People used to be afraid to be fat; now they're afraid to say "fat." Oh, we can talk about diets and exercise and the paucity of plus-size fashions--CONSTANTLY--but we can't really use the word "fat" as an adjective anymore. Unless, of course, we're referring to ourselves and are comedic by nature, like Kevin Smith, the director of such inspired movies as "Clerks" and "Mallrats," who recently was removed from an airline flight because his girth made him a security risk.
His embarrassment became national because he tweeted obsessively about it and is still seeking his pound of flesh, so to speak, from Southwest Airlines. He may actually get it because he is rallying all people over 200 lbs. to join his boycott. With fat being our national condition, he might well militate enough people to affect the airline's bottom line, so to speak (again.)
This is why everyone in the media business is terrified of the "F" word. With a recent national study showing that over 72 percent of the US is either overweight or obese, to offend that group can have serious repercussions. The utter ridiculousness of this phobia was played out this week on ABC's "Nightline," where a panel of silly people debated whether being fat is, indeed, a bad thing.
One silly panelist was a fat young woman (there, I've said it!), another a former model who now wears a size 12 (the average 5'4" American woman wears a size 16. The model was about 5'10--you do the math), a former fatty who dieted about 100 pounds off her frame and a silly skinny extremist whose mission is to chastise fat people for costing not-fat people countless dollars in health care and accommodations.
Moderator, JuJu Chang, consulted this panel, pretending that she had a good representation of the population and that they had some expertise. Their expertise was simply that they wanted to be right and justify their own points of view. Even though "Nightline" airs at 11:30 p.m. and I watch in from bed as I drift off to sleep, I was so ticked off by its absurdity that I was out of bed and at my laptop within minutes.
Just because most people are fat doesn't mean that it's a good thing. Most of us lie, too, but it doesn't make it right. Type II diabetes isn't good for us, even if, in our democratic society, we would vote it so. Remember our mothers admonishing us, "If Johnny were to jump off a cliff, would that make it okay for you to do it, too?" Well, Mom's right--just 'cuz everybody's fat doesn't make it cool.
I'm not making a character judgment about fat people. My personal interpretation of the facts is that our DNA is undermining our best efforts--not personal slovenliness or lack of backbone. We were designed to be hunter/gatherers who did not eat regularly or with any predictability. When we got smart enough to master our environment by becoming an agricultural society who planted, harvested and collected livestock, our genes didn't keep up. We were still meant to be intermittent and light eaters. When we got really smart, we could process our foods to make them stretch even further and delight our taste buds.
Think about it, our ancestors wouldn't have known or cared about getting the seasonings just right in a meal; a meal might be a squirrel's backside and some barely-digestible root or grass. An appetizer, main course and dessert with a tasty Chianti may be divine, but we weren't designed to eat this way. It's a huge disappointment, that's for sure, but the facts remain the same.
Think of it this way: We developed to walk on two feet rather than four, but modern man is cursed by back ailments because our bone structure hasn't caught up with this wondrous accomplishment. Our tailbones turn in on themselves and our discs are herniating like suicide bombers. The greatest risk to old people is injury from falling. Old dogs don't break a hip climbing out of a tub because they still use all four limbs. Evolution is an imperfect journey, at best.
Everything we do to avoid the conclusion that we simply have to eat much less of everything is going to kill us. We can have tantrums and look for pills or gastric bypass or some other miracle to allow us to eat the same and weigh less, but the truth is that the only real solution is to push away from the dinner table about 20 minutes earlier than we want to. It stinks and makes us very cranky, but we can't change it.
Not talking about it is cowardly and patronizing and, ultimately cruel because behind almost every fat child is a fat parent who can't demonstrate the behavior necessary to rescue them from this life sentence. A recent European study said that a child who was fat by age three was overwhelmingly destined to be a fat adult. We can blame TV advertising and processed foods all we want, but a fat toddler is almost always created by a fat parent--and, no, it's not because of their genes or because they're "big boned." Why don't we ever see any "big boned" fatties holding on to their weight in starving populations or on the Bataan Death March? Because there is no such thing!
