<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Elastic Wai&#8230;t A Second What The Hell?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bfdblog.com/2008/08/22/elastic-wait-a-second-what-the-hell/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bfdblog.com/2008/08/22/elastic-wait-a-second-what-the-hell/</link>
	<description>We&#039;re bringing chubby back.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 18:02:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: wvucfowxa</title>
		<link>http://www.bfdblog.com/2008/08/22/elastic-wait-a-second-what-the-hell/comment-page-1/#comment-13248</link>
		<dc:creator>wvucfowxa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:14:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bfdblog.com/?p=497#comment-13248</guid>
		<description>She started to cum for. She lifted her. &lt;a href=&quot;http://birou-avocat.com/blog/index.php?blogId=6&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;mujeres peludas&lt;/a&gt;  Had.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>She started to cum for. She lifted her. <a href="http://birou-avocat.com/blog/index.php?blogId=6" rel="nofollow">mujeres peludas</a>  Had.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Baroness</title>
		<link>http://www.bfdblog.com/2008/08/22/elastic-wait-a-second-what-the-hell/comment-page-1/#comment-13233</link>
		<dc:creator>The Baroness</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Aug 2008 03:46:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bfdblog.com/?p=497#comment-13233</guid>
		<description>I certainly don&#039;t like that ad, but I feel that messages like that are fortunately harmless to me personally.  It&#039;s just like when you see that ad that says &quot;Make $10,000 a month from your bed!!!!&quot;  I know that it&#039;s not true, and that even if it were it wouldn&#039;t make me a happier or a better person in the long run.

There are people out there who are easily influenced and who still think thin=sexy, but hopefully most people see that thin=thin, and that&#039;s all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I certainly don&#8217;t like that ad, but I feel that messages like that are fortunately harmless to me personally.  It&#8217;s just like when you see that ad that says &#8220;Make $10,000 a month from your bed!!!!&#8221;  I know that it&#8217;s not true, and that even if it were it wouldn&#8217;t make me a happier or a better person in the long run.</p>
<p>There are people out there who are easily influenced and who still think thin=sexy, but hopefully most people see that thin=thin, and that&#8217;s all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: K</title>
		<link>http://www.bfdblog.com/2008/08/22/elastic-wait-a-second-what-the-hell/comment-page-1/#comment-13232</link>
		<dc:creator>K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Aug 2008 19:25:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bfdblog.com/?p=497#comment-13232</guid>
		<description>I think I have now become totally ad-blind.

Though earlier today I was reading a blog post which contained the words &quot;guinea pig&quot; in its metaphorical sense, and the ads were all to do with guinea pigs! Since I have three of them, this probably struck me as funnier than it really merited...

But yes, the ad-selection software does seem to be a terribly blunt instrument.

On the TV Tropes Wiki site, there&#039;s a page in the &quot;character tropes&quot; section that discusses ways in which fat characters are depicted in various fictional media, and the ads are split between &quot;Lose the Belly Fat&quot; types and &quot;Gay Chubby Dates&quot; types. Neither of which is really particularly relevant as far as I recall.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think I have now become totally ad-blind.</p>
<p>Though earlier today I was reading a blog post which contained the words &#8220;guinea pig&#8221; in its metaphorical sense, and the ads were all to do with guinea pigs! Since I have three of them, this probably struck me as funnier than it really merited&#8230;</p>
<p>But yes, the ad-selection software does seem to be a terribly blunt instrument.</p>
<p>On the TV Tropes Wiki site, there&#8217;s a page in the &#8220;character tropes&#8221; section that discusses ways in which fat characters are depicted in various fictional media, and the ads are split between &#8220;Lose the Belly Fat&#8221; types and &#8220;Gay Chubby Dates&#8221; types. Neither of which is really particularly relevant as far as I recall.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emily</title>
		<link>http://www.bfdblog.com/2008/08/22/elastic-wait-a-second-what-the-hell/comment-page-1/#comment-13246</link>
		<dc:creator>Emily</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2008 22:14:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bfdblog.com/?p=497#comment-13246</guid>
		<description>Correction:

And, for the record, I’d pay to read ad-free Big Fat Deal and Elastic Waist, if that’s what it came to in order to retain editorial freedom and *avoid* too-intrusive advertising.

