality, it is NOT NECESSARY to buy into that one mainstream idea of what women are. Simply taking those images and putting a fat woman’s body rather than a size 0 or whatever the current sexmag standard is IS NOT being “subversive” as far as fat-women-as-women goes. It’s not “reclaiming our sexuality” or whatever other bullshit: it’s a pathetic attempt to show the Cook Kids that look, we can be cool like you, too! When it would be much better, and truly revolountionary and subversive, to just trash the fucking Cool Rules and find new, better ones.
And that doesn’t even touch on the point that sexuality is not the sum total of a being a woman. Making it overshadow everything else is further playing into the mainstream idea that women are “made” to be fucktoys.
Look, you may be desperate to break into the Cool Kids’ Crowd and have them like you. I’m not. I think everything about their mindset is shit and I want it fucking eradicated.
And that means EVERYTHING, including the stupid, bullshit, juvenile, objectifying images of what women’s sexuality is.
No actually, it’s just occurred to me that fat-women burlesque shows and embracing of raunch culture are not in fact trying to show the Cool Kids that we’re cool too. It’s really about us trying to prove to ourselves that hey, we can be cool just like them–even if they’re laughing at us. Which to me means that, no matter how much we may be protesting, what we really, really want is to be them.
You know, maybe just fucking leaving high school behind would be a good step?
ouch.
this feels like such a hurtful conversation to me. i feel completely disregarded and disrespected. i have been a member of fatass since its inception, have worked on both fgs’, and am currently working on upcoming show. i have a really hard time with someone telling me how i should act, reclaim my sexuality, or insinuate that my feminism is less than theirs because they happen to disagree with the way i inact it. it feels really frustrating to me that there is all this judgement happening. this movement needs to be about supporting each other where we are – rather than assuming we know best for others or that there is only one way to do it. there are enough people in this world that are willing to be hurtful, name-calling and presumptuous – we don’t need to help them with it! we need to challenge each other to grow. look at what is making us uncomfortable and work on it. assume the best of each other. repect each other enough that if we do have a problem, we find a way to sit down face to face and have converstation about what it is that is bothering us. support and elavate, not divide and conquer.
other things i was thinking about as i read this thread – why do we NEED to define someone as bad? WHO gets to make the decision about what is or isn’t bad? why can’t we be supportive of each other? something doesn’t feel right for you – ok, you don’t have to do it! you like to do something (and you aren’t hurting yourself or others) – well then rock on – empower yourself.
Bean – as someone who works in the movement to end violence against women i would expect you to be able to facilitate a converasation based on ethical communication and understand that belittling, name calling, and being judgemental isn’t effective or respectful. isn’t so much of what we do, meeting people where they are and supporting the decisions that are right for them – rather than judging, attacking and forcing our personal agenda on them? shouldn’t that translate into the way we live the rest of our lives as well? i think that is what i hear you saying in many of your postings above – but then you turn around and make some pretty catty remarks. it feels a bit hypocritical to me.
i am sorry your needs weren’t met at the past FGS’. there are many of us working hard to make this event the best it can be, but realize that we aren’t going to please everyone. what i would like to ask is that in the future, rather than assuming the worst – you take a moment and appreciate all the hard work, time, effort and love that went into making this event happen – even if it wasn’t exactly what you wanted it to be.
**edited to change name of person being spoken to
Burlesque is what impresses the cool kids? I may be 10 years out of high school at this point, but I’m pretty sure that burlesque hasn’t suddenly become the cool hip thing that all the kids are into. Indeed, it was unearthed precisely because it was a forum developed in a time when cultural standards of beauty were very different than they are today. And while at THAT time the medium was probably as restrictive of sexuality as anything today, in this day and age its a very political act of defiance. Just like fat modern dancers. Just like fat cheerleaders. Just like fat synchronized swimmers. I don’t think any of those expressions is inherently exclusionary and if it is every practiced as exclusionary, we can deal with THAT. But being exclusionary towards these forms of expression is not productive. This just isn’t a fair or just target. Fat Girl Speaks and a few woefully isolated by similiar forms of expression are some of the most vibrant examples of fat acceptance going today. And it is fat acceptance with a clear committment and appreciation for the political aims of the movement. Ripping into them and attacking them and dismissing them just isn’t fair. There are better targets. How about the do-nothing “national” organizations? NAAFA, for instance, installed as chairman of their board a pornographer who actively promoted anti-fat acceptance ideologies like feederism. Granted, he was eventually pushed to resign, but the fact that he was there at all speaks volumes about that organizations serious failings. How about the fact that there fat communities throughout the nation who only aspire to serve the social needs of their members and which harber open hostility towards fat acceptance? Or hey, even the high-profile allies who while generally bringing some much needed attention, also seem eager to throw larger fat people onto the rails in order to make the movement more palettable to the wider public? An organization who provides a forum for some of the most passionate, dedicated, and productive fat activists around and also host burlesque performances just doesn’t seem like a problem at all to me. Even if that kind of sexual empowerment isn’t always my thing, I recognize it has a place in the larger movement and can’t be written off simply because its positioned as being about sexual empowerment. This is a good thing. Unless they say that this is all anyone should be fighting about, I don’t think its fair to tell them its something they shouldn’t be fighting for.
Does FA have to go through the same argument loops that feminism does? I’m getting dizzy. I think BStu has made some important points, but I think where the heat is coming from is the intersection between FA and feminism.
