So I was dinnering with some cartoonists (and a couple of normal people) the other night, and we got on to the subject of an argument I had on another occasion. Asked what the argument was about, I had to admit it was about fat advocacy.
But I really hesitated to admit it.
To steal a phrase, “I hold what most people consider unorthodox views about fat (i.e. that it’s not some kind of full-body malignant tumor).” And — as I admitted at dinner — I sometimes hate to talk about my views on fat, because doing so tends to get other people to classify me with the folks who wear tin foil hats to fend off the aliens. It’s not a comfortable feeling.
I went into it a bit anyway, and tried to make it funny. But it’s a problem. I have to get over my fear of being seen as a nutcase crank, I guess.
I sometimes feel this way also. I think it’s even the word “fat” that gives the conversation such a weird tone – for so many people, it’s still a cuss word.
Still, I think it’s a very powerful speech action for a thin-privileged person to sit down and describe some fat acceptance tenets logically and plainly. (Usually the points I find myself making are something like “Eating well and exercising will make you healthier, but they may not make you thinner, therefore it is illogical to assume fat people aren’t ‘taking care of themselves'” and “Fat is not a moral failure.”) It’s usually a successful exchange… my acquaintances are usually embarrassed when they find themselves being narrow-minded. More importantly, though, because many FA ideas are so confluent with feminist ideas, my colleagues pick them up and carry them into other exchanges.
As they say over at Shakesville, “teaspoon by teaspoon.” : )
The way I look at it is that all of us are nutcases about something, and there are worse things to be nutty about. If someone I’m with doesn’t like it, well, they probably haven’t embraced their inner whacko and I prefer to hang out with people who have, anyway.
Or: accept that you are a nutcase and proceed accordingly. Works for me, anyway. :-)
I could be wrong, but it seemed that the conversation proceeded more smoothly due to the presence of women in our group. Generally speaking, women tend to be more comfortable talking about body issues, while men tend to hold back from uncharted territory. “There be dragons! Or, well, insecurities. Same thing!”
The women we were with were smart, informed and articulate, so that helped, too.
I should add: not that women don’t have insecurities about their bodies, of course. It’s really the irony that the same societal obsession with women’s bodies that informs women’s insecurities about them also makes them more familiar with the subject. Men are not encouraged to talk about their bodies, except their muscles and their pricks. Oh, and bodily functions. But talking about their bodies is, to allude to another thread, forbidden because it’s “women’s territory.”
Fucked up, but true.
I hold what most people consider unorthodox views about fat
As opposed to your positions on economics, politics, gender issues, etc., all of which are squarely within the American mainstream. ;)
Is it that your views on fat are unorthodox? Or that they’re unorthodox within your general political and lifestyle groupings? IE, you’re comfortable being a godless commie or whatever it is that you believe out there in Red Portland – but lots of the people around you also believe that silliness, so it’s OK. But the fellow travelers tend to think fat=bad, so it’s uncomfortable.
Thought experiment: would you be more comfortable coming out to Colorado and advocating (politely, I hope) for atheism among my social circle of Catholics and evangelicals, or going up to Seattle and advocating (you can be rude there, I don’t care) for fat acceptance among the gaunt hipster liberals?
“fear of being seen as a nutcase” – As someone with a mental illness (I so dislike the phrase ‘mentally challenged’), even the tin-foil hatters look at me strange when I start getting wound up about nutcase advocacy.
I wrote this post at 3am or something, when I was quite tired. Just now, I reread it and changed a couple of words, because I think my original wording was ablist and might make some disabled readers feel unwelcome on “Alas.”
(Credit to jawai for reminding me, although I don’t know if that was her or his intent.)
I can’t speak for Ampersand, but for myself, there’d be no question that the former would be far more preferable (and a far easier challenge) to the latter.
Robert: No doubt you’re right that this comes up more for me with fat issues than with other issues partly because my friends and family are more likely to agree with me on the lefty issues.
But I don’t think that’s all of it. I’ve been in right-wing groups where I was the only one arguing for socialism, atheism, etc, and been quite comfortable — the truth is, if the group isn’t belligerently hostile or physically threatening, I enjoy that sort of thing. But most Americans accept that those things are a matter of opinion; and even if their own circle doesn’t include any socialists,athiests, etc, they are aware that people with such opinions exist.
In contrast, I know that when I talk about fat issues, I’m often arguing against not what is seen as an opinion, but against what most people believe is well-established fact. Furthermore, they may not ever have heard that anyone disagreed with the anti-fat consensus before talking to me. That changes my comfort level, I think.
