Big Fat Ad
I saw this poster in San Francisco over the weekend, put up by some public health initiative, I believe. Of course I thought of you, and snapped this picture!
The first dotted line says “STARTED GOING FOR WALKS DURING LUNCH HOUR.” The second line says “STOPS ORDERING TAKE-OUT AND STARTS COOKING HEALTHY MEALS.” And the third line says “JUST BOUGHT BIKINI THAT CHALLENGES SOME OBSCENITY LAWS.”
The first two lines, of course, are there to show that if the fat woman makes positive health changes and stops “ordering takeout” (you know, as we all do), she will lose lots of weight. It’s the third line where I have the real issue–once she no longer has any “unsightly” lumps (please notice that the shape of the line changes, not just the size) she’s “allowed” to buy a skimpy bikini. Isn’t that the goal, after all?
I have to say, I misunderstood this photo at first. My first thought was, “cool, a fat chick in a bathing suit!” and then I skimmed the ad and thought “hey, she’s going to get empowered and buy a bikini!” totally missing the whole weight loss thing. This obviously proves that I’ve been brainwashed by my own blog; there’s clearly no way a headless fattie in a bathing suit would be there to convey a positive message. But isn’t it nice that I thought so?
Posted by mo pie
Filed under: Advertising, Fatism, Feminism, Health, Media, Weight Loss
I guess the advertisers want you to read those three phrases as if they’re in chronological order (presumably as layers of fat come off). But I kind of like reading it from the inside out, so that it means: first she bought a trashy bikini! Then subsequently she realized she was more than a sex object and started taking care of herself!
I think doing a few Photoshop remixes of this thing is in order.
Can I also just say how much I love that walking during your lunch hour and not ordering take-out are supposed to make you lose enough weight to have a conventionally acceptable bikini body? Way to reinforce the myth that substantial weight loss is just a matter of small, easy changes. *headdesk*
she’s “allowed” to buy a skimpy bikini
I don’t remember there being security personnel in the swimsuit section last time I was at the store. Maybe they were hiding and would have lept down from the ceiling tiles if I had tried to consider a bikini…
I think the design isn’t bad but I totally missed the “getting smaller” suggestion of the text until I read this though…
also her arm is behind her back a little like he’s being handcuffed or something. The placement just looks odd.
It is nice that you thought so. I kind of thought so too.
I don’t know… I’m slightly conflicted, in that I see exactly what you mean, but I do like the message that you don’t have to ALREADY BE SKINNY to start exercising and doing the things you want. Though it ought to be obvious.
I agree with Kate’s analysis. It reinforces the idea that all fat people must be lazy, donut-stuffing, willpower-less, ignorant morons in order to be fat. Because, yanno, all you have to do is walk during your lunch hour (so easy!) instead of eating lunch, and make sure at night you’re cooking homemade pasta instead of ordered take-out from Italian restaurant down the street.
It’s that simple!
Besides, we know no *skinny* people order takeout or eat lunch.
Marilynn Wann posted about this on the fat studies listserv. Someone “vandalized” one of these is San Francisco and replaced the words with (the words are a little hard to read):
1st line) Started getting angry about ads like this that promote anger against fat people
2nd line) Started spreading the word that people of all sizes can be healthy & sexy
3rd line) Started telling weight bigots to kiss my fat ass not that I’d let them!
Personally, I think that is just too cool. Guerilla Fat in action.
I notice that there are no weight/fat loss lines are her arms. So apparently it’s acceptable to have flab on some parts of your body but not on others, cause that just makes you disgusting and unsexy.
It’s such a gorgeous picture, it’s tragic that they chose the message they did.
If only it were so simple. It’s kind of a neat idea- the design, I mean- but as someone said above- obviously no *skinny* people order takeout and they must all walk during their lunch hours, too.
I’m kinda glad it appeared here, in SF, so that someone COULD “vandalize” it.
The sad thing is, it probably isn’t even posted in L.A., because GOD FORBID they see someone wearing a bathing suit who isn’t a walking skeleton!
I remember, a few years ago, driving down Sunset Blvd. and seeing a huge billboard for Victoria’s Secret’s new thong. The ad consisted of a model wearing said thong and sticking her ass in the camera. So, yes, it was basically a giant billboard of a skinny naked ass. There were a large number of fenderbenders on Sunset, but no one thought it was odd. Except me, and a couple of my female friends. In most other places, SOMEONE would have complained, don’t ya think?
But this is the mentality we’re dealing with. That we are only worthy if we’re skinny, and if we ARE skinny, we should be objectified.
And NEVER MIND that NO ONE gets skinny by taking strolls around the block, and that a majority of models and actresses have eating disorders, which is why they look the way they do. No, let’s just keep our heads in the sand, and “educate” people with methods that have been proven, time and again, NOT to work.
OK, sorry about the rant.
Yeah, my first thought before I read the entry was, “Dayum! Nice ass!” followed shortly by, where can I get that suit? LOL. It’s such a shame because it really is a great picture. And as much as I disagree with the message, I have to admit, it’s one of the better examples I’ve seen of this type of PSA. At least they lured me in with a saucy picture before they insulted me. So, I’m going to name her Sadie, and in the rest of the picture, she has great hair and a smile ten feet wide. If I lived near one of these, I’d get all Fat Guerilla on it (love that term): SHE IS GORGEOUS ALREADY!!!
I saw a similar ad a couple of years ago that showed a picture of a headless fat man and pointed to the notches on his belt. The belt got bigger with labels like “wife got a new lasagna recipe,” “got Sopranos on DVD,” and “hired lawn service.” So the guy was getting fatter.
Alyssa, I’m not sure what LA you’ve been living in, but I lived in LA and OC for 11 years (I moved away about 4 months ago.) In all my times at the beach, not once did I see beach full of perfect 10s in string bikinis. I saw all sizes, shapes, colors and ages at the beach, in bathing suits, having fun. I saw all sizes and body types on Melrose, at the Whiskey, at Roscoe’s. LA is not some “strictly skeleton thin stereotypes only allowed within our viewing range”.
I have to say, buying a 2 piece bathing suit that bared my middle was one of the most important things I’ve ever done in terms of my own personal relationship with my body.
I’d always had trouble buying one piece suits because I was (prior to three pregnancies) barely a B cup on top with broad shoulders, broader hips, a substantial ass, and wearing an 18/20 on the bottom. If the bottom fit, the top, inevitably, did not.
Once places like Target started selling 2 piece suits, I jumped on it, and though it was strange, at first, to have that white swath of squishy skin in the middle bared to the world, I found I loooooved how quickly I dried off after the pool, and how free I felt, and how *in* my skin I was. I bought a bottom that had a small skirt on it, because I’m not a waxing kind of woman, and I like to swim without worrying about a wedgie. And I haven’t looked back since.
