NPR and Nimoy
I am just going to reprint heatherbelly‘s comment, because I think it’s worthy of discussion and I’m so glad she shared it!
Please listen to this report aired on NPR’s Weekend Edition Saturday, last weekend. Understand—Scott Simon is usually a fantastic host. I found myself with my jaw agape as I listened to the introduction and report. So I emailed. Here is how our ‘conversation’ went:
“Dear Scott Simon, whom I usually love and admire:Come on. Could you have sounded more offensive in the Nimoy piece? Going where no man has gone before? Do you not know that more than half of American women are a size 14 or larger? That is not Plus-size model size, which is usually a 10 or 12. Please do not act as if it is newsworthy that a fat woman is happy, has fun, and even (how dare she) locks eyed with the camera. I am so disappointed at how that conversation went–after expressing your surprise at their confidence and even beauty–but all of us fatties are getting our comeuppance–being fat leads to cancer. Whew. What a relief. Fatness is the last acceptable recipients of prejudice. I just didn’t think I would hear it from you and NPR.
Thank you.”
His response (which was rapid—within a half hour of my email)
“Thank you for your note. I thought my introduction made it pretty clear that the women featured in Mr Nimoy’s book are not plus-sized models, not merely Rubenesque, but of several sizes beyond that. We even chanced to use the word obese, which is usually confined to stories about snacking children.
I certainly was not looking to add to or somehow burnish the bigotry with which I know large people have to contend with from society, and I thought that Mr Nimoy was eloquent on that score. But when a significant study comes out the very same week that ties obesity to cancer, it is simply irresponsible to overlook that. We can’t pretend that the study didn’t appear, especially when one of the women of the book died of cancer before publication.
I also think both Mr Nimoy and I noted the health concerns for women, including models, who starve themselves to look a certain way; altering that harm such an image does is one of the reasons he chose to do this book. But when the deadline comes, we are in the news business. At some point, preserving individual sensitivities are less important that recognizing the news.
With thanks,
Scott Simon”
And here is my response:
“Hello, and thank you for your prompt response.
I appreciate what you are saying about the connection between obesity and cancer, but I fail to see how it is related to a book of photos of fat people. If we were showing old photos of celebrities in movies with cigarettes hanging out of their mouths, would you take the time to note how many died of lung cancer?
I guess it saddened me to hear you so shocked that fat women could be perceived as beautiful, and not something to be gawked at like an exhibit at the zoo. Believe me, I am not a “fat power” person. I believe that most overweight women, no matter how much they protest their happiness, would prefer to be a lighter weight. I have seen these photos by Mr. Nimoy. Yes, they are obese, but if you look at statistics, a woman who is 5?8? and 200 pounds is obese. Did you see last week’s People magazine with Queen Latifah on the cover? She is obese. She is, as she put it, in the 200s. When you use the word obese as a defense, you make it sound as if you are talking about the people who are bedridden and need to be removed from their homes with construction equipment.
The reality is, there are many obese people out there, and many of them are beautiful. There is something innately beautiful in the human form, happy, and dancing. To me, Mr. Nimoy’s book should be generating publicity for something many of us have known to be true for some time.Thank you.”
And finally, his next email:
“In fact, I think that most every time we have done something about 40’s movie star photos, we’ve noted that having cigarettes dangling from their mouths would be unthinkable in a publicity photo these days.
I don’t know why you are so sure that I sounded shocked that far women could be perceived as beautiful. I am not shocked at all. But I am also not naïve about the fact that books like Mr Nimoy’s are considered unusual; I doubt there are enough for their own section in any bookstore or library. In fact, I gather that this is his point. He didn’t do a book of nudes which includes a few large women, some skinny ones, and several with amputated limbs. He did a book with large women, period. I do think Mr Nimoy’s book is generating the kind of publicity you suggest, and I imagine that our book is helping that along. But to repeat, we simply can’t pretend that the cancer study that appeared this week didn’t appear, especially when one of the women in the book just died of cancer.
With best wishes,
Scott Simon”
What do you all think? Was I PMS (I was) and too harsh on him? What do you think about the set-up and interview?
Thank you for voicing your views, Heather, and for taking the time to bring them over here. So, what do you all think?
Posted by mo pie
Filed under: Advocacy, Art, Guest Post, Media, Question
Email us
I find it ironic that he decided to focus on the one study that said that we (fat people) ARE at higher risk for cancer, but completely IGNORED the one that said that we are at LOWER risk for cancer, and that when we do, we have a higher chance of SURVIVING said cancers.
Yes, one of the models died from cancer, but she died from a cancer that is notoriously a genetic-driven cancer (ovarian).
I just listened to the interview myself, and it does sound as if Mr. Simon was trying to be respectful, but his ingrained prejudice shone through. He completely glossed over the fact that these women had obviously high self-esteem and good self-image and went straight for the “OMG THEY’RE GONNA DIE!!!1!!1” tact.
I couldn’t help but smile, however, when I heard Mr. Nimoy come back with the “yes, but I think the yo-yo dieting, poor self-esteem and stress has a lot to do with that as well” (paraphrasing, obviously) point of view. Mr. Simon couldn’t hide the fact that he has the same view of fat women as society does, but in the same token, Mr. Nimoy couldn’t hide the fact that he DOESN’T have that view.