As far as I can tell from this thread, Bean has some legitimate beefs with FGS, she has expressed them and defended them, and she’s not a Bad Person when she criticizes the parts she has problems with. She’s also not a Bad Person when she says she only has time to put into things that align more closely with her activist POV, nor is she wrong when she talks about her experiences and what it was like for her when she attended a meeting. For Pete’s sake, she’s NOT saying her fat cheerleaders group is better than FGS, or that FGS sucks. She’s saying that FGS appears to put FA first and that she doesn’t agree with the type of sexuality promoted by FGS and so she’s NOT INTERESTED in participating. Surely it should be OK for people to opt out of belonging to groups that don’t interest them!
FGS has explained and defended her group and its actions, and she has some legitimate points, too. I think it’s great that she’s helping fat women become more self-confident, and maybe some of these women will grow into feminists – I think it’s hard to understand the sexual object/subject dichotomy if you’ve never thought of yourself as a sexual being before, and sometimes the door to sexuality has to be through the culture that people are familiar with. But ya know, this passive-aggressive Oh, you’re attacking me if you don’t join my group or if you don’t totally agree that this is a totally wonderful experience shtick is getting kinda old for me. I’m not interested in FGS, either (for somewhat different reasons that Bean’s), but I should hope that if I should feel moved to criticize the group that I wouldn’t be a Bad Person because I don’t want to throw my time and energy into fixing those things with which I disagree.
Ok, well, this conversation is obviously not going anywhere anytime soon, so:
Lee:
Main Entry: 1passive–aggressive
Function: adjective
: being, marked by, or displaying behavior characterized by expression of negative feelings, resentment, and aggression in an *unassertive* way (as through procrastination, stubbornness, and unwillingness to communicate)
This definition in no way applies to me in this exchange. Please try not to diagnose without a license. Passive-Aggression is a real problem for some people.
Now to address your actual concerns –
Agreed. Bean is NOT a “Bad Person” – and no one is interested in painting her as such. See Liv’s post above — why does *anyone* have to be a BAD PERSON (or a BAD EVENT) here? There is good in everyone and everything involved in this exchange, and my only intention in the defense of FGS is to not let one or two negative opinions about one aspect of the event *completely* overshadow its merits in a public forum. I do believe that Bean’s anger and overwhelming judgement have made it impossible for this exchange to move past this point, but I respect her and the fact that she’s active and motivated to make life better for women. I’m on her side, and while we may disagree about whether or not the exploration of sexuality has a place inside the fat activist movement, and whether or not FGS is a positive thing simply because it includes to some degree some exploration of the afore-mentioned sexuality — I certainly don’t wish her ill or think she’s any less valuable a human being because of that.
If Bean had made *any* effort at all to express her frustration *to us* before she took it to a public forum, I’d have had far less of a problem with this exchange. I had absolutely *no* idea she was frustrated until I read this, and that feels horrible. No, she doesn’t owe it to us – of course she doesn’t – but I absolutely believe that activists would be MUCH better off if, instead of treating each other like the enemy when disagreements arise, that the energy used to mock and disavow be used productively to actually attempt to resolve that frustration in a way that makes whatever the project is *better.* Surely that’s common sense!? Of course Bean has the right to vent her frustration in whatever way she see’s fit – I simply feel that the energy could have been better spent if its intention was to help instead of hinder. Had Bean emailed me and said “You know, I really didn’t feel heard at that meeting and I feel really frustrated about that.” I would have fallen all over myself apologizing and working to make sure she felt heard, but I never got that chance, and now we’re placed in the precarious positions of learning that we actually do have some fundamental disagreements about this topic, but in a public forum, and with an incredible amount of frustration with each other.
If FGS was some big corporation with a standard “thank you for your concerns.” form letter, or in some other way completely inaccessible, I’d have completely understood not making any effort at all to voice frustrations *to* us. But she’s actually attended a couple of FATASS practices WITH people who are ACTIVELY involved in planning FGS, and none of them knew about her frustration, either. She had several points of access to make her needs known, and she took none of them. Peer relationships bring additional expectations for ethical models of communication, and fellow activists bear different responsibilities to behave in ways that are beneficial for the overal movement. For all Bean knew, no one from FGS would ever have read her initial comment in this thread — and what good would that criticism have done if we’d never chanced upon it? Luckily it was read, and the concerns heard, and can now be included in the discussions for the planning of the next FGS. But the fact that this concern has been heard at all is solely through luck. I was aware of amptoons and had been to the site before, but it had been ages. Someone sent me a link to it that day with a mention that I should contact the owner about another project I’m working on and that’s the only reason I was here. You can throw your criticisms into the void if you like, but it’s a waste of energy in my opinion. Criticisms are only valuable if the people actually doing the work hear them.
BStu, I get what you’re saying, but as far as I can see there’s not much real difference between more mainstream forms of women-as-fuckholes (eg pole & lap dancing) where the women are required to conform to mainstream physical standards and burlesque-type stuff, which may be out of the mainstream but is still about women-as-fuckholes. We can’t play the mainstream game, so we find ways to objectify and dehunanise ourselves “in our own way.” So yeah, it’s our sad attempt to show ourselves that we can do everything the Cool Kids do.
How about finding a way to see fat women as sexual beings that go beyond the women-as-fuckholes models altogether?