The more cowardly we become about fat and the longer we pretend that we can continue eating while our bodies revolt against us by getting sicker and sicker, the more we fail our children and their children. Bill Clinton and Arnold Schwarzenegger just held a summit against childhood obesity in California and the former President said that we parents might be the last generation to live longer than our own parents. Our children are dying and we're trying to be politically correct. This can't be right. Let's call fat by its proper name: Murderer.
Thomas Goetz: We Need To End The Obesity Epidemic
Our ancestors had to hunt, drag, cart, carry, and hurl their food and water. With the help of an office chair on wheels, we can actually prepare, cook and eat an entire meal without even standing up! Our ancestors saw food as fuel. We don't....nowdays food satisfies much, much more.
Truthfully, the problem is that we are terribly inactive. FACTOID: The daily activity requirements of our ancestors was equivalent to a 2-mile walk! Our bodies were made to move.
On a very sad note, I do mental health clearances for people seeking bariatric surgery. I have been keeping statistics on the frequency in which these folks exercise. They don't. Of the fifty some patients I have seen for this type of clearance, only three had ever established a regular habit of exercise.
So GET MOVING!!!!
Dr. Gina is co-author of "You GROW Girl!: a self-empowering workbook for teens and tweens" and has self-published a guide about overeating called "Friendly Mirrors"
As a parent of two, I can now see how important it is for me to exercise healthy boundaries with my kids. They don't like it, but they respect me for it. I write a self care column and have been a total control freak with my kids around food, insisting they eat healthy. I was extreme. However, my daughter - now 17 - thanks me. She loves her body, is confident, and knows she can make good eating choices as she makes her way out into the world. My 12 year old son still bawks sometimes, but even he recognizes that "mother knows best," at least in this area. Now, if I can just get him to clean his room...
Men's DNA tells them to have sex with every woman they see, and then to move on to the next. Having lots of kids by lots of women makes a man's DNA successful. But nobody is blaming Tiger Woods' DNA. Somehow he is being held responsible.
Americans are the fattest people on earth. God must hate Americans, and he must have changed all the American Immigrants' DNA as they landed at Ellis Island, because the countries that all these fat people's ancestors come from are not as fat as America. Amazing.
If people are fat, it is their own fault. Stop buying terrible food, and you won't eat terrible food. Stop going to buffets if you can't control your eating.
And for God's sake, shut up and stop whining!
Since you won’t do that though, a compromise: venture into a public crowd of overweight people and try to “help” them by shaming and not educating. When you’re out from the shield of the internet I’m sure you’ll see how helpful you really are.
I think it should also be "If you feed junk to your kids, STOP!"
Not letting them pollute other people's lungs inside confined buildings?
Taxing them to pay for the HUGE cost smoking adds to society?
INFORMING them of the dangers?
Did we do anything beyond those things to shame smokers?
Also, just FYI to the people here...the word fat means fat....all of those other meanings you interpret...lazy, weak, etc. may or may not be implied.
But the word itself refers to having excessive body fat, nothing more.
But on there is one area where the analogy makes sense that appears unintended in this article: when a person choses to use the 'N' word they show themselves as ignorant, prejudiced and hateful. Likewise people who go around passing judgements on people who they deem fat - like saying they need to exercise self control (by staying away from cookies or putting down the fork) - are also demonstrating their own ignorances and prejudices. The relevant comparison is NOT between the person who was labeled, but between the people labeling others.
Just because a study cites 72% of the population is overweight or obese, I don't think we should be afraid to use the word for fear of backlash. I also don't think people so stand in front of someone that is overweight and call them fat in a negative manner. It comes down to personal responsibility. With all the information at one's finger tips regarding weight and health issues, there really isn't an excuse. I'm also not suggesting that people must be a size 2 but they should be a healthy size as outlined by a medical professional. I also understand that eating healthy is expensive from personal experience but it can be done if a person isn't lazy and plans out their meals and makes the effort to stick to it.
And isn't about food, America needs to get off the couch. Period. Here's a reality TV show, it's called Your Life, go live it.
And no, I'm not talking about pointing at fat people in the street and laughing.
But when lies like fat is normal or fat is healthy are used to justify poor health choices, it is destructive.