And that’s why Leonard Nimoy is my hero. :)
Right on, nuckingfutz. It sounds like Simon has simply put up the defensive on trying to defend that one point about the cancer study without being willing to consider where you’re coming from. But then again, he’s still a journalist – NPR or no. And unfortunately, it sounds like he’s also an average American – the kind who isn’t willing to see beyond the lens that equates fat with illness.
And that’s especially clear when he KEEPS mentioning that one of the women involved with the book has died of cancer. Because apparently she is the *only* woman who has died recently of cancer, and thus makes an easy ploy for him to stick in his FAT MAKES YOU DIE argument. Shameful, really.
Actually- I think he keeps mentioning because he was being called to task for the very fact that he brought up the cancer tie-in and was explaining his reasoning. I also find it interesting that the same people who seem to want everyone to accept the fact that some people find obese people beautiful without conditions cannot accept the fact that some people do not. It isn’t a matter of not being willing- some people just do not find fat people attractive, some people do not find super skinny people attractive, etc…
Cathy, it isn’t about finding people “attractive.” It’s about accepting that people are different. You don’t have to like my physical appearance, but that doesn’t mean I have to be bashed and treated like dirt in the process.
It’s people like Simon who keep perpetuating stereotypes about fat people, and it’s getting old. I’m tired of being judged by my appearance.
Cathy, attractiveness and beauty can be mutually exclusive ideals.
Attractiveness implies a sexual desire. Beauty is simply beauty. I can find a tree beautiful – does that mean I want to fuck it? No.
Beauty is so much more than a person’s sexual attractiveness. Beauty encompasses all of a person. Not just their physical appearance. When I think of a person’s beauty, I think of how their personality shines through in their entire being. How their eyes shine, how their smile brightens up their face. How they treat other people, as well as how they treat themselves.
I repeat: beauty is so much more than sexual attractiveness. And until people like you figure that out, we’ve not done our job properly.
Well, I would first off say that being able to debate without taking out your frustrations on another poster and keeping it fairly civil would be preferable.
Second, I never implied sexual desire when I said attractive. I actually only feel sexual desire about once a month and that is only with my husband!
As for beauty? I do not the women in his book to be beautiful and I will not apologize for that. I am not judging their value as a human nor am I commenting on their health or their intelligence or their fitness level. I do not find their physical form beautiful and I do not enjoy looking at the photos, but I have no problem if you or anyone else does. I was simply commenting on the posts.
Please, tell me where I was uncivil.
Did I call you a name? Did I attack you as a person?
No, I did none of that. I challenged your perception of beauty.
I won’t apologize for THAT, either.
The whole point is that a REAL journalist, and not an ad whore — which is what we’re paying NPR people to be, ahem — is supposed to be able to look beyond the standard-issue “fat=death” crap and dig a little bit deeper. But this assclown can’t, because he hates us. It’s that simple.
And that is why I am not giving a dime to NPR or PBS until they knock off this crap once and for all.
I’ve noticed that NPR falls right in line with mainstream media when it comes to ZOMG TEH FAT!!! We only get tv through the aerial (yes! All 9 stations!) at home and I listen to NPR a lot, a lot, a lot. Except on any subject related to weight, and then I listen to the indie radio station.
I can find a tree beautiful – does that mean I want to fuck it? No.
…is my favorite blog comment of the day. thanks for that, nf.
anytime! :D
I’m not surprised that Scott Simon is so squeamish about teh fat, since I’ve always thought he represents mainstream NPR values- just a tiny bit left of the American comfort zone. However, it was a little weird to hear his barely contained horror at these fat women’s audaciousness.
But Leonard Nimoy? I love him! In a previous BFD post about his project, there was a link to an article that kept dwelling on whether Nimoy was a chubby-chaser, and quoted him saying, basically “no.” I was a little worried that he was taking that tack himself. But hearing him respond so well to Simon’s knee-jerk fear was really heartening. It makes me happy.
That he tried to turn Heather McAllister into a fat = cancer stereotype makes me sick to my stomach. It’s sad when 1) the person you are interviewing about art is more informed than you are about the health issue you bring up and 2) that person is also more responsible and admits when he hasn’t read the research.
Thank goodness for Heather McAllister. Obviously she and the Fat Bottom Review taught Leonard Nimoy a thing or two and he’s got the guts to speak up about it! I
Oh no he didn’t.
I’m not saying much on this in order to protect privacy, but I know a very great deal about Heather, her illness and death.
That he would say that sort of thing just makes me want to punch his motherfucking lights out. Oh my god I’m so pissed I can barely type.
Wow. Just wow. I think I’m going to cry.
Talk about not understanding a goddamn thing you’re talking about. And here I was under the assumption that NPR had higher journalistic standards compared to any other form of broadcast media.
How can he cite a meta-analysis of several very disparate studies and say, “Well, you know, fat causes cancer?” Completely disingenuous. He didn’t even bother to find out if that “study” was scientifically valid before saying, “Well, you know, we can’t just let the fatties think they might actually be healthy.”