Especially in catalogues, it’s getting easier and easier to find two-piece suits in larger sizes, and I highly recommend giving them a try, no matter what your size!
I grew up in L.A., and I agree with that. In certain social scenes, there’s absolutely that pressure to be thin–but if you’re not trying to be an actor or socialite, I don’t think anyone cares. I feel like the guiding principle is that people are so into their own lives that they don’t so much have energy left for judgyness. That’s just my impression, though.
I hardly ever get takeout, I work at home so it’s unnecessary. I also walk pretty much every day, sometimes for hours. Why have I not disappeared?
mo, I agree. I really think nobody should worry about what anyone else thinks they look like, since most people are more worried about how they themselves look. Most people don’t have the capacity to step outside their own egos long enough to worry about how others look in most of those superficial-ish social situations.
Does anyone else wonder what Jennifer Love Hewitt’s reaction to this billboard would be?
I can understand why people are offended by the ad, but I think its intended message is not really a bad one. While Kate Harding is right that little changes are not likely to result in significant weight loss, there is substantial evidence that they can result in small weight losses of 10-15 pounds…which can be enough to reduce your risk of type II diabetes and heart disease. Seeing as how the ad is a product of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (along with the Ad Council), I think that’s probably the ultimate goal here.
And if you look at where those dotted lines are, they don’t seem to represent a massive weight loss. The “obscene bikini” line is at a point where that’s still a pretty curvaceous booty, in my opinion. I think here they are trying to say that if you lose some weight you will likely feel better about yourself and enjoy showing off your body…even if you’re not super-skinny. I understand why people take objection to the conflation of self-esteem and body weight, but I think the reality is that most people do feel better about themselves when they’ve lost a few pounds.
ok Im completely HORRIFIED that thats actually a real ad.
and I completely adore that youve been brainwashed by yer own blog.
M.
La Wade, I don’t mean to pick on you, but that kind of thinking–just lose a few pounds and you’ll feel better!–is just as damaging as the “you must lose 100 pounds immediately or you will die.” Why? Well, first of all because not everyone who makes “small, healthy changes” is going to see the result of weight loss. I lived in a major European city and didn’t own a car for four and a half years, while living on the 4th floor of a walkup apartment. “Takeout” was largely unavailable. While I now live in the United States and don’t get to walk everywhere anymore, I am still plenty active and cook 90 percent of my family’s meals from scratch. I focus on loving myself–all of myself–and that means eating well and staying active.
Guess what? The weight never changes. I am fat, just as I have been since early childhood. If I lost 10-15 pounds, I would still be fat, and as a fat person would still be subject to the random judgments of strangers who know fuck-all about who I am or what I do for lunch or when I order a pizza. It’s not like I would then be able to wear a sign that says, “I’m fat, but I lost a few pounds and feel so much better now and am at much less risk of TEH DIABETEEZ, so please don’t stigmatize me.”
Hey, my first thought was “my bum looks like that!”. I already own a bikini, and have worn it in public, I don’t think mine threatens to break any decency laws, unless there’s a law against looking indecently cute?
I think this ad is acceptable, because it’s not overtly judgmental, even with the take-out assumption, and it is advocating little healthy changes, that is a message that very much needs to get out there.
I’m taking an Epidemiology of Chronic Disease class with now for my Master’s (Mistress’?) degree, part of the class is online discussion groups, and it is INTERESTING what some people come up with when the debate is “why do people not exercise?”.
It is judgemental. The ad assumes that fat woman doesn’t exercise at all, only eats take-out, and shouldn’t be allowed to wear a two piece because she’s fat. The model they used probably does walk and doesn’t stuff herself with take-out food.
Some people don’t need to lose a few pounds to feel better or look better. When some of you will stop buying into that junk, society will be a better place.
Kinda skimmed thru the comments, so not sure if someone already touched upon this or not…..
It’s ironic how many times I hear the “eat better, exercise more, and you will lose weight”.
I’ve been at a restaurant and ask to substitute veggies for french fries, or am sweating away at the gym…when I get those looks that say “why are you even bothering, pig?” or “You know you’re gonna eat some Ben n Jerry’s when nobody is watching”.
I still make the choices that are healthier, but there are times when I resent the implication that because I “allowed myself to get this way”, I am suddenly beyond hope.
Hey, I live in SF and saw this a couple of weeks ago in Spanish at my local bus stop. As I don’t speak Spanish, I didn’t know exactly what the lines said, but I apparently surmised the content fairly accurately.
Every time I walk by the thing, I wish I had a better grasp of Spanish and a thick black sharpie so I could do some creative revisions.
I’ll take suggestions for Spanish phrases that appropriately modify the ad…
Miriam, your post has made me want to try to wear a bikini again, even though I’m at my biggest since right before my ED began in high school.
I know this doesn’t seem like much, but…wow, it oddly means a lot to me that you said that. I mean, what the hell, why is my flesh not “allowed” to see the sun while the svelte can stride in confident bliss?
How odd. I just never considered I could do it again. I never thought I could just say, “Fuck all!” to the world of beach bodies who would eye me disapprovingly, or the teenage boys that would inevitably mock me (why the fuck do I care about what teenage boys think of me again? Oh yeah, PTSD from high school, sigh).
Thanks to this ad, instead of desiring to get ’smaller’ than I am (because, as La Wade pointed out, smaller is automatically healthier, and you can lose 15 lbs by walking at lunch and not eating takeout), I want to *accept* who I am — not just for me, but for *all* the fat women out there. Even the ones who will also eye me disapprovingly, because they’re still in the grip of the Fantasy of Being Thin.
Thanks Miriam, and thanks lovely headless fat woman in the ad. :)
I saw this ad in person about a month ago in SF, and thought about capturing it to send in to BFD. But I was so ENRAGED that I couldn’t bring myself to go back and look at it again.
To La Wade: I ALREADY take walks during lunch, and I ALREADY cook healthy meals at home and don’t order take out. In fact, I spend about 800 dollars a month ordering fresh, grass fed, organic lean meat, organic vegetables, beet kvass, and raw milk for myself and my husband. They are delivered every week, and I cook because this food isn’t cheap and I don’t want to waste it. I walk, lift weights, and swim.
The ad I saw was in spanish, which makes it even more pompous.
La Wade, I’d love to see a picture of you. What do you weigh? I’m guessing (based on nothing, since that’s what your post was based on) that you need to pluck your eyebrows to feel just a little better about yourself.