“Ripping into them and attacking them and dismissing them just isn’t fair. There are better targets. ”
I’m sorry, but there is no way I can go along with this. Anti-feminist is anti-feminist. Why the hell should I have to compromise my beliefs just because “some” bits of their philosophy are good? If something sucks, it sucks, and we shouldn’t ignore that just because it may suck marginally less than other available alternatives.
Buying into raunch culture, for women of any body type, is fake empowerment. Why do it at all, if there are other ways of looking at things? Or are we saying that just because we’re fat, we have to get ourselves to where “normal” women are first, and *then* worry about feminism? Isn’t that just positing ourselves as “ab-” or “sub-normal” and needing to be “brought up to the level” of “ordinary” people? If we’re really interested in empowering ourselves in real ways, why can’t we do it all at the same damn time?
FGS: textbook passive-aggressive response, plus a condescension chaser. Thanks for the example.
It’s not as if Bean held a press conference, for crying out loud. The Internet is a public forum in a strictly legal sense, but seriously, does everyone who has a problem with your group have to come and talk to you personally before posting on a blog about it? Or are only people who praise your group allowed to post before talking to you? Jeez.
… and while we may disagree about whether or not the exploration of sexuality has a place inside the fat activist movement…
I believe that this is what bean refers to when she says it is clear that you have not been listening to what she has been saying. Even I, a person who is not clear on what, precisely, bean means when she writes about other ways of exploring sexuality, understand that bean is not arguing (indeed, has never come close to stating) that the exploration of sexuality has no place inside the fat activist movement. It appears to me that bean thinks that mainstream, women as object, patriarchal sexuality has no place in feminist activism and that is the sort of sexuality that she sees FGS promoting. And that what she would like to see is fat/women’s sexuality discussed & shown differently than FGS deals with it.
This, I think, is precisely why bean feels that it would be an utter waste of her time and energy to attempt to become involved with FGS.
Granted, what is lacking is not necessarily concern or caring but, rather, some vital listening skills. I understand that these listening skills are difficult to develop – I’m still working on my limited abilities in this area – but they are important.
Lee said: “FGS: textbook passive-aggressive response, plus a condescension chaser. Thanks for the example.
It’s not as if Bean held a press conference, for crying out loud. The Internet is a public forum in a strictly legal sense, but seriously, does everyone who has a problem with your group have to come and talk to you personally before posting on a blog about it? Or are only people who praise your group allowed to post before talking to you? Jeez. ”
I’m leaving the passive-aggressive thing alone because it’s just catty and wrong.
In answer to your second paragraph – No, Lee. Not everyone who has a problem with our event has to come to talk to us before posting about it in a public forum. But local activists who are working on the same and/or similar issues have peer relationships that are not *required* to, but have the *potential* to be really empowering, educating and SUPPORTIVE. I’m grieving that lost potential in this exchange, and I’m sad that it turned out this way because it *could* have been much different. This is a personal, rather spiritual, opinion – that we are in this together and that we owe it to ourselves and to the activism that we’re doing to attempt to engage with those doing similar work in respectful and helpful ways. Maybe we disagree on this – and that’s fine. But that is my perspective, and that’s the code I live by. If I didn’t like something in a broadway production of CATS, I just wouldn’t go see CATS anymore or I’d post in my blog for other people to not go see CATS if they held the same belief that caused me to have an issue – because in that situation, I wouldn’t have a voice or a direct line to the leadership to attempt to make change. But if I didn’t like something I saw at the local mixed-abilities dance performance I mentioned earlier, because I have access to the organizer and/or the dancers, because there’s a built-in peer relationship and a mutual respect based on common goals and ideals, I would absolutely talk to him to see if there was any way to dialogue about my concerns before I voiced a dissenting opinion about how I could never support his events in a public forum. That’s just how I function, and I have the same hopes and expectations for others. I’m sorry if that disagrees with you on some level. But I absolutely feel it’s the most ethical model of peer communication in terms of activism.
Jake, in Bean’s own words, she disagrees with you. See here:
Bean says:
“Sure, having workshops or discussions or whatever on more egalitarian forms of sexuality would be better than the focus on patriarchal sexuality — but the focus would still be sexuality. And that’s just not my thing — not for anything that is supposed to be political in nature (and frankly, I’m not into activism just for the “fun”).”
I totally give up. Good luck, FGS, and I hope your group gets the positive publicity it deserves.
How you go from “… but the focus would still be sexuality. And that’s just not my thing…” to “… … and while we may disagree about whether or not the exploration of sexuality has a place inside the fat activist movement…” is beyond me.
I’m with you Lee. Resistance to the defensiveness and constant glossing over substance is futile.
Good luck, FGS.
*sigh* Y’know what guys? I give up, too. You’re saying that Bean would prefer that FGS deal with sexuality in a different way – in a way that she feels isn’t patriarchal. Bean herself said that, while other ways of exploring sexuality might be ‘better’, dealing with sexuality *at all* inside a political event isn’t her thing. And all I’m saying is that a) from where I sit, there’s no way to please bean in this save for to remove the exploration of sexuality from our event carte-blanche, which is something we’re not willing to do because fat women have been denied their sexuality for far too long. b) we’re open to hearing ideas on how the subject of sexuality could be explored in ways that wouldn’t feel as oppressive to bean and others who feel similarly and c) we’re sad that this was discussed in this way.
At this point I’m just plain old confused, and tired. Enough.