Moron.
I listened to this and while I didn’t appreciate the word Huge in the beginning. But then later he showed his appreciation about a particular picture. I feel like he was being just analytical.
This post was particularly compelling to me. I thought heatherbelly’s comments were well articulated to Mr. Simon. His replies however… holy crap. Nothing but bullshit mumbo jumbo.
Now, I realize reporters are supposed to remain neutral in order to present both sides of the story, but his introduction alone… geez… did he throw up a little bit in his mouth looking at the pictures? That is how his comments came off to me. But maybe I am a touch sensetive.
The photographs are beautiful. If nothing else, they made me appreciate my body shape even more.
And tell me this… Skinny people never get cancer? Seriously? You have to be fat to suffer through a horrible disease? Only fat people get terminal illnesses? Hmm… last time I checked, it seemed like it was spread over the whole population pretty well. One in eight women have breast cancer. I don’t think the little cancer genes look for women with extra meat on her hips and say, gee… she’s got more to chomp on, I’ll invade her! Pisses me off!!!!
My grandmother died of ovarian cancer. In her 80’s she was slim, ate incredibly well (I never saw her eat anything other than whole grains, fruits and vegetables, and lean meats), exercised every day (she had a swimming pool and spent hours doing laps and water aerobics), and was so spry and energetic that if her roof leaked, she climbed up and fixed it. So whose “fault” was her cancer, then?
People want a reason to be able to say it’s wrong to be fat so any study that goes in that direction gives them a basis to say, see it’s wrong and gross and ugly and now I’m right because of this study so now I don’t need to feel bad about how I feel. They aren’t going to look around and see if the study is viable, they are happy to have this idea to cling to that gets them off the hook for being prejudice.
being slim is no protection against any cancer…being slim is what today’s like to call atractive
On the bright side, I thought Leonard Nimoy was wonderfully eloquent in the interview. I agree that it’s absurd to bring up cancer when discussing a book of photography that’s not about cancer.
This line in Scott Simon’s reply made me laugh out loud:
“We even chanced to use the word obese, which is usually confined to stories about snacking children.”
At least he knows NPR is prone to doing that kind of story.
With much respect to all the posters here, I have to say that I didn’t find Scott Simon’s introduction or interview inflamatory. I also didn’t think his remarks about the cancer study (and he didn’t fund or participate in the study, after all) were meant as a hateful aside about heather.
Rather, I heard the interview as a probe about Nimoy’s experience with models who are treated as less-than by the market and considered problematic by the medical community.
I really, really didn’t hear him fat bashing.
I believed his e-mail response in that he wasn’t looking to add fuel to the anti-fat fire.
I really respect the posters on this board, and I enjoy your posts. No malice intended here – just disagreeing.
Hi,
I too heard the NPR story. I just left this email on the NPR website.
I heard your interview with Leonard Nimoy about his book ‘The Full Body Project’ and was surprised and disappointed to hear a recent study concerning fat and health brought up in this context. My hope would be that you would do more than pass on a press release or abstract.
Personally, I would love to hear a discussion about how to interpret the validity of this study. Was it a cohort study, a clinical trial, a meta-analysis, etc? Could the study as designed ever show anything more than association?, why, why not? Was there a control group? Was it similar in health/activity/socioeconomic status/ etc to the study group? What was the change in risk and was it significant for this type of study? Did the study results report actual health outcomes or risk markers? What is the difference and how does that help evaluate the conclusions? What did the actual research paper show (as opposed to the press release or abstract)? How does this fit in with the body of research in this area?
Bottom line, if you don’t critically read the actual study and/or you don’t educate yourself on statistical methods and study design so that you can evaluate the validity of scientific research, then reporting on it appears pretty irresponsible. Especially in the last few seconds of a story.
I thought mentioning the cancer study was poor form. Even if there is any sort of validity to that study, he had no way of knowing that Heather died of a cancer that was studied, and as mentioned above, it appears that she did not. Aside from that, it wasn’t a story on obesity and health. It was a story about art. Up until he mentioned that, I didn’t get the impression he was really fat bashing, but I did think bringing up that study like it was a foregone conclusion was super inappropriate and disrespectful to Heather. Kudos to Nimoy, though. He was eloquent on the topic, and his pictures (and subjects) are beautiful!
The fact that man mentioned a cancer study that is biased and has been proven untrue…just makes me want to send him a nasty email.
As for Mr. Nimoy…I always knew there was a reason that I loved that man.
I’ll just add this. I’m reading Library Journal right now at my job and this is the upcoming blurb for Scott Simon’s new novel due in March ’08.
Simon, Scott. Windy City: A Novel of Politics”
“A widower from India with two rebellious daughters, Chicago alderman Sonny Roopini has new worries when the mayor evidently eats himself into a fatal heart attack. From NPR host Simon; with an eight-city tour”.
Library Journal Nov 1, 2007 vol 132, no 18 p.44
Simon “what’s his face” speaks about the women “looking into the camera” like they’re dumb animals in a zoo who find facsination with their own reflections, laughable.