After all, I “think” the “reality” is that most people (especially entry-level scientists) who tend to make inaccurate assumptions about people they don’t know “tend” to feel better about themselves when they are more conventionally groomed. Even removing a stray hair or two can do wonders for someone.
And you know, once that “better feeling” wears off, just pluck another. And then another. You know, like an anorexic might do if with the pounds if they want to keep feeling just a little better about themselves.
*Sheesh* the ignorance.
Insulting or not, “ignorant” or not, a LOT of women DO seem to get some kind of boost when they lose a little weight. I’m not judging them for that, and I’m not judging anyone who doesn’t care about their weight.
I’m aware that this comment is based on anecdotal evidence…however, I feel most of the “I do this and this and can’t lose weight therefor these changes will make no difference for anyone else” are based on less than scientific evidence.
This in no way changes my opinion that anyone should wear a bikini if they darn well want, and if I don’t like it I’ll keep it to myself, and I won’t look.
Wow, Stacy, that was really mean and totally uncalled for! We’re all in this fight together and being cruel to someone for their well-researched and intelligent opinions doesn’t do any of us any good. Maybe consider taking the high road next time.
Well, it’s certainly enlightening to see the range of responses to this ad!
To me, they seem to be saying that small, healthy lifestyle changes can result in modest weight loss that can make you look and feel better.
But most of the commenters here seem to feel they are saying that if you look like the woman in the picture, you are doing something wrong, and you need to change. I agree that this is a message often perpetrated by our society. But I don’t think it’s the message this particular ad is trying to send.
I think maybe the fact that it’s a fat person in the ad and not an “average” or thin person proves that this ad isn’t all about health.
Lisa-Marie -
My phrasing wasn’t intended to be mean, and I’m sorry that you perceive my analogy as cruel. It was intended as nothing of the sort.
For someone to assume that I will fee better about myself if I lose 10-15 pounds is ludicrous. As it would be ludicrous for me to assume that someone would feel better about themselves if they pluck their eyebrows.
And there is absolutely nothing “well-researched” behind the statement that “changes” like those described in the ad will result in a weight loss of that many pounds.
What if your starting weight is 90 lbs? Should you make those “changes” so that you can feel better about yourself?
What if you are already doing those things? How then, does one implement those “small changes?”
Oh, just walk a little *more* and eat a little *less,* right? That’s exactly the kind of thinking that the diet industry pushes on people.
I’ll take the high-road with trolls, thanks, but with regular posters who should know better, I’m pretty sure it’s okay to call them out on lazy thinking.
Have you seen the ads for http://www.smallstep.gov? They come up on the CNN website. The one I was just looking at showed an overweight man with an air valve (like the ones you see on kids’ plastic rafts) in his chin. The air valve was open and presumably he was “deflating”. It said, “Step 11: Avoid portion sizes larger than your fist.”
Pretty insulting.
Hey Fatfighter: I was actually referring mainly to the industry-types. I should have made that more clear. Sunset Blvd. is where a lot of them hang out (power lunches, clubs, etc.) and I think that’s why that particular billboard was placed there, and nowhere else. As far as women in swimsuits go, they often ask young women who are auditioning for them to send a photo of themselves wearing a swimsuit, preferably a bikini.
I lived in L.A. for 9 years, and used to be an actress.
Why is there an assumption that if a woman lost weight that she’d automatically buy something skimpy that “challenges a few obscenity laws”? Pssh…I challenge them everyday by wearing clothes that fit me!
Anyhow, the add is a double-edged sword. It can be viewed in both lights as being about being healthy or trying to adhere to the “ideal”.
*ad
I can see why someone would want to think that this ad is about how you can make small changes that might cause you to lose a small amount of weight and that improves your health. But you know, it’s not. It’s about how a woman looks. If it was about health, the innermost line wouldn’t be about a sexy bikini.
As for me, I resent the idea that I have to go for a walk on my lunch. I only get half a hour for lunch. I’m on my feet for the rest of the day, usually running around the store, up and down stairs several times an hour. Today, I spent the whole day hauling thirty to fifty pound boxes around the back room. When it’s lunch time, I want to sit my big ass down and get off my feet. Maybe if I had an office job, a walk would be appealing.
The only thing this ad conveyed to me was “Holy Shit! Somewhere out there in the world, there is a gorgeous and practical magenta swimsuit in my size!
The ad is a well-meaning effort to improve people’s health by appealing to their vanity. Vanity is a much greater motivator for most people than the desire to be healthy - this is something I’ve noticed about human nature. Not every fat person is unhealthy and sedentary, but many are and the judgment in the ad is therefore not unreasonable.
Sorry for the misunderstanding, Stacy! I guess I’m just in the “if I lose 10 - 15 lbs I will feel better about myself” camp, so for me what La Wade posted wasn’t a ludicrous statement, but one that makes sense, so your analogy was lost on me. Sorry. (I also feel better about myself after a good eyebrow waxing, so maybe I’m just vain!)
I have small hands. Portion size of my fist wouldn’t even give me a side salad anywhere.
Unfortunately the ’small steps’ the US Government is advocating plays into a lot of the stereotypes of fatties out there. You know, that we never excersize, we never play with our kids (at leat five of the tips refer to playing with your kids #54, #75, #118, #119, and #170, nevermind that not all of us have kids to play with), that we watch tv all the time (#31), that we all drink full sugar soda all the time (#18, #95), and on and on. I’ve not seen one about not eating donuts, but on the tv commercials, there is one about ’substituting healthy snacks (ie, fruits and veggies) for unhealthy chips and snack cakes’. It’s insulting and condenscending, frankly. Just like this add that tries to use the ‘health aspect’ (feeding into the stereotype that all fatties are unhealthy) but the real payoff is buying a bikini.
I’ve recently commented in my personal journal. Due to medication I’m on, in a bit over a year, I lost 70 lbs. Now, I’m STILL overweight, but I started at 270, and am now at 200 (I’m also 5′2″ and so am still in the 39 BMI range).
I’ve done some math and realized that by losing the 70 pounds I lost, I’m down to a 12% chance of diabetes. WOOOHOOO! I’m SO much healthier! Nevermind the fact that I have a low genetic risk of diabetes and have never tested anything but normal for all the times I’ve had the fasting test done (even when I was at my highest weight of 270). But wait… on top of that, I work out 3 times a week for an hour (had knee surgery 2.5 months ago and am doing PT 3 times a week, excersizing hard for the whole hour), and hardly ever do “take out”.*
Yet still, yesterday, when following my PT’s instructions to eat *immediately* following my appointment and eat protien and LOTS of carbs, including drinking shakes, I was “politely” redirected by the (thin) clerk behind the counter to a ‘fat free’ smoothy instead of the full fat strawberry and cream smoothy I was ordering. Yes, the PT told me that I wasn’t eating enough carbs after my workout, and that I had to increase the amount of carbs and should even be drinking chocolate milk and milkshakes right after my therapy appointment! (For the record, I teased him and asked him if there was some oversight committee I needed to report him to, because he was telling a fattie to drink milkshakes and eat more carbs. He knows some of the issues I’ve had with fat prejudice, knew I was teasing, and laughed at me for wanting to ‘report’ him.)