FGS, it’s looking to me like you have bought that the patriarchal, misogynist, women-as-fuckholes definition of female exuality is THE, ONLY AND ONLY FOREVER AND EVER “true” definition of female sexuality. Otherwise, why are you insisting that just because we don’t like the *type* of female sexuality you’re pushing, we’re evidently “against explorations of sexuality in fat culture”? Absolutely untrue.
I’d say it’s YOU who’s against doing any actual “exploring” because all you seem to be doing is recycling the same old boring, sexist images over–only this time with fat women in them. Yeah, like, radical.
And this is admittedly adolescent of me, but shit, “FGS” looks waaaaaaay too much like “FGM” to make me comfortable. But then again, if both are based on the idea that it’s men’s definitions of women as sexual objects that constitutes sex, and not women’s physical experiences……….
I think FGS is clearly a minority view in this conversation. Taking the minority view is hard going – much harder than being part of a crowd agreeing with a person. So although I don’t think FGS has acted perfectly in this discussion, I’m more concerned with how the crowd disagreeing with FGS is acting, because FGS is not similarly situated.
Although on the substance of this debate I agree with some of Bean’s criticisms, I still want FGS treated with reasonable kindness and respect on “Alas,” and clearly not all of the responses here have been treating her with kindness or respect. That’s a problem for me, and it goes against the moderation goals of “Alas.”
Nothing FGS has said justifies treating her as if she’s endorsed anti-feminism. Her views on sexuality are incompatible with some feminists’ views, but other feminists would likely agree with FGS’s views. The truth is, how to represent sexuality is a difficult and thorny issue, even between feminists. On an issue in which many feminists disagree with each other, and which so many folks understandably take personally, I think we should bend over backwards to treat each other like allies, and that includes trying to disagree with each other without trashing each other.
I recently had an experience on “Feministe” in which I was attacked and trashed by the folks there – virtually all of whom identify as feminist and would say they’re against anti-fat bigotry – for being the wrong kind of fat activist. It took me weeks to recover from the hatred directed at me by these so-called allies, who I thought should have been able to disagree with me without treating me like shit.
I really, really, really hate that Bean was treated badly at FGS. And I really, really hate that FGS is being treated badly here on “Alas.” Treating each other like we’re not worthless pieces of shit is NOT too much to ask.
Amp, I’d like to say that Bean pretty much states how I feel in her points 4 & 5.
I’d also like to say that I feel FGS is treating US like “worthless pieces of shit” with the passive-aggressive stuff in some of her posts and also her point-blank refusal to address what we’re saying rather than what she thinks anyone who disagrees with her is likely to be saying.
Crys, “she’s doing it too” isn’t an excuse for anything.
Like you, I agree with Bean’s point five. I don’t think anyone should have to ignore it, accept it, or get over it, and I’ve never told anyone to do any of those things. I think Bean’s argument/analogy in comment #33 was completely on target – it’s not reasonable to ask people to put core beliefs aside.
I’d just like to point out that comment #33 wasn’t directed at me, and I’ve *never* asked that bean ignore, get over or put aside her core beliefs. That is so not even *close* to what I’m about. All I asked was for a dialogue to get a better understanding of them. I think there’s been a lot of confusing back and forth here so let me clarify one more time:
I *DO NOT THINK* that burlesque is the only valid exploration of sexuality. It is *a* way that we chose to explore it at FatGirl Speaks, and I would *love* to hear more ideas on other ways sexuality could be explored that would not feel as oppressive to folks who disagree with burlesque on principle so that we could incorporate those ideas into the event.
Does *anyone* have any productive ideas/concepts to offer around this? I’m not sure how much clearer I can make my willingness to hear and to explore alternatives.
No, I’m not saying, “She’s doing it, so I get to.” In fact, I don’t agree with you that that’s what I’m doing at all. I’m listening to what she has to say, even if I don’t agree with it. She’s completely ignoring me and talking past everything that Bean–who, btw, has also bothered to actually address FGS’s points–has said.
As a matter of fact, FGS is so clearly not dealing with anything that’s being said by anyone who disagrees with her that I’m completely flabbergasted that you’re coming out swinging for her. WTF? Is it because she’s a public face for “fat acceptance” while I’m not?
(But I will point out that if she is in fact “doing it too,” then you coming down on us and defending her isn’t exactly the most rational thing to do.)
Finally, #5 in Bean’s last post is the crux of this matter. I honestly think you need to reflect on it and think how you would respond in our situation. Okay?
wow.
so over ethical communication? then how about just respectful communication versus this “fuck off – if you don’t agree with me you aren’t the right kind of feminist” type of communication that is happening on here.
i personally am not asking you to “get over” anything. i was/am simply commenting on the way you are trying to get your point across and how that method effects my ability to hear what you have to say. it feels like someone is standing in my face screaming, calling people names and assuming the worst of everyone involved in a project that i worked hard on and well, i have a hard time responding well to that.
and i used your name (sorry for the misspelling) because that is how i know you. i apologize if that is not the correct ettiquette for this forum.
Crys T – I’m speaking over you because your presentation is hurtful and I honestly have no idea how to engage with you. Telling me I want to be one of the “cool kids” is so completely off-target for the way I function in this world that I just don’t even know how to address it. It’s hard to wade through that much animosity to find a point to actually converse on. I’m a human being and when I feel attacked on a really painful and personal level by someone who appears to be so angry that I doubt productive conversation can be had, I leave it alone.
