2. Lesley at Fatshionista is doing Huge recaps, and tackles the latest episode here. Also, the cast signs a Body Peace Treaty, but… there are some problems, as The
Rotund explains:

“Oh, hi, y’all, love your bodies but isn’t this traditionally attractive boy just the hottest? You may be smart and funny and good looking but you won’t measure up to the mainstream heartthrobby good looks of the thin dude.”

Yeah, I’m paraphrasing. BUT COME ON.

3. The Glamazons are auditioning for new talent.

Those 4 plus size beauties are looking to cast another girl to add to the group! Are you a gorgeous, tall, plus size girl who can sing and dance? Please send pics and resumes to glamazongirls@gmail.com for audition appointment.

4. Let’s teach preschoolers to count calories! Family Feeding Dynamics spots a problematic sign at the local Farmer’s Market.

Circle the healthiest choice (fewest calories)!
Ring the cowbell!

1/2 cup diced fruit salad (60 calories)
1/2 cup diced fruit salad with 2 Tbspn orange juice (88 calories)
1/2 cup diced fruit salad with 2 Tbspns light yogurt (96 calories)

I wonder why adding yogurt is not “healthy” or the assertion that the definition of “healthy” is low calorie. Low-calorie and low-fat diets fail nutritionally for small children (and fail for adults too.) I won’t elaborate on why this is garbage “nutrition” info which is more harmful than helpful.

5. And finally, happy ten-year blogoversary to the granddaddy of all FA blogs, Big Fat Blog!

I know we haven’t solved all of the world’s fat problems (yet), but just think for a second where fat acceptance and body equality were ten years ago. Or maybe it would be easier to think of where *you* were on the body love continuum ten years ago.

Happy Thursday!

“Try an almond stacked on top of a dried apricot — it tastes like a cookie. Really.”

Um… no. I’m not exactly a foodologist, but I’m pretty sure that this snack would taste like a nut on top of a dried piece of fruit.

Sometimes we get so inundated with this kind of ridiculous advice that we need a reality check. Yes, it’s ridiculous to drink hot lemon water instead of eating. I mean, come on! What are we, Cheerios?

“Sometimes I add a teaspoon of sand.”

[She was told] she would be given a free gym membership and had 30 days to improve, and if she did not, she would be separated from the company. The company’s uniforms are offered in small, extra small and double-extra small.

Says Hooters:

“Our practice of upholding an image standard based on appearance, attitude and fitness for Hooters girls is both legal and fair. It is not unlike the standard used by the Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders or the Radio City Music Hall Rockettes.”

I’m not even sure what, as a feminist, to think about Hooters qua Hooters. That level of objectification of women is just gross, but do women know what they’re signing up for when they choose to work there? Is this story only a story because the woman is clearly not overweight? What if she were? Or are you like Michael Scott and my friends Carrie and Brian, who love the hot wings? What do you guys think?

Via @RevoltRealWomen on Twitter.

The diet involves eating 14 servings of baby food a day followed by a healthy adult dinner, and Jen has reportedly lost 7 pounds in the past week.

Yeah, that sounds healthy.

The Baby Food Diet (and the famous people who love it) is a plot point in the young adult novel I just wrote! (Pear and pineapple, which I tasted for research purposes thanks to my friend Aych, makes an appearance.) So I’d better finish editing my novel so I can sell it and become rich and famous on Jennifer Aniston’s coattails while the Baby Food Diet is still making headlines.

Oprah once ordered two pecan pies from room service and *shudder* ATE THEM BOTH!! And what, Kitty Kelley? The earth tilted on its axis from Oprah’s subsequent weight gain? As I’ve mentioned many times before in this blog, I’m a food addict, and if indeed Oprah suffers from the same problem (which I personally think she does) eating two pies in a sitting ain’t no thang. I have, after a particularly bad day, personally inhaled a whole pizza and chased it with a cheesecake.

Of course, people are reading this to reinforce “Gross! fat people and their fat eating!” instead of thinking about binge eating as an actual disorder, along the lines of the comparatively (and incorrectly) glamorized anorexia and bulimia. No, it’s just, let’s lash out at Oprah, a powerful woman of color, and target something foolproof: her weight.