I'll tell you what, I don't drink soda, I have a few favorite foods that are 'prefab' but for the most part I cook for myself. I eat just as many fruits and vegetables, if not more, as I do possible snack foods because I view these things AS snack foods. I exercise regularly and if my depressions or fibro are too much that week I at least keep myself moving around the apartment.
I know I'm fat. I'm not walking around in ignorance waiting for that one person to tell me (and more than likely to imply how gross and icky I am at the same time.)
I also am very well educated, possibly more so than you (the random individual that walks by me on the street and I'd wager to say the writer of this article) about healthy living, the consequences of being fat and the various studies that disprove a lot of the crap I see people spewing about fat people. So please, stop assuming you know what's best for me and that I probably just stuffed myself with donuts or something and use more than two brain cells and a little bit of compassion.
In the long run, as nice as it would be to lose some weight, currently I'm happy to maintain where I am. It means I'm working through a lot of problems, with my own body and mind. Accepting your size as long as your size isn't affecting your health negatively isn't reinforcing a bad habit, it's rejecting a world that tells me I should feel ashamed because I'm not a size 6.
However, calling people "fat" or "fatty" is not appropriate. She makes several statements in the article about people being "afraid" to use the "F-word" and about how our society is too "P.C" to call people fat. She explains how this is negative because "Not talking about it is cowardly and patronizing and, ultimately cruel". There is a BIG difference between talking about obesity and calling people fat. She seems to be saying that the only way to educate people about health and weight is by calling overweight people "fat" and "fatty". How does that make any sense?
In a classroom, a teacher may encounter a child who does not have any knowledge of a particular subject. The teacher would not educate that child by saying "You're ignorant". That would serve no purpose other than to demoralize the child. Not only that, but it would probably hinder the child's education. After being degraded, the child would be much less likely to listen to the teacher.
She has valid points about the need to educate our children and focus on healthier eating habits, and the fact that it serves no one to ignore or make excuses for the "epidemic" of obesity. She just offered no intelligent solutions. I thought name-calling was just an elementary school child's problem solving technique.
I was in no way making a comparison between "F" and "N"--I didn't say nor did I mean to imply that they're the same or different or any of that. My comment was this: saying that that the media are reluctant to use the F word because they're afraid of losing the business of overweight people (as was proposed by the author) is just as absurd saying that they don't use the N word because they're afraid of losing the business of African Americans. It's a pretty ridiculous idea when you think about it. They don't use the N word because it's understood that it's an offensive slur. And I think the same motives hold true for F. More and more, it's understood that's it's just plain offensive and inappropriate.
So the comment was about motives of the media (and others who refrain from using that word), not the semantics of pejorative terms. As MFIvers points out, there's a huge difference between an open discussion of weight issues and name calling. Most folks are intelligent and sensitive enough to get that.
Being called "fat" is not remotely comparable to being called the "N" word. Not even on the same playing field.
Get people to read your writing based on its merit alone rather than sensational intros.
The N word is used as a catch-all word to encompass a whole slew of derogatory attributes and characteristics that prejudiced people want to heap onto others based on how they LOOK; (darker skin).
In other words: Dark skin = *Ugly*, lazy, uneducated, drug dealer, Ho, thug, criminals, hates white people....
It's the same with the word Fat; It's not just a descriptive word such as "big" or "large" or even "heavy". It's become an all encompassing word to label people with another whole slew of bad characterizations and flaws -- based only on how they LOOK.
In other words: Fat = *Ugly*, Lazy, uneducated, slovenly, gluttonous, dumb, hates themselves, and thin people...
So I have to say that from that perspective, the F(at) word is / has become pretty much like the N word.
The original and still current definition of the word 'fat' has nothing to do with the current connotations that you have described. The fact that people are using a descriptive term in a negative way such as "Fat = *Ugly*, Lazy, uneducated, slovenly, gluttonous, dumb, hates themselves, and thin people..." may be true- but the problem is in the usage not in the definition.
What I'm trying to say is that there is nothing wrong with the word 'fat'. There is a lot wrong with how it is being used.
There is a lot wrong with the N word. period.