I’ve explained that I feel that fat burlesque is a reasonable and valid exploration of sexuality. I don’t know how to debate this with you because you so clearly and vehemently disagree that I really don’t know that we can come to any sort of compromise about that particular issue. So instead I’ve asked for alternatives – other ideas that would feel more suitable, that would feel less harmful to you – so that we could present those TOO. Short of removing burlesque from the program, which is unlikely to happen since so many of our planning members support it, and since so many radical, political and empowered feminists that I respect are actively involved with it – this is the best I can offer in terms of attempts to make FGS a more palatable event for your particular style of feminism. And maybe it’s just that with this element involved, you simply cannot and will not acknowledge FGS as a worthwhile event, and that’s OK, too. We can’t please everyone.
But we’re trying, and I’m here, barreling through this aching debate to try to take away with me some sort of better understanding.
I really think its important that people be given a wide berth to explore their OWN sexuality without it being seen as objectification. While I’ll grant that in popular culture the lines can be blurred, I think that with regards to fat people and their OWN sexuality, much expression is profoundly political by its very nature. We also have to recognize that a personally driven sexual empowerment isn’t necessarily going to be complete indistinguishable from patriarcial exploitation. There are going to be points of intersection. Motivation and intent take on a very important role. Even if something sorta looks like exploitation, I don’t think that’s enough to dismiss it entirely and presume that the expression is in support of patriarcal systems. That’s not saying that anything and everything gets a free pass and we need to not worry about patriarcial exploitation anymore. It just means that we have to thoughfully consider the intent of the person who is expressing themselves, and we need to thoughtfully consider our own intentions when it is our OWN expression. None of this occurs in a vacuum, so self-awareness and introspection is crucial. We can’t ignore the impact of sexual exploitation, but I’ve seen sexual exploitation in fat acceptance and I just don’t think we can lump in a performance art event like a burlesque show in with that.
Yes, the media’s inability to see fat acceptance beyond sexual empowerment is frustrating. Frankly, a lot of the blame does lie at the feet of the movement itself. Certainly the institutions of fat acceptance have done much to promote this idea and little to combat it. But when account for the actions of smaller organizations, I don’t think much blame can be leveled at them for this situation. Most especially if they are providing a platform for other areas of the fat acceptance discussion. Other areas of disenfranchisement are absolutely important and need to be talked about. I’ll readily say that I think the health issue is the most pressing concern and is the glue holding up the house of cards that is fat oppression. It frustrates me that it is so especially hard to get THAT message out. But I have no ill will towards people exploring different aspects of fat oppression. Unless they are exclusionary towards other topics, it is a vital and important excercise and one which I feel can take on many different forms.
Actually, I only responded to you specifically after you replied to me – my comment before that, although galvanized by your comparison to FGM (which you admitted was adolescent), was not about you in particular. And I have no idea where you stand on fat acceptance, or how public you are about your stand on FA.
I haven’t “come out swinging” for FGS’s position – never having seen the event, I don’t really have an opinion on the specific charges. I do think that she could have done a much better job being open to criticism, but I also think that you could be doing a better job opening up lines of communication on your end. And I realize it’s not easy, but just because it’s not easy doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try.
Regarding the issue at hand here, I tend to agree with you and with Bean that displays of sexuality that – even though they feel empowering to many participants – are also supportive of sexist and damaging views of sexuality – are probably counterproductive. But we don’t have a solution for that in the short term, and in the short term millions of fat people have been taught to have a profound self-hatred for themselves, and in particular for their sexuality. For that reason, I tend to agree with FGS that it’s not enough to critique what’s been going on; we also have to find a viable substitute for burlesque-style events because there are so many fat people, especially fat women, who are in simply incredible pain over these issues and who require relief and help.
And saying “Look, you may be desperate to break into the Cool Kids’ Crowd and have them like you” doesn’t seem to me like you’re really acknowledging the very real oppression and pain that draws some fat women to burlesque. It’s not about wanting to be a Cool Kid; it’s about wanting to live in one’s own body and one’s own sexuality as if you have a right to be happy and healthy, including sexually healthy.
And that’s where I get stuck. Because in the long term, I think the only real solution is to radically remake society so that it’s no longer has a warped, sick view of sexuality as wares
ownedheld by women and put on display. And I recognize that burlesque shows – including burlesque shows for fat women – are contributing to what I see as a very harmful cultural status quo. But I don’t have any short-term solutions for patriarchy, and if burlesque helps some fat women feel better about themselves in the here and now, it’s hard for me to say they shouldn’t do it.Everyone makes their compromises with patriarchy, me included. I don’t agree with burlesque, but I know there are extremely valid problems which draw some fat women to burlesque – a lot more than just a desire to be a “Cool Kid.” And I think there are good reasons to treat other feminists and FAs with respect even when I disagree with them, and even when I think they’ve made a compromise with patriarchy.
(I’m not assuming that you disagree with all of this, btw! I’m attempting to outline my own view here; I’m not attempting to refute your view).
” I’m speaking over you because your presentation is hurtful and I honestly have no idea how to engage with you. Telling me I want to be one of the “cool kids” is so completely off-target for the way I function in this world that I just don’t even know how to address it.”
At this stage of the game, after seeing your other posts, I can’t help but feel that your use of the term “hurtful” is a cynical ploy on your part to garner sympathy (that you apparently didn’t feel you needed before when you were doing the passive-aggressive bit) now that Amp has handed the FGS As Victim of The Big Mean Girls card to you on a plate.