2. This article about reframing the war on obesity makes a few good points, but there’s also quite a bit of fat shaming.

Instead of having a discussion about obesity, I wish it could be framed in the language of “nutrition” or “nourishment.” Because I’d like to include all the kids, fat and thin, big and small, in a larger discussion of food.

I see lots of thin kids at school and they are eating the same foods as the obese kids. Are they eating the right calories and fats to nourish their bodies? Somehow I don’t think so… [it's just that] in our thin world it’s easy to say “let’s fight fat!”

Apparently originally, the blogger wrote “…being obese is a big problem and if you are overweight, you did something to get there.” People took issue in the comments, but I saw a lot of “don’t blame kids, blame their fat, lazy parents!” The full comment has been edited out, but the “being obese is a big problem” is still there.

3. And speaking of kids, PETA strikes again!

The advertisement? “Tot Teetering on Childhood Obesity? Go Vegan!” You know the fools at PETA were all, “OMG HILARIOUS PLAY ON TEETER-TOTTER OMG HIGH FIVE!!!”

Ugh, this kills me. I know getting upset about PETA’s press releases is completely futile* but still I rise. Can you imagine a little fat kid (who, btw, is already teased mercilessly because kids are the motherflipping MEANEST) coming to the playground and seeing those teeter-totters? Stunts like this don’t turn kids vegan but I bet they could turn them suicidal. Further, how many fat kids do you know who venture near a teeter-totter anyway, it’s already ground for public humiliation. Way to know your audience, PETA!

And what of all the thin kids with malnutrition and fast food diets? There are tons of them, believe it. Just because they’re skinny, they get a free pass? Thin does not healthy make. What a crappy lesson all the way around.

4. An interesting article about classism in Jamie Oliver’s Food Revolution:

Food Revolution highlights how much of the war on obesity is rooted in classism. One scene shows Oliver reacting to a newspaper article that suggests he thinks the people of Huntington are cola-swilling rubes who think an apple is just a character in the Bible. So most of his time isn’t spent cooking, it’s spent convincing residents he doesn’t look down on them. It’ll be an uphill battle. Advice on better eating isn’t evaluated on the quality of the advice as much as on its source. The lower-middle class doesn’t want to be lectured by a more well-off person about how easy and worthwhile upgrading one’s diet is, because the immediate thought is, sure, easy for you, perhaps. When Oliver arrives in Huntington with his British accent and his crates of radicchio, he’s dooming himself from the start. He’s not only a rich guy, he’s a rich British guy, thumbing his nose at our good, old-fashioned American preservatives.

5. The Curvy Fashionista came to Igigi with a group of us last week, and she is awesome. Maybe now that I’ve decided to follow her around like a baby duckling in search of fashion advice, I’ll be plugged in more to events like these.

Thanks to Michelle, Rebecca, Aych, Ian, and Jess for the links!

Here’s an overview from the New York Times.

Advance reaction to the Double Down has been intense in the blogosphere, in part because the sandwich plays into our worst fears about Obese America, a nation in which we disdain not simply vegetables but now starch as well. The sandwich posits chicken as bread. Bacon and cheese as sandwich fillers. Plus mayonnaise. No vegetables…

But for the record? The calorie count for the Double Down is 540, according to KFC. That’s exactly equivalent to a Big Mac over at McDonald’s, and well below the 920 that constitutes a Double Whopper at Burger King.

And a taste test from Salon.

But the Double Down, and everybody’s peeking-through-covered-eyes reaction to it, is not about logic. It’s about balls. The balls of a fast food chain, in the middle of rational America’s hand-wringing about obesity and sustainable eating, to come out with a sandwich made of bacon, cheese, mayo-ish sauce and two slabs of fried chicken as the bread. The balls of KFC, which, in the weak-willed ’90s, changed its brand from Kentucky Fried Chicken to its lame initials because it didn’t want you to have to say the word “fried” every time you spoke its name.

In retrospect, though, the really funny thing about the Double Down is not that it exists, not that it’s a dare pretending to be a lunch, but that it would be nothing special if they added a bun to it. Think about it. It’d be like, “What’s that? A double chicken sandwich? Pffft. Snooze. Any jackass can make a double chicken sandwich.” Somehow, by taking off the processed-food bread, KFC made this thing look deadly.