I was waiting for Amp to answer Robert’s question, but since he hasn’t yet, I’ll chime in.
I think it would be easier to discuss atheism with conservative Christians because, a) I have plenty of experience in my own family with it, and b) matters of faith, or lack thereof, always come down to subjective experience. We don’t have objective proof either way, so it’s not like there’s some data we can point to or a workable theory, no matter what Intelligent Designers tell you. So as important as faith is to conservative Christians, for me it would be no big deal. “Hey, man, it’s your Kool-Aid. You drink it.”
Talking about fat inevitably leads to discussions of health. Most PNW Lefties I run into are obsessed with health: eating organic, exercising, biking, hiking, gardening, and other physical activities. By and large, these are good things, and I feel guilty sometimes for being such a sedentary sloth (not a lot of exercise when you’re cartooning.) Yet I don’t think there is a simple either/or regarding health and fat. I carry most of my fat upfront, putting strain on my back muscles and my heart. I should eat better and exercise to get rid of it. But Barry’s right that such a regimen is not a guarantee that one won’t be fat; indeed, one might lose a considerable amount of weight yet still be “fat” by common standards.
So fat as an issue – a health issue, a body politics issue, a feminist issue, a personal issue – is very complicated. Faith is easy.
AH, Barry posted while I was writing. Sorry!
In contrast, I know that when I talk about fat issues, I’m often arguing against not what is seen as an opinion, but against what most people believe is well-established fact. Furthermore, they may not ever have heard that anyone disagreed with the anti-fat consensus before talking to me. That changes my comfort level, I think.
Interesting. Thanks for the insights. (I shall, of course, use them to further the Right Wing Agenda.)
For what it’s worth, I suspect that there are more disagreements with the AFC than show on the surface. I meet a lot of people, mostly though not exclusively men, who aren’t wrapped up in the AFC and who profess honest bewilderment at the expectations placed particularly on women’s bodies. Usually this is expressed selfishly, along the lines of “I like chubby girls, I wish they’d stop starving themselves so I could get ahold of some of that sweet junk”, but it’s a start.
Amp–
I myself used to be quite a bit fatphobic, but after reading about the Fat Acceptance/Fat Activism movement, I must say I have been swayed around to their beliefs. I’m a thin person, I feel perfectly happy and healthy in my own body but I’ve had people (average-sized people who were neither as thin as I am nor anywhere near fat) accuse me of anorexia. I’ve tried to patiently explain to these people that I feel fine, that this is my body, and that there is little I can do to get bigger. And I’ve been told to: “Just eat more.”
I used to dismiss these attitudes as jealousy or of a specific problem with me, but h0nestly–if someone believes that a genetically thin person can (easily) become bigger through simply “eating more”–then what do they think of genetically fat people? It’s body facism–“my body is the correct body, every other body is either too big or too small.”
I try to accept fat people now. I know they have it harder than I do–it’s one thing to be called an anorexic when you see fashion models strutting their stuff, I’d imagine it’s quite another to be called fat and see the thin Jennifer Love Hewitt’s ‘cellulite’ being harshly mocked.
But thank you for bringing your point of view to my attention.
Hey, Genevieve. I don’t really have a substantive reply, but I wanted to say thanks for your post.
Ampersand: Let’s call it a peek at an alternative reality.
You can “steal” my phrases any time you like, Amp. Thanks!
P.S. “Nutcase” doesn’t bother me, although I totally am one.
Amp – you ARE a crank. So am I. Deal with it. Embrace it. Learn to love it as much as I have, and you’ll be a happier man.
“accept that you are a nutcase and proceed accordingly”
This is now my mantra :D
I feel this way too, but I also realize that most people are extremely ignorant about the reality of fat prejudice. So sometimes you just have to explain it gently and patiently, like teaching a small child something new.
I thought that this was Amp’s answer!
The issue for lefties as I see it is that science and medicine seem to be developing increasingly religious overtones-which adds an interesting line about the point and reasons for religious beliefs- I know people object to this line of reasoning but I that’s what I’ve perceived on numerous occasions and being brought up also in a religious home, I think I can recognise at least some of the signs.
As has been said before, the religious are now used to being challenged, those who think their reasoning follows science are not, I think your reticence is fear of being cast out being no longer seen as one of them, you would not be seen as a crank but in the same category as those who are against science, therefore, a non-entity.