And anyway, the “Cool Kids” comment was, IIRC correctly, actually in response to a post of BStu’s, and is not only about your organisation, but any fat woman who thinks that getting acceptance means buying into the patriarchal bullshit & using all the patriarchal sexual imagery. It’s what I sincerely believe. What do you want me to do, lie? Pretend I don’t think it’s horribly harmful and counterproductive when I know in my heart it is? Put it in language that minimises how important I truly believe it to be just so someone’s feathers don’t get ruffled? So I look more “polite”?
“I’ve explained that I feel that fat burlesque is a reasonable and valid exploration of sexuality.”
How does it “explore” sexuality? How does taking a load of already existing images and just sticking fat bodies in them “explore” anything?
Anyway, this misses Bean’s main point, which was that the whole “Sexxee” vibe was NOT confined to the burleque (she repeatedly said that if it had been, she would have had no problem as she simply would have avoided that segment) but permeated the ENTIRE event. That is what her problem was. She never said you need to eliminate the burlesque–and I wouldn’t say that either as I’d just avoid it as well–but that you need to control the Sexxee mindset so that it doesn’t dominate every aspect of what you’re doing. That’s how you compromise: you got people who want the Sexxee stuff, fine, give them their slot, but allow those of us who are not only not into that but actively against it the chance to participate in the other segments without getting that stuff shoved in our faces all the time.
And I’m sorry, but I can’t let this one go by: “so many radical, political and empowered feminists that I respect are actively involved with it” This is so “some of my friends are Black/Jewish/lesbian….” Come on.
“And I have no idea where you stand on fat acceptance, or how public you are about your stand on FA.”
Okay, fair enough. But from my POV, it was so obvious that FGS was talking around Bean in a way that looks to me like willfully misunderstanding Bean’s stance, and distorting Bean’s words in a “let’s make her look like another one of those anti-sex frigid types.” So why you felt she was being gangpiled or treated like a “worthless piece of crap” is still somewhat beyond me.
“I haven’t “come out swinging” for FGS’s position”
But Amp, when you as the owner of the blog makes a post specifically smacking some posters on the wrist while giving another poster a supportive little cuddle, that’s what it looks like.
” I also think that you could be doing a better job opening up lines of communication on your end. And I realize it’s not easy, but just because it’s not easy doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try.”
That sounds nice, but the sad fact is that I and other women in my position have been here so many times before. We’ve heard it already. And we’re tired of it. You know that, because you’ve been around for a lot of it. You’re asking us to compromise on something we believe is an absolute basic minimum. Sorry, can’t be done.
“But we don’t have a solution for that in the short term, and in the short term millions of fat people have been taught to have a profound self-hatred for themselves, and in particular for their sexuality. For that reason, I tend to agree with FGS that it’s not enough to critique what’s been going on; we also have to find a viable substitute for burlesque-style events because there are so many fat people, especially fat women, who are in simply incredible pain over these issues and who require relief and help. ”
See, I don’t get this. Why do we “have” to find substitutes for that sort of thing? Says who? This is probably more information than anyone here needs, but I’m currently seeing a counselor due to the breakup of my marriage, and one big issue there has been my weight. And her way of dealing with these issues is to flat-out tell me how destructive the patriarchal images are, not encourage me to try them out myself. And you may think this is because I picked a counselor who’d mirror my own feminist views, but that’s not how it worked–we got her basically because she was available at the time we could come. So, seriously, why can’t we address the issues of fat women and sexuality in the way my counselor is–by making me feel good about my body and to see myself as a sexual being in non-patriarchal terms?
If all that raunch stuff isn’t good for “normal” women, why on earth adopt it even in the short term rather than do the work to figure out new healthy ways of seeing ourselves? Of course that’s hard work, but hell, all of this is an uphill battle anyway.
“And saying “Look, you may be desperate to break into the Cool Kids’ Crowd and have them like you” doesn’t seem to me like you’re really acknowledging the very real oppression and pain that draws some fat women to burlesque. It’s not about wanting to be a Cool Kid; it’s about wanting to live in one’s own body and one’s own sexuality as if you have a right to be happy and healthy, including sexually healthy.”
As a fat woman, I have to vehemently disagree. I think that for most of the women who participate (of course I recognise there will be exceptions), it’s that thing of having been shut out of the Official Club of Sexy to the point where all they do is obsess about getting into that club. That club becomes the only thing that matters, and they’ll do anything at all if they can just get through that door. The closest thing I can compare it to is the weight-loss obsession, except instead of “if I can only lose these X pounds, my life will be good,” it becomes, “if I can only get into the Club of Sexy, my life will be perfect.” And not only is it not true–losing weight doesn’t make your problems suddenly disappear anymore than being seen by others as sexy does–it’s destructive, and leads fat people do things that are actively harmful to themselves in order to achieve that goal.
When instead what we should be doing is realising that that club is a load of boring old crap and that we don’t need it. We can start our own and make it a truly fun, healthy wonderful one. But only if we stop obsessing about getting into the Official one, as if it were the only one that mattered.
“And that’s where I get stuck. Because in the long term, I think the only real solution is to radically remake society so that it’s no longer has a warped, sick view of sexuality as wares owned by women and put on display. And I recognize that burlesque shows – including burlesque shows for fat women – are contributing to what I see as a very harmful cultural status quo. But I don’t have any short-term solutions for patriarchy, and if burlesque helps some fat women feel better about themselves in the here and now, it’s hard for me to say they shouldn’t do it.”