Ha! Good point.

And a do-it-yourself alternative (link swiped from Eric on Facebook) that looks pretty awesome.

Most of the panty-twisting revolves around its nutritional qualities. But is it really that bad for you? After all, conceptually and nutritionally, it’s no different than a Chicken Cordon Bleu, right? Is there no room in our diet for fried chicken or bacon?

To me, the grossness of this sandwich is the same as what’s gross about all fast food: convenience and quality. It’s simply too easy to walk up to a window, hand over five bucks, and get 600 industrially produced calories prepared by a worker who couldn’t care less.

I admit that I will never go to KFC, but a fried chicken sandwich from Bakesale Betty’s is, every so often, delicious.

1. Also recommended by Trabb’s Boy in the previous link roundup is this terrific essay from Shakesville: it’s okay to choose to be fat.

Because it really is a radical notion, and, like other radical notions, it is both has the capacity and is likely to evoke visceral reactions of protest. Like: “But being fat is (potentially) unhealthy! And that’s not okay!” But, if you give yourself a moment or two, you’ll probably realize there are other potentially unhealthy things that people do, which you would probably argue in favor of allowing them to continue doing…

It can be a hatred that’s hard to let go of, even for fat people, because letting go of that hatred, and replacing it with acceptance, can feel akin to giving fat people permission to be fat.

But being in the position of feeling like permission is yours to give is a manifestation of privilege. And maybe it’s all right to let that privilege go.

2. A great post from The Rotund about food politics:

This keeps coming up and I will keep bringing it up – if we’re so concerned about health then why are we framing the discussion as being about weight?

I know the answer – it’s that we aren’t really interested in health so much as using health to bludgeon fat people. But I’ve yet to get a satisfactory answer on that one out of anyone. If high fructose corn syrup is so bad for us (and I do believe that, in quantity, it isn’t the best thing for us by any means), then why are we focusing solely on “it makes you fat” and not on “it is harming your overall healthfulness”?

3. In Defense of Bad Prom Dresses at Manolo for the Big Girl:

The trend these days seems to be for hyper-ruched dresses with bubble hems or those horrible pick-ups or the same bodice ruching with a mermaid skirt, and Lord knows they’d probably want to wear it with shiny spandex opera length gloves that flatter precisely no one in the universe.

And you know, fine. I don’t care. Would I wear it? No, but I’m not a 17 year old girl whose entire world is about to change in a few weeks.

If I had to do it all over again –and thank God I don’t– knowing what I know now about how my life has turned out, I’d actually go for a big goofy dress on purpose.

4. A scholarship is being offered for people who design plus-sized clothing. Awesome.

[Application includes] an essay (750 words or less) outlining why your fashion entries are unique/innovative and explaining your interest and motivation for a career in the plus-size fashion industry.

5. And now for something completely different: a picture of a chihuahua on a Leonberger, originally posted at Cute Overload.

Because we have a Leonberger (a small one). And he just turned nine.

I invite you to respond to any of the posts above, and/or post or link to your own pet pictures in the comments. Why? Why not! It’s Tuesday! Join the party!

Please don’t get hurt, but the (3) of U should loose weight. I know it’s hard. It is certainly hard 4 me. But I feel better afterwoords and validated, and accomplished. [sic]

And she left her phone number! Stephanie C. sent in the link and added:

The nerve. I don’t care if she had the best of intentions or the very worst, it was not her place to comment and none of her business in the first place. And the “please don’t get hurt but…” does not excuse her from what she says. It’s like saying “I don’t mean to be mean but…” Yes, yes you do mean to be mean, but you don’t want to think of yourself as mean so you try to write what you’re doing off as something other than what it is – being mean – by premising it with a statement of intention so that if (or when) the other person flies into a murderous rage and cold-cocks you for being an insensitive jerk it’s their fault, not yours. (Sorry about the overwhelming number of coordinating conjunctions in that last sentence.)

I love a girl who knows her coordinating conjunctions, and I couldn’t agree more. FAT PEOPLE KNOW THEY’RE FAT, ANGELA. And thanks, Stephanie!

Here’s something I hadn’t thought about before. The definition of binge-eating disorder (BED) says that binges involve eating more food than most people would expect you to eat in a relatively short time. So what if all of the people in your world don’t find your eating out of the ordinary?