Emily</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Correction:</p>
<p>And, for the record, I’d pay to read ad-free Big Fat Deal and Elastic Waist, if that’s what it came to in order to retain editorial freedom and *avoid* too-intrusive advertising.</p>
<p>Emily</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emily</title>
		<link>http://www.bfdblog.com/2008/08/22/elastic-wait-a-second-what-the-hell/comment-page-1/#comment-13245</link>
		<dc:creator>Emily</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2008 22:05:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bfdblog.com/?p=497#comment-13245</guid>
		<description>Several months ago on Elastic Waist, Weetabix posted a strong response to an article written for, I believe, _Glamour_ magazine.   As I recall, the man who wrote the article in question made some ridiculous claims about the female body, dating, and plastic surgery, and Weetabix offered a pretty sharp retort to this guy&#039;s editorial.  However, almost immediately after I read Weetabix&#039;s piece on Elastic Waist, it disappeared.  I&#039;ve no proof that this is the case, but there is a part of me that believes Weetabix&#039;s critical response to an article published in a fellow Conde Nast publication had to be suppressed or removed.  I&#039;m not trying to stir up unwarranted controversy, especially as I do not know the reason why Weetabix&#039;s response disappeared.  I&#039;m also not naive when it comes to the often problematic relationship between editorial control and advertising dollars or publishers (Gloria Steinem&#039;s &quot;Sex, Lies, and Advertising&quot; sums it up), but, I admit, my reading of the Elastic Waist site is mildly affected by this incident.  I guess it concerns me because if Weetabix did, indeed, have to remove her response because of a Conde Nast conflict of interest, what else can&#039;t she, or any contributor to Elastic Waist, write in response to the general cultural wallpaper, especially if it appears in _Glamour_ or _Allure_ or _Self_ or ... something else in which Conde Nast has a vested, financial interest?  It&#039;s telling that Steinem&#039;s solution to the advertisers/publishers vs. editorial control tension was to make _Ms._ a reader-supported, ad-free magazine.

Weetabix&#039;s response may have vanished for a completely unrelated reason, however.  And I can&#039;t remember enough of the specifics in order to do a thorough search of the Elastic Waist site.  If I&#039;ve somehow missed it, and Weetabix&#039;s response is lurking there somewhere, I apologize for speculating too wildly about its absence.  I just know I couldn&#039;t find it almost immediately after I&#039;d read it, and subsequent returns to the site soon after did not produce it either.

And, for the record, I&#039;d pay to read ad-free Big Fat Deal and Elastic Waist, if that&#039;s what it came to in order to retain editorial freedom and/or too-intrusive advertising.

Emily</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Several months ago on Elastic Waist, Weetabix posted a strong response to an article written for, I believe, _Glamour_ magazine.   As I recall, the man who wrote the article in question made some ridiculous claims about the female body, dating, and plastic surgery, and Weetabix offered a pretty sharp retort to this guy&#8217;s editorial.  However, almost immediately after I read Weetabix&#8217;s piece on Elastic Waist, it disappeared.  I&#8217;ve no proof that this is the case, but there is a part of me that believes Weetabix&#8217;s critical response to an article published in a fellow Conde Nast publication had to be suppressed or removed.  I&#8217;m not trying to stir up unwarranted controversy, especially as I do not know the reason why Weetabix&#8217;s response disappeared.  I&#8217;m also not naive when it comes to the often problematic relationship between editorial control and advertising dollars or publishers (Gloria Steinem&#8217;s &#8220;Sex, Lies, and Advertising&#8221; sums it up), but, I admit, my reading of the Elastic Waist site is mildly affected by this incident.  I guess it concerns me because if Weetabix did, indeed, have to remove her response because of a Conde Nast conflict of interest, what else can&#8217;t she, or any contributor to Elastic Waist, write in response to the general cultural wallpaper, especially if it appears in _Glamour_ or _Allure_ or _Self_ or &#8230; something else in which Conde Nast has a vested, financial interest?  It&#8217;s telling that Steinem&#8217;s solution to the advertisers/publishers vs. editorial control tension was to make _Ms._ a reader-supported, ad-free magazine.</p>
<p>Weetabix&#8217;s response may have vanished for a completely unrelated reason, however.  And I can&#8217;t remember enough of the specifics in order to do a thorough search of the Elastic Waist site.  If I&#8217;ve somehow missed it, and Weetabix&#8217;s response is lurking there somewhere, I apologize for speculating too wildly about its absence.  I just know I couldn&#8217;t find it almost immediately after I&#8217;d read it, and subsequent returns to the site soon after did not produce it either.</p>
<p>And, for the record, I&#8217;d pay to read ad-free Big Fat Deal and Elastic Waist, if that&#8217;s what it came to in order to retain editorial freedom and/or too-intrusive advertising.</p>
<p>Emily</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Simon</title>
		<link>http://www.bfdblog.com/2008/08/22/elastic-wait-a-second-what-the-hell/comment-page-1/#comment-13244</link>
		<dc:creator>Simon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2008 20:58:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bfdblog.com/?p=497#comment-13244</guid>
		<description>And Rachel hits the nail on the head.  While the people at EW might be interested in promoting Fat Acceptance, their parent companies, which decide on what advertising goes where, are only interested in promoting Fat Wallets - specifically their own.