Maybe it’s hard for you because you’re a man. I’m not, so I don’t have a problem. I recognise the “why” that leads many of the women to participate, just like I recognise why some fat women will have their stomachs stapled or do crazy fad diets. I understand that desperation and need to feel validated. And yeah, some of them will temporarily feel “empowered” by participating, just as those women who eat nothing but cabbage for a month will lose some weight and feel temporarily happier about themselves. But there’s a long-term price to pay for that kind of thing, and it ultimately ends up being very damaging.
“I think there are good reasons to treat other feminists and FAs with respect even when I disagree with them, and even when I think they’ve made a compromise with patriarchy.”
This is where you and I will probably never understand each other. I think being upfront about things & saying them how you think them is showing far more respect than couching things in careful language is. To me, the latter implies that you don’t think the other person is up to hearing what you really have to say, while the former implies that you think they’re able to deal with it.
“At this stage of the game, after seeing your other posts, I can’t help but feel that your use of the term “hurtful” is a cynical ploy on your part to garner sympathy (that you apparently didn’t feel you needed before when you were doing the passive-aggressive bit) now that Amp has handed the FGS As Victim of The Big Mean Girls card to you on a plate.”
Oh lord – are you kidding me? I don’t even know how to address this.
“How does it “explore” sexuality? How does taking a load of already existing images and just sticking fat bodies in them “explore” anything?”
Because, in my opinion, defying societal norms by presenting the polar opposite of what is conceived to be physical attractiveness by society at large in an empowered fashion by women who have chosen it, by women who have been denied the right to feel sexy/sexual/attractive — is powerful imagery for those who have never even considered the idea that they *could* feel good in their bodies and is powerful for the women who use this as a tool for their own sexual exploration. For us, it’s not about who see’s it. It’s about the women doing it and what they get out of it. I don’t agree that burlesque is inherently patriarchal. I agree that intentions and motivations weigh heavily in terms of defining that.
“And I’m sorry, but I can’t let this one go by: “so many radical, political and empowered feminists that I respect are actively involved with it” This is so “some of my friends are Black/Jewish/lesbian….” Come on.”
…what!?!?! I don’t even know how to address this either. Saying that my peers and friends, whose politics and activism I respect and admire, are involved with something else that I feel valuable, and, in that way, and for that reason, I support them is not even close to what you’re insinuating. I’m stunned. I’ve taken part in burlesque workshops myself and they were truly profound experiences for me to connect with my body in that way. So much of the time I live in my head – I’m still working on my own personal body issues – and having the chance to shake myself down into my skin, to use my body, my muscles, to sway to music, to feel the connection with my mind, my heart, my desire and my flesh was one of the most unique and empowering experiences I’ve had in terms of my own personal exploration. I’m certainly the better for it. And I don’t apologize for that in the slightest.
Amp, I’m sorry you feel this discussion is mirroring your experience on Feministe, but after going back and rereading the More (Fat) Politics thread (which is the one I think you were referring to in your comment), I don’t think the situations are similar. On Feministe, you were trying to communicate clearly, the other posters were also trying to communicate clearly, you all were explaining and rewording and apologizing, and things got kinda heated. This thread, to me, has a different dynamic. But this is your blog, and I appreciate all of the effort you put into hosting it, so I’ll stop commenting on this thread now.
Lee, it’s certainly not my intention that you stop posting here! (And I really disagree with you summary of that thread on Feministe, but that’s a topic for email, perhaps). I appreciate your appreciation, but I don’t want you to feel like I’m telling you to stop posting.
And I want to clarify a couple of things. First of all, on second thought, there are a number of people here taking both sides of this debate, so it was wrong of me to imply earlier that the numbers are terribly uneven.
Second of all, I don’t want to give the impression that I think the bad behavior and lack of respect has existed only on one side of this debate. On the contrary, I think that people on both sides of the debate here could do a much better job of expressing concerns in a way that nonetheless shows respect for the other people here, and that leaves lines of communication open.
What horrifies me is that virtually everyone here is a feminist, and a fat activist as well. It shouldn’t be so impossible for us to have a productive discussion. But, obviously, it is hard.
The only comparison I intended to make between this thread, and the thread on Feministe, is that I don’t like to think of people walking away from this thread feeling beaten up, the way I felt after that thread on Feministe.
In no way do I mean to say that I think people here have behaved as badly as a couple of the posters on Feministe did. I’m sorry if I gave the impression that I was saying otherwise.
I’m going to make this short. I will never post here again.
FGS ’04 changed my life.
While there was a lot of sexy there, it wasn’t the only thing. It was one of many good things. I needed all of them. I felt loved, enlightened, and supported and, yes, sexy. I left with tools, information, and a heart to spread my freedom and newfound joy to others. Everything has changed and I’m a better person for it.
Thank you, fatgirlspeaks, for creating an event that changed my life so staggeringly. Thank you, liv, for inviting me and being a sounding board for my thoughts through development.
I will see you both on the 12th.
For the rest of you, thank you for voicing your opinions and thoughts on sexuality and fatness. You have encouraged me to evaluate my views and experience in new ways. I have come out the other side respectfully disagreeing with you and more resolved in my own views.