Another way of asking this question: Could the definition of BED be culturally-dependent? A blurb about a recent study suggests that black women meet BED criteria less often than white women. One of the project’s researchers says, “These (black) women could be binge eating, but they may have less anxiety and distress surrounding their eating habits, so they don’t recognize it as an issue.”

Where it really gets interesting is in the comments (all bolding mine).

Frankincensy says:

He makes a really good point, though I have to admit I bridled at “we can try to convince these women they have a problem”. If the definition is culturally dependent, it doesn’t seem right to pathologise women’s eating habits simply because they don’t fit the (white-identified) norm.

Looking at eating habits in context sounds more sensible than applying arbitrary rules about what is and isn’t bingeing, though that might pose a risk of overlooking detrimental eating habits because they’re “normal” in context (for instance, and I apologise for the cliche, a 17-year-old model may have a restrictive ED yet not stand out from her peers in terms of how little she’s eating). An eating pattern that does not cause psychological distress may still be causing physical harm, though I’m not sure whether that would still count as an eating disorder.

The always insightful Meowser says:

Bingeing is not just enjoying some brownies and ice cream; it’s inhaling ALL the brownies and ALL the ice cream as fast as you can so you can get to the whole pizza and the bags of cookies and whatever else you’re bingeing on, and stuff it all in before you can stop to think, much less taste any of it. It’s the opposite of actually enjoying food, really. And there’s an ugly racist element to this (presumably white) researcher’s theorizing that these black women can’t possibly know what they’re doing to themselves and must be lying about how much they eat.

Rachel:

During my eating disorder, I saw a shrink who diagnosed me as bulimic after asking me how often I binged and how I felt during these binges. The only problem was that I considered anything above 500 calories a day to be a “binge.”

And Fantine:

I remember being in a weight loss program at age twelve, and going through a chapter in the little textbook about binge eating. We did this exercise where we ate a slice of apple as quickly as possible, and then ate another slice slowly, savoring it. We were asked how often we binge, big binges or little binges, by ourselves or with others. There was no option for people who did not binge. We were all fat, so we must all be binging, right?

Believe it or not, I tried to restrain myself from over-quoting, so I highly suggest checking out the whole discussion. I’m still trying to formulate my thoughts on this issue, but I thought it was worth thinking and talking about. Thanks for the post, Rachel!

I’ve heard the idea of a “soda tax” floated many times before, but this is the first time any actual legislation has been on the horizon–let alone right in my backyard:

Newsom said he was particularly motivated… by Thursday’s release of a UCLA study showing a link between soda and obesity in California. Researchers found that adults who drink at least one soft drink a day are 27 percent more likely to be obese than those who don’t – and that soda consumption is fueling the state’s $41 billion annual obesity problem. The study also found that 41 percent of children and 62 percent of teens drink at least one soda daily.

“Soda is cheap, sweet and irresistibly marketed to teens,” said Susan Babey, the study’s lead author. “Not enough teens know about the health and dietary risks of drinking huge quantities of what is essentially liquid sugar.”

I’m not particularly a soda drinker or an advocate for soda, but I also don’t see how this tax will really do anything–maybe if you make soda itself a lot more expensive, it could change people’s habits, but taxing Safeway isn’t going to make them stop selling soda, and I doubt they’d raise their prices on soda in response, so what’s the point? (Also, this tax wouldn’t affect fast-food places, so wouldn’t people just go there for a quick soda fix?) The Chamber of Commerce apparently agrees:

Jim Lazarus, vice president of the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, said the group opposes the soda tax. “Does this mean there’s a fee on candy bars, on ice cream, on potato chips?” he asked. “Where do you draw the line?”

He added that a small fee – likely to be passed on from the retailer to the consumer – wouldn’t be enough to dramatically change people’s habits, leading him to believe it’s meant to be just another revenue source for the city.

So what do you guys think–does this all feel a little “nanny state” to you, do you think it’s a good idea, do you think it’s insulting? And where are they getting this “obesity costs California $41 billion a year” from, anyway? And Californians, given the budget crisis–what about the idea of taxing “extra” purchases like soda as a way to help dig ourselves out of the hole?