*Since the surgery, I’ve been doing physical therapy three times a week every week, for two and a half months. I did not start off at an hour’s worth of exersize, but have been doing an hour’s worth of exersize for about three weeks now with no weight loss. I’ve been doing hard, makes my heart beat fast, sweat rolling down my face, need to take a shower when I leave the physical therapy center exersize that includes stamina exersizes, weight lifting and stability exercises (which are a combination of the stamina and weight lifting exersizes). The exercises I am doing are more than ‘parking at the back of the lot and walking’, ‘walking the beach instead of just sunbathing’, or ‘don’t just watch the dog walk, go on a walk with the dog’. And I’ve lost not one extra pound.
And only started drinking shakes after my sessions this past week.
Lisa-Marie -
NP. Where I’m coming from is that I’ve realized there is nothing I can do to lose 10 - 15 lbs and keep it off.
It isn’t easy to accept that.
Nor is it easy to face the fact that dieting is what has made me fat, and that I have to STOP IT or I will just get fatter.
That is what the science shows, and will continue to show. The world is only just beginning to catch on, but in the meantime, it’s hard to accept it. Ads and misinformation just make it harder.
And believe me, I’m plenty vain myself, and look like a plus-sized model. Regardless of how vain I am though, losing 10-15 lbs will only make me gain 20 later. And that sucks.
Anyway, to be fair, my annoyance at the continued spreading of misinformation probably obscured that analogy.
:)
I feel like a lot of people jumped on La Wade’s comment, but really the people here are a different “breed” We are all here because we want to be accepted for who we are no matter what that shell is. If most of the world agreed, though, the entire FA movement wouldn’t exist. I do think a lot of women would say losing 10-15 lbs would make them feel better. Maybe you wouldn’t. You know eating healthy and keeping active is what counts in the end. If I polled my entire office, though, that wouldn’t be enough. The people I work with still equate what they see in front of them to how hard people are working.
In the end I think the poster was leaning in the right direction with the words, but in he wrong way with the picture. It’s tough to market health at any size to your every day American. If they put up the same poster with some smiling women of different sizes saying, “Be healthy, walk at lunch, eat home prepared meals, feel good about yourself, wear something you’re proud off…etc” It would probably be perceived as cheesy. Like it or not that picture caught peoples attention just as it caught ours. Shock value just works, even if the end result (as in this case) is misguided.
“I’d love to see a picture of you. What do you weigh?”
Do we have a minimum weight requirement to comment, now? Is an average-weight person’s opinion invalid?
Well, just to make sure I meet Stacy’s new fat credential check, I’m a junior level scientist and overweight person. That is, I’m 5′2″ and weigh around 153. In case you’re also checking activity levels, I work out for 45 to 60 minutes at 65 to 90% of my maximum heart rate 4 or 5 days a week. So I am safe in calling myself a pretty active overweight person.
My perception of this ad, if I’m permitted to share it, is that it’s a deeply wrong-headed attempt to try to get the idea across that you can make small positive changes to diet and physical activity levels, and improve your general outlook and appearance.
In fact, looking at the logos at the bottom, it’s a joint effort of the Ad Council and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. A little poking around reveals that in the print version, the tagline at the bottom reads, “TAKE A SMALL STEP TO GET HEALTHY. Get started at http://www.smallstep.gov.” A little more sleuthing yielded this information about the campaign itself: http://www.adcouncil.org/default.aspx?id=54 (There are links to about a half-dozen print spots in the same labelled-contour vein, featuring both men and women.)
I think the worst problem with this ad and the others is the one I’ve ranted about before, which is the incorrect assumption that one can judge activity level, dietary choices, and general health of adults by body contours and general appearance.
I realize this all a matter of perspective, but I don’t see the implication here that fat people are fat because they made worse diet and exercise choices than thin people. I figured that they used an obese model because obese people are the target audience of this campaign, as they are at increased risk of weight-related health problems, and therefore stand to benefit the most from weight reduction. But then again, I obviously have a lower sensitivity to perception of anti-fat bias than most people here!
Ginger, just out of curiosity, can you think of a way to approach a campaign like this with greater sensitivity? Is it possible to have a campaign that promotes weight loss without the appearance of making generalizations or judgements about fat people?
I’d just like to say that part of the reason losing weight makes someone feel good is because it is a tangible sign that their efforts are paying off. Personally, I exercise 4-5 days a week, eat healthy, don’t smoke or drink, etc. and still don’t lose weight. But my feel good moments come when my efforts are seen through the curve of a muscle I didn’t have before, or when I roll out of bed after working out the day before and my whole body looks lifted, perkier if you will.
What I’m saying is that although the media fuels the myth that losing weight will make you into a completely different person and you can’t love yourself or feel good until you do, losing weight or other side effects of working out, still make you feel good.
“LA is not some “strictly skeleton thin stereotypes only allowed within our viewing range”.
Then I need to hang out with you when I’m there.
It might be better for my career for me to move there, at least temporarily, but when I’m there on business, I HAAAAAAAAATE feeling like a humongous galoot at size 8, so I stay in New York all the time.
Except for when I visit relatives in the Midwest, where I am universally excoriated for being “too skinny”.
*sigh*
Women - Hated At Every Size
Ginger, you’ve missed my point entirely.
La Wade made an inaccurate statement:
“While Kate Harding is right that little changes are not likely to result in significant weight loss, there is substantial evidence that they can result in small weight losses of 10-15 pounds…”
Followed by a guess:
“I think here they are trying to say that if you lose some weight you will likely feel better about yourself…”
And an assumption:
“…I think the reality is that most people do feel better about themselves when they’ve lost a few pounds.”
When I asked La Wade how much she weighs, the inflection was on the word “you.” In other words, if La Wade starts walking at lunch and cooking at home instead of eating take-out, will she lose 10-15 lbs? If not, why not? Because she doesn’t need to/want to? Does that advice only apply to overweight people?
If not, why don’t we just require everyone to walk at lunchtime and only cook at home?
She “thinks” the “reality” is. La Wade was implying the ad was about health, but her entire point was about weight. Her thinking was/is only a slightly less dramatic version of what the weight loss industry pushes on people.