Advertising on a site isn&#039;t bad, nor is having advertising on your site.  But if you don&#039;t understand your target market, you&#039;re only going to piss people off.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And Rachel hits the nail on the head.  While the people at EW might be interested in promoting Fat Acceptance, their parent companies, which decide on what advertising goes where, are only interested in promoting Fat Wallets &#8211; specifically their own.</p>
<p>Advertising on a site isn&#8217;t bad, nor is having advertising on your site.  But if you don&#8217;t understand your target market, you&#8217;re only going to piss people off.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rachel</title>
		<link>http://www.bfdblog.com/2008/08/22/elastic-wait-a-second-what-the-hell/comment-page-1/#comment-13243</link>
		<dc:creator>Rachel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2008 18:52:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bfdblog.com/?p=497#comment-13243</guid>
		<description>This is one of the reasons why I just don&#039;t accept any commercial advertising on my site at all.  People might think that I somehow endorse the product or services advertised and I just don&#039;t want to create that kind of conflict of interest.

&lt;i&gt;But how can Elastic Waist as an entity purport to be part of the solution if its also part of the problem?&lt;/i&gt;

That&#039;s just it.  I don&#039;t think Conde Nast or Self magazine &quot;purport to be part of the solution&quot; at all, either explicitly or implicitly.  They are in it simply for the profits and if women want to read about body-acceptance, they will be all about body-acceptance; if women want to read about dieting, they will be all over dieting.   This isn&#039;t the personal and moral issue for them that it is for us; to them, it&#039;s simply a matter of what pays.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is one of the reasons why I just don&#8217;t accept any commercial advertising on my site at all.  People might think that I somehow endorse the product or services advertised and I just don&#8217;t want to create that kind of conflict of interest.</p>
<p><i>But how can Elastic Waist as an entity purport to be part of the solution if its also part of the problem?</i></p>
<p>That&#8217;s just it.  I don&#8217;t think Conde Nast or Self magazine &#8220;purport to be part of the solution&#8221; at all, either explicitly or implicitly.  They are in it simply for the profits and if women want to read about body-acceptance, they will be all about body-acceptance; if women want to read about dieting, they will be all over dieting.   This isn&#8217;t the personal and moral issue for them that it is for us; to them, it&#8217;s simply a matter of what pays.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrea</title>
		<link>http://www.bfdblog.com/2008/08/22/elastic-wait-a-second-what-the-hell/comment-page-1/#comment-13242</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2008 18:31:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bfdblog.com/?p=497#comment-13242</guid>
		<description>I saw that the other day as well.  And while I agree that sometimes one cannot control what ads show up, I would think that a Conde Nast site would have a great deal of control over what other Conde Nast publication they are advertising on said site.  I do think it was in poor taste and thoughtless.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I saw that the other day as well.  And while I agree that sometimes one cannot control what ads show up, I would think that a Conde Nast site would have a great deal of control over what other Conde Nast publication they are advertising on said site.  I do think it was in poor taste and thoughtless.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mo pie</title>
		<link>http://www.bfdblog.com/2008/08/22/elastic-wait-a-second-what-the-hell/comment-page-1/#comment-13241</link>
		<dc:creator>mo pie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:42:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bfdblog.com/?p=497#comment-13241</guid>
		<description>Actually, today I had to update the BlogHer ad code (it took me all week to figure this out, by the way) and I just took out the Google ads because they were bugging me. I think this particular post triggered a lot of weight loss ads and, just, bleh. I can&#039;t be part of the solution and part of the problem either, right?

BlogHer is better about not putting any weight loss ads on the site, although sometimes the links that live under the main ad are weight loss related.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, today I had to update the BlogHer ad code (it took me all week to figure this out, by the way) and I just took out the Google ads because they were bugging me. I think this particular post triggered a lot of weight loss ads and, just, bleh. I can&#8217;t be part of the solution and part of the problem either, right?</p>
<p>BlogHer is better about not putting any weight loss ads on the site, although sometimes the links that live under the main ad are weight loss related.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mo pie</title>
		<link>http://www.bfdblog.com/2008/08/22/elastic-wait-a-second-what-the-hell/comment-page-1/#comment-13230</link>
		<dc:creator>mo pie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2008 16:24:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bfdblog.com/?p=497#comment-13230</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s true, I noticed that myself last night. I have weight loss ads explicitly blocked on both BlogHer and Google ads, and yet sometimes they appear anyway. Making this whole post very ironic!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s true, I noticed that myself last night. I have weight loss ads explicitly blocked on both BlogHer and Google ads, and yet sometimes they appear anyway. Making this whole post very ironic!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