Sincere in every way,
duckie
“are you kidding me? I don’t even know how to address this.”
No, sorry, but I was deadly serious. I felt that you weren’t taking me (or really any of us who were challenging your ideas) seriously at all, therefore, I found it hard to believe that anything I said could be very “hurtful” to you.
“in my opinion, defying societal norms by presenting the polar opposite of what is conceived to be physical attractiveness by society at large in an empowered fashion by women who have chosen it, by women who have been denied the right to feel sexy/sexual/attractive — is powerful imagery for those who have never even considered the idea that they *could* feel good in their bodies and is powerful for the women who use this as a tool for their own sexual exploration. ”
I disagree, for reasons that I went into somewhat in my last response to Amp. Firstly, I very much disagree that that sort of thing is ever “empowering”. I think that, just like the weight-loss from stomach surgery or crazy starvation diets, it makes the women who engage in it *temporarily* feel good about themselves because they’re doing something that society has deemed “what women are for.” And that’s the problem: you aren’t even bothering to question whether that definition of “what women are for” has any validity or not.
The entire reason that it’s considered soooo terrible for women to be fat is that it makes us “unSexy, ” and Sexy, which is dependant on a woman’s being thin, is the only worth women are believed to have . So, if thin=Sexy, and Sexy=the sum total of a woman’s worth, then dammit, we’d all better be hysterically trying to lose weight if we’ve got “excess,” or maintain our weight if we haven’t. What you’re not seeing is that the main problem here is not that “thin=Sexy” but that “Sexy=the sum total of a woman’s worth.”
(Though to be honest, I’d be happy if you’d just get to the point where you’d say, “Sexy and Sex do NOT equal what mainstream society says they do,” so you’d be more interested in looking for new, real ways of expressing sexuality and not just lifted-wholesale-from-the-patriarchy attitudes and images.)
What you’re doing is saying, “Well, we’re going to scrap the “thin” requirement and make it so that “Sexy” can include fat women. I’m sorry, but that’s not good enough. This is a problem that affects ALL women, and all you’re doing is “fixing” the no-fat requirement, but allowing the core misogyny to stay….hell, you’re CELEBRATING it! And in doing so, you may make yourself and other fat women feel a bit better for a while, but in the long run, you are screwing over (and I’m not saying that to be rude to you personally, but because it is what I believe) every single female on the planet, fat & thin, because you’re buying into a whole set of bad ideas.
Sex is a good part of life, and we all have the right to feel we are sexual beings. However, what you’re doing is buying into the belief that being sexual only comes to you through the definitions & eyes of others–particularly men (and please don’t “inform” me that plenty of lesbians are into these shows–I am aware that’s likely to be the case, just as I am aware that lesbians don’t magically grow up outside of patriarchal influences). As I said, there are plenty of ways to positively explore sexuality, and let women work through the shit that we’ve had jammed down our throats for so long, so why lazily fall back on a whole load of pre-existing images? Yeah, the other way takes a hell of a lot more work, but I thought you wanted to really change things.
” Saying that my peers and friends, whose politics and activism I respect and admire, are involved with something else that I feel valuable, and, in that way, and for that reason, I support them is not even close to what you’re insinuating.”
Yeah, after I went away for a while and cooled off, I realised that wasn’t really what I was wanting to say: what I meant was more along the lines of, “Well, I know some Black/Jewish/whatever people and *they* aren’t offended by X, so that proves that X isn’t offensive to Blacks/Jews/Whatevers.”
Some women who ID as feminists may be fine with what you’re doing. Many others, as has been made evident here, are not. And as someone upthread pointed out, there are self-identified feminists involved in a lot of what many of us consider anti-feminist activities, such as anti-choice work.
I’m coming in late to this discussion, but I’ve read every post here and a have a few comments to share. I am not interested in what’s been considered a debate on this thread, but if there is sincere interest in my perspective rather than a shout-down or a one-true-way forced re-educating, I’d be willing to share further…
1. I attended FGS 1 & 2. I’m a queer femme, feminist, and a strong ally to FA.
2. The audience was 90% female, the other 10% were male or genderqueer people who were allies and SOs, many directly involved in FA. There were no size fetishists in attendance.
3. The audience and performers were overwhelmingly queer identified, with many VERY VISIBLE queer femme performers and audience members.
4. Burlesque is a performance art that has been reclaimed by queer femmes as it affirms and celebrates their visiblity and sexual agency.
5. Femme gender expression (and femininity in general) has been de-valued by mainstream feminism as being patriarchial and existing only for the male gaze.
6. Demonizing one end of the spectrum of personal gender expression available to women, or the desire to abolish all gender choices for women, is reactionary and limiting – and strengthens the position of the patriarchy while at the same time mimicking that position under the banner of feminism.
7. Understand that FGS was an inclusive event where the amazing intersection of FA and “sexee” and gender expression and queer identity and sexuality all happened due to the positive actions and hard work of the people who made the effort to participate.
8. If you would like to see other elements brought into FGS, there has been an open invitation to do so. I, for one, will be interested to see what you bring to the plate. I haven’t heard any concrete suggestions on this thread so hopefully it will be brought up in person at planning meetings of FGS 3 or in the production of your own event.
9. Fighting on the internet tubes will only get you so far. There is no shame in agreeing to disagree…and is pretty much required if we are all going to work together for our common goals.
Bean, I’ve e-mailed Amp. He has my permission to forward it to you if you want to see it.