If someone wants to “feel better,” losing 10-15 lbs is probably not the best way to do it, because they *will* gain it back. How about learning to accept oneself instead?
I could care less what La Wade really looks like. I was making a point.
(But it is interesting Ginger, that you felt you should tell me how much you work out. If anything, you should see the value in my pointing out the lazy thinking in La Wade’s original post.)
I also resent the assumption that La Wade thinks that the “obese” get special diseases too.
I worked in a doctor’s office for six years, and there were plenty of normal and thin people with diabetes and heart problems.
Those people get treated. The obese are just told to lose weight. Not very fair, is it?
“Not every fat person is unhealthy and sedentary, but many are and the judgment in the ad is therefore not unreasonable.”
Many thin people are unhealthy and sedentary too. How come they don’t get targeted to get active and eat better?
Getting back to mo pie’s original post…
I think you hit an interesting point dealing with entitlement. Once you are small enough, you have earned the right to wear a bikini.
I just got back from vacation. Before I went I contemplated buying a bikini. I chickened out and wore my smokin’-hot halter 1-piece with the sparkles…I digress. My destination was a popular spot for Europeans. Let me tell you, these ladies had no reservations WHATSOEVER about wearing a bikini. I was shocked and a little disappointed that I didn’t look harder for a bikini for myself.
There were some other things that shocked me as well. The Europeans seemed to not care if people were waiting in line, they were entitled to whatever people were waiting for (a room, food, drinks, towels etc.). They also felt entitled to take whatever they wanted and to be rude to the staff of the resort.
I turned that whole idea around and decided that the large women in bikinis didn’t think that they were NOT entitled to wear a bikini if they wanted to.
In the US people believe that we have a merit based culture (my disagreement with that is for someone else’s race/class blog). We believe that if you were in line first, you deserve to be served first, if you work hard enough or were blessed enough to be a size 2 or 4 then you deserve to wear a bikini. If you haven’t then you are relegated to onesy ville. I think it is time to get away from thinking that large people aren’t entitled to things, and start taking them for ourselves. If others don’t accept it, they have two options.
1. Get Angry
2. Get out of the way.
Either way, we get to do what we want.
littlem - I just moved to the Midwest FROM LA and according to my boyfriend, apparently here I’m quite the swizzle stick. I would say that here they are more lax on what they consider overweight, but the truth is LA is more strict about what is thin.
Women - Universally Judged
La Wade,
“I figured that they used an obese model because obese people are the target audience of this campaign, as they are at increased risk of weight-related health problems, and therefore stand to benefit the most from weight reduction.”
Please explain what you mean by “increased risk,” but NOT by using statistics (which are faulty indicators, because they show correlation, not causation).
Thank you.
I’m sorry but a hugely obese person should not wear a bikini though. Really.
However, there are more important things in life (ie health)
BigLiberty, there’s a large body of research on the subject which is way too extensive for a comment here. But if you are truly interested in learning more about this, here are a few places to start:
Excess fat tissue has been shown to interact with inflammatory cells, which can result in induction of the metabolic syndrome. Metabolic syndrome puts people at increased risk for type II diabetes and heart disease.
In addition, fat tissue secretes a number of hormones that directly regulate insulin sensitivity and blood pressure. Since the levels of these hormones are in proportion with the amount of a person’s fat tissue, this is another mechanism by which obesity is thought to predispose one to heart disease and diabetes.
Furthermore, studies have found that modest weight loss can decrease your risk of hypertension and Type II diabetes.
By the way, “statistics” don’t show correlation or causation…they’re just a numerical representation of data. Statistical significance is the standard by which most scientific findings are judged, and those findings can either be correlative or causal in nature, depending on what the study is looking at.
[i]Ginger, just out of curiosity, can you think of a way to approach a campaign like this with greater sensitivity? Is it possible to have a campaign that promotes weight loss without the appearance of making generalizations or judgements about fat people?[/i]
I’m not sure. I’m pretty ignorant about advertising tactics. It’s anti-scientific, but it looks to me like testimonials are a pretty effective advertising method. Maybe some ordinary-looking people, some of higher and some of average weight explaining that they feel better since they took the small steps?
[i]Please explain what you mean by “increased risk,” NOT by using statistics (which are faulty indicators, because they show correlation, not causation).[/i]
I’m not sure what you meant to ask. Statistics don’t exist in a vacuum - what they show depends on the study design. What did you mean, please?
(And Stacy - I was proving to you that if we have to be healthy yet fat to judge the ad, then I had the credentials to do so. Ridiculous, beginning to end.)
La Wade,
Thanks very much for the links! I’m so used to people trying to throw statistics in my face, it’s refreshing to see some real science referenced.
Some initial points:
For the first studies, before I read them, just a point of logic (since I’m not a biological scientist): if excess fat tissue causes metabolic syndrome, which can lead to type II diabetes, why don’t all people with a certain threshhold of excess fat tissue have type II diabetes?
Also, on your second points, I can’t access the first article on hypertension, and the second article studies people who already have impaired glucose tolerance, which doesn’t apply here.
As for statistics, they can indicate causation, yes, but they really can’t conclusively be used as arguments of proof. For that one has to show the biochemistry suggested by the statistics is actually at play. I.e., they’re ultimately indicators. Sometimes really good ones, but depending on how the study is set up (and yes, it is VERY easy to “cook the books” by forgetting to mention certain assumptions in the summary/conclusion, for instance), they can be really, really bad. As an example, your second study about type II diabetes already assumes impaired glucose tolerance. A backwards correlation between how lifestyle changes effect those who already have impaired glucose intolerance can’t conclusively say anything about prevention of type II diabetes by the same lifestyle changes in people who don’t have impaired glucose intolerance.
Again, thanks for the links. I’ll read the others soon. :)
^Oh, okay, as another point: if you suggest that people should lose 10 - 15 pounds, because certain studies have shown (which has yet to be determined, in my book) that to do so can lead to decreased ‘risk factors’ of diseases X, Y, Z, and M, then why do you ignore the overwhelming evidence from several major studies (each of which I’ve lost the links to, d’oh! I know JAMA did a study on this, it should be searchable) that an overwhelming majority of people who diet not only don’t keep the weight off but gain more back than they started with?
How healthy is that? Also, since it would follow from this you’re advocating yo-yo dieting (since the weight will come back on, necessitating trying to lose it again), and it’s being shown increasingly that yo-yo dieting can *itself* lead to metabolic syndrome, in effect you’re advocating a method to perhaps cure that which the method itself may cause.
Mo, I apologize, I’m going to take this “off-line” to my blog. The next link I checked is also extremely fishy (still have a few more to go!). It’s this kind of scienterrific crap (which yes, even researchers aren’t immune from engaging in, if they’re trying to push forth a certain agenda…doctors, PhD’s, and so forth are political beasts as well) which is the ammunition for the people who claim they should step into our homes, control what we eat/do, and control what our children eat/do. It’s this stuff that perpetuates obesity as a “lifestyle” and a “choice,” and that we can just “choose” to not be so icky and disease-prone whenever the hell we want. Cheers! :)
if excess fat tissue causes metabolic syndrome, which can lead to type II diabetes, why don’t all people with a certain threshhold of excess fat tissue have type II diabetes?
Nobody knows the answer to this for sure, but it is known that diabetes also has a genetic component. It’s sort of like how smoking has been shown to cause cancer, but not all smokers get cancer because different people have different degrees of genetic susceptibility to it.
As to the feasibility of sustaining weight loss, it’s true that many people have trouble with it. But small losses put less metabolic stress on the body than large ones. And as for yo-yo dieting, I recently wrote a mini-review of the literature for my blog, and I don’t know of any papers that link it to metabolic syndrome in humans. In fact, there is very little evidence in human studies to support the folk wisdom that yo-yo dieting has any permanent effects on one’s weight or health.
Sorry about the one broken link. Here is an abstract from another study on modest weight loss and heart disease. There are many others. It’s true that most of the studies looking at the effects of modest weight loss on obesity-related health problems have been done in people who are already in early stages of the diseases, as that simplifies the study design. But if weight loss can actually reverse the progression of these diseases, I think there is good reason to believe that it may play a preventative role, as well. And in the case of impaired glucose tolerance, a study showed that in the early 1990s, 40.1% of American adults aged 40-74 years had impaired glucose tolerance and impaired fasting glucose, and it’s probably even more prevalent now.
Big Liberty — can you post a link here once you get this up?
I’ve just read Gary Taubes book, which is a huge indictment of the “science” about metabolism, weight loss, obesity and health.
Very interested to see if anything you come across changes my mind back to the dark-ages-thinking I had before reading it. As a journalist, it takes a *lot* to convince me of something, and that book (written by a multi-award winning science journalist) completely changed my point of view.
Most of the “science” published on this topic is, as you put it, “crap.”
I think it’s almost impossible for an ad like this to be seen as a neutral campaign at obese people with health risks.
I think it’s clear that A) the body in the ad is presented as a deterrent and B) as potentially pathologized.
For those looking for additional interesting reading, Gina Kolata, the science journalist for the New York Times, wrote two really interesting books about the science behind exercise and weight recommendations. The exercise one is called “Ultimate Fitness: The Quest for Truth about Diet and Exercise” (the title is tongue-in-cheek) and the weight one is titled “Rethinking Thin: The New Science of Weight Loss - and the Myths and Realities of Dieting”. (I love Kolata’s writing - she’s super-clear but very careful about her conclusions.)
I haven’t read Taubes’ book yet.
I’m going to go look up plus bikinis right now ;)
Ginger - Taubes book has changed everything for me. It’s amazing, and I’ve covered almost the entire book with pink highlighter.
It also made me revisit this crazy website I came across a while back:
http://www.westonaprice.org/splash_2.htm
I have to jump in and say that I think the implication that women can only wear a bikini if they are the “right size” is a terrible message that should not be coming from the government. How sad to live life without wearing a bikini in public at least once. It took me years to get up the courage, and I think that is sad that it takes courage to wear a swimsuit.
I have 2 bikinis (one red, one lime green) and I am sure the designers of the poster would find my wearing a bikini obscene. Size 42DD’s and an 18/20 tushy in bright red or lime green, for all the world to see. 225 pounds of tummy fat rolls and big thighs that aren’t hidden away. (The top and bottom both fit well (10 pounds of sugar in a 10-pound sack, if you will), and cover what they should cover.)
My tummy rolls would like to stay hidden, but my brain won’t let me stop living while I lose weight and get to a more publicly accepted size. It is hard sometimes for me to get up the courage to wear them, but now I’ve worn my bikini in Las Vegas, L.A., Hawaii, and many hotel swimming pools. I usually get dirty looks, especially from thin women in thier bikinis. Sometimes people laugh. I think they are pissed because they felt like they had to get thier bodies to look a certain way before they wore a bikini, and where do I get off wearing one at my size?
I spent years (years and years) not going to warm places for vacation, thinking they were for thin people, and that I had to wait until I was thin to be able to go and be comfortable.
If I could swim naked, I would (and have). I love being in the water without a top on. (Bottoms are a must when swimming with fishes and eels and other things). I refuse to let my size dictate what I wear in the water.
I spent 2 weeks in Malibu over Christmas for a college class one year. I have never seen so many thin, blond, breast-implanted women in my life. I hardly saw anyone over a size 4 except for some women on campus. It was a strange new world for me, one I see on tv but would rather not visit again.
So admittedly most of the readers of BFD are at their natural weights, don’t lose weight even when running 80 miles a week and eating almost nothing but small portions of incredibly healthy food. Ignoring that for a minute…
In this country there are many, many people who do - indeed - sit around all day and eat nothing but fat-laden take-out food. It happens. Hell, I used to be one of them.
For those people (and I include myself in this category), small changes in habits (eating less, doing more) can indeed have big effects (personally I lost about 70 lbs and stopped having knee/back problems, but that’s just me). And I know an awful lot of people who - like I used to - lament the fact that they’re “just fat” and don’t like it but never actually decide to do anything about it.
And you know what? If you don’t want to change your weight, you don’t have to. I’m totally cool with that. But if you do want to, this ad is trying to get the point across that (at least for many of us) there are simple ways that, for a lot of people, do actually work, and aren’t terribly difficult.
Wonderful: another public display of a disembodied fat person. I am embarrassed for my town.
I love that. Tagline!
I’m not precisely sure why the government thinks it has to have a say in my weight -or- my swim suit choices. We don’t have universal health care so any health care issues from obesity (which are questionable at best) fall on insurance companies right? Not that they are paying for anything…including thin people’s chemo therapy.
I don’t get this at all..she’s not so overweight that she’s unable to get out of bed and must be cut out of her house and taken somewhere on a fork lift, why is it that she has to fit into some stereotype before she can buy clothing?
This isn’t a healthy message on any level. This isn’t about her feeling better or avoiding health risks..this is about her loosing enough weight to be sociably acceptable. Blanketing it with some assumed concern for my health and well being is offensive. If it were about my health and well being then why wasn’t that the focus of the ad?
Playing off of people’s insecurities is never a nice thing to do. Especially when it comes from your government.
Richard — I detect a bit of sarcasm in your opening paragraph. So for the record let me state that the portions I eat are not small. They are normal. I don’t run, except when chasing our cat.
If you’ve lost weight and kept if off for more than five years, then you’ve managed to be one of the few who beats the odds. If, in fact, you have beat the odds, it’s not your small portions that made it happen.
Your smug opening paragraph indicates to me that you really aren’t very well informed, and the rest of your email confirms it.
No matter how much you sat around being lazy while you got fat, that doesn’t mean that other people got fat from sitting around. That “awful lot” of people you describe… did they get fat from, oh, I don’t know, *dieting*? Because that’s. what. happens.
And then of course, they *would* eventually realize that more dieting will make them…say it with me: even fatter. So hey, maybe they’re just smarter than you. Are they your friends? Because you are judging them for being fat, and “not doing anything about it.”
Check back in in five years and let us know if you’ve gained the weight back.
P.S. Guess what: eating fat is *healthy.* Trans fats aren’t, but real fat IS. Your government lies about that stuff. They get paid by industry to do so. Go figure.
Richard,
Congratulations on being one of the people who got big results from small changes. That’s honestly awesome.
Just try to remember that, just as there are people who eat “like horses” and sit around while being slim or skinny, there are bigger people who don’t eat like horses, don’t sit around, but still don’t drop 70 pounds.
And turn down the sarcasm a bit, too.
Try to disagree respectfully; this thread is getting a little prickly.
While I agree Richard was being sarcastic, I have to say I agree with what he is trying to say and also what the response to what he wrote is. The thing is, when people on here comment about things, the majority reacts from the perspective of people who say the don’t eat like horses and don’t sit around- and get angry when others, like Richard, imply that some people do.
I think we have both and neither side is understanding the other. One group is those of us who do eat too much and sit around and still wish we could lose weight with a magic pill- and the other group who says they do everything right but still are fat. I don’t understand that side because when I eat less and workout, I do lose weight- yet I have seen on biggest loser some women who are obviously doing what the other contestants are and yet they lose 2lbs when the others lose 15- so I believe it.
We all are coming from different beliefs and experiences and that is shading our comments. I like the differing opinions and that is why I keep coming back- but sometimes it does turn into, “If you don’t agree with me you are wrong and I don’t have to be respectful to you because of that.”
Let’s all agree to disagree or agree- but without the rudeness or the need to make anyone feel they are lying if their experiences are different.
Or not. lol
Not to re-open the gender wars in addition to the size wars, but has anyone ever noticed that it’s usually men who start the “I Lost Weight! You Can Too!” cheer/rant-fest?**
Anyone else think it has anything to do with the fact that men also have a significant muscle-mass advantage over women, so they burn calories faster??
**Not to say that there are some women who don’t go there as well; I have my theories as to why they do but
a) I’m talking about the majority of what I’ve witnessed
b) I’d rather make one point at a time
I’ve seen these ads around town, didn’t take the time to look at them. If losing weight were as easy as cooking instead of takeout, and walking during lunch, I’d be a happy camper. I am slowly losing weight, but I exercise my ass off, with bike-commute to work, 5-6 hours of gym/week, and no fast-food, no takeout, no starving myself. But, I have know men who notice their pants becoming tight, and eat one less piece of toast in the morning, lose the weight. I dunno if I screwed up my metabolism, or whether I even believe in it, but it is NOT EASY, at least for me, to lose this 50 pounds I wouldn’t mind losing
Maybe I mis-interpreted Richard. But when I read “many, many people,” I did indeed catch a whiff of the persistent belief that you can tell what people’s eating and exercise habits are by looking at their bodies — and a whiff of the “fat people are typically overeating, sedentary folks” mantra.
This blog and its commentors have, generally, *always* acknowledged the existence of malnutrition and sedentary lifestyles among all sizes.
Just saying.
And I’m not trying to sound prickly, either.
“In fact, I spend about 800 dollars a month ordering fresh, grass fed, organic lean meat, organic vegetables, beet kvass, and raw milk for myself and my husband. ”
You know, buying organic, or grass fed, or raw milk, doesn’t change the nutritional makeup of the food. Lean beef has the same nutritional value and fat content regardless of whether it is organic and grassfed or from Vons. Ditto on the milk. Whole milk has the same fat and caloric input whether it is organic or not, raw or pasturized, etc. Same for skim, 2%, 1% milk, same for beef, same for veggies. If you want to spend the cash on the specialty food items, it is a choice, but is not making you healthier or improving your diet over the same choices from conventional sources.
I think one could argue that eating organic foods is healthier than the alternative, and is improving her family’s diet. If you’re defining “healthier” as “lower in calories,” then no, but that’s not the be all and end all of health. Have you read The Omnivore’s Dilemma?
Mo — what do you mean is the ‘alternative’ to eating organic foods?
For the purposes of my comparison, the ‘alterntive’ is the same food from a conventional source. In which case, an organic, grass fed, raw or whatever-you-are-going-for food product is no healthier. From any nutritional standpoint, they are identical. :-)
(I’m not defining healthier as “lower in calories’… I am actually just saying ‘organic’ and conventional food stuffs have the same nutritional value, and hence are equivalent. One is not ‘healthier’ than the other.)
Michele, not to put words in her mouth, but I think Mo’s point may have been that organic foods don’t have the pesticides, herbicides, hormones, etc., that factory-farmed produce and/or feedlot livestock may have. Thus, probably healthier, despite whatever nutritional value it may have in exact scientific terms. Or at least that’s how I read it.
And while I’m here, I’d like to comment on one thing I keep hearing here: If I’ve lost weight within the last couple of years, is my opinion invalid until I’ve kept if off for five years or more, or until I’ve gained it all back? Because this “shut up until you’ve kept it off for five years or more” thing is kind of annoying. Yes, there are plenty of people who diet and are really irritating in that “recent convert” kind of way (and I think Richard should have laid off the sarcasm). But I’m still in the process of understanding and accepting my body as it was and as it is after losing 55 pounds; and I’m finding the hostility toward those of us who have recently lost weight rather off-putting.
With that little vent off my chest, I’ll hop on the topic: the ad is obnoxious, but I’ve seen much worse. To address La Wade’s question about being more sensitive in the approach, I can think of a few ways to address the diabetes issue, or the heart disease issue, but it’s always easier to “sell” an idea that offers a more immediate benefit or sense of pleasure, rather than the utilitarian “do it because it’s good for you in the long run!” message. What I mean is that long-term health isn’t a strong call-to-action; looking sexy in the near future is. Which is not to say that the woman in the poster isn’t sexy as she is — that’s why the ad falls flat, to me. (For the record, I work as a Creative Director at a small ad agency.)
“From any nutritional standpoint, they are identical.”
Michele, not, IMO, from the standpoint of added sulfites, nitrites, and polysorbate-20 and 80.
“cool, a fat chick in a bathing suit!” I have the same thought at the first sight. LOL
(Hi Folks — no prickly tone intended here, I very much enjoy talking about this stuff.)
Michele — actually, Mo and MizShrew are right. There are fewer chemicals in organic food, and conventional food is GMO tainted.
Raw milk is not identical to conventional whole milk. Conventional whole milk is pasteurized, and because of that, the natural enzymes are no longer present. Its nutritional value is severely compromised, for example, the lactic acid content is much, much lower than it should be.
Grass fed beef is not the same as conventional beef, because conventional beef is raised on grain and “feed,” which can include all manner of things that are not natural for the cows to eat (like textbooks). If the cows are raised on grass, which is their natural diet and which their stomachs are designed to digest, the nutritional value of the meat soars. This is what people used to eat, and it’s much better for us biologically.
I second the recommendation to read “The Omnivore’s Dilemma,” but also, I got interested in these more natural foods because the grocery service I use offers them. I started reading up on them, then tried them, and it’s hard not to want to run up to folks and make them drink a cup of raw milk and watch their reaction after 20 minutes. (When I first tried it, it was like I had been starving! Talk about intuitive…I drank 3 quarts in two days. Now I drink a cup or two a day.) :)
Regarding the 5-year weight loss, I’ll admit I’m guilty of not wanting to hear folks talk about that *if* it seems they are saying it will work for me. I’ve lost weight off and on over the years, and each time it comes back a little at a time with more. The last time, I lost 75 lbs in 1999. I was practically anorexic in my behavior to make it happen, and all it got me was down to 165.
Slowly, the weight has come back, while even my assistants remark things like, “you hardly eat!” and “Is that your whole lunch?”
So if you’ve lost weight, good for you! But if you’ve lost weight and are smug about it, I can’t tolerate that. And Richard’s remarks were sarcastic, which I find offensive.
Anyway. Blah, blah, blah. Sorry my posts have been so lengthy on this. Again, always good conversation here, and I really do support everyone’s efforts on the board.
Stacy, I totally agree with you that people should not assume that what works for one person will work for another, and I understand why people get annoyed with that attitude. I find it annoying and rude as well, and belive me I’ve heard a lot of that crap over the years. It’s like the rabid recent ex-smoker who makes me want to light up a whole pack of Lucky unfiltereds — and I don’t even smoke. And I also agree that Richard was out of line, as I mentioned above.
But by the same token, I also don’t think that someone’s opionions on body acceptance or overall health are invalid simply because they’ve recently lost weight, or that an individual is an idiot for even trying. Just as I don’t assume what others should do in terms of eating and exercise, I’d appreciate it if people didn’t make assumptions about me in the opposite direction, and I get a lot of that vibe (not at me per se, just in general) in threads like this one.
But it is a good/important discussion to have. I know I’ve learned a lot by reading this blog, and gained some valuable perspective on my own attitudes and body image issues.
Another headless fat person? When will the media learn that fat people have heads too?
I just find it really creepy and dehumanizing when they do this!
I think we need to start a headless person project to demonstrate how detrimental these things really are!
Well…
My very humble opinion is that EVERYBODY can benefit from eating less take-out or junk food and walking some more! Fat or thin, healthy food and exercise choices will benefit everybody. Just like smoking is bad for EVERYONE, even if you don’t get lung cancer.
And I also think it is possible to love and accept your body the way it is, and as a consequence of that, of that re-found love for yourself, you start making better choices food wise, and some people might lose weight, some peolpe might gain weight, some people might not see a change, but ALL PEOPLE will feel better! And be healthier!
Listen, this ad has nothing to do with health. Point to a study and yell all you want about fat people being doomed to a quick death and how everybody would feel better if they ate asparagus and skinless boneless baked chicken, but it has no bearing whatsoever on the message behind this poster. This ad is not about being healthy. This is about shaming fat people — women in particular, as is typically the case. This ad is saying, “All you have to do is take the stairs and stop eating Chinese food! Then you’ll earn a sexy hot body and you’ll finally be allowed to feel good about yourself!” It’s about making fat women feel that they can only be attractive if they lose weight. It’s about making thin women feel that they cannot gain not even one pound ever because then they will no longer be desired and beautiful. This about making sure women keep counting calories and feeling bad when they look in the mirror.
Whether or not fat studies are accurate is irrelevant. This ad is not addressing the health of an individual relative to her weight and diet. It is is addressing the physical appearance of thinness, a particular perception of beauty which is always equated with happiness, in relation to her weight. If this were legitimately about health, then there would be no reason to show a woman in a bathing suit and mention how kickin’ her bod will be in that two piece. The reward would be something like “Now my cholesterol is lower!” or “Now I’m no longer at a risk for diabetes!” (Even if, FYI, these health issues are related far more directly to nutrition and genetic than those pesky 10 pounds nobody is ever able to lose.) The reward offered for all your hard work and disordered eating is an obscenely skimpy bikini. This is not about health.
I hate this weird new government ad campaign working to get people on diets because it’s condescending. How many grown women honestly do not have any idea what a “portion” looks like? Hmm? I’d guess very few. In human bio, I didn’t even take notes on the “Health and Nutrition” lecture series because I KNOW this. I know it backward and forwards and upside down. (Aced the midterm, BTW.) I’ve counted my calories like a good girl my entire life and all it has ever done was make me unhappy and obsessed with my body and weight and, oh yeah: still fat. Every single time I tried.
When someone tells me that not only am I disgusting and ugly in my current “extra pounds” state but that I must almost certainly be eating all kinds of trashy food and that it’s so easy to lose weight if only I do X Y and Z religiously, it’s infuriating at best and incredibly damaging at worst. That’s how eating disorders get started, you know.
The government does not know me. It does not even know health and nutrition, since the food pyramid was created by the USDA who answers to meat and dairy interest groups, not to doctors and science (flawed as they may sometimes be). I’ve seen those new PSA posters up around government buildings, hung up in front of the elevators and vending machines. They offer sage wisdom and pithy advice like, “Free Exercise Machine, Available 24/7. Take The Stairs.” Well, thanks, poster. I was going to take the elevator simply because I’m a lazy fattie fat, not because I’m going to the 24th floor with a heavy box of legal documents and I’ve only been in this building twice so I’m not sure where the stairs are. I guess that skinny guy next to me waiting for the elevator is allowed to take the ‘easy’ way since he’s thin and good whereas I have to pay the penance of being fat and making all you skinny people suffer when I happen to be in your line of vision for a moment. Sorry, my bad.