I'm not your metaphor

Earlier this month, a commenter here hit on a continuing frustration I have with progressive allies and how some relate to fat rights. Its frustrating, because I consider myself politically progressive. While I don't think one necessarily needs to a progressive to believe in fat acceptance, it is indisputable that the movements political foundations were products of radical feminism in the late 1960's. Progressives should be natural allies to fat acceptance, but a reluctance to respect our needs and perspectives continues to be a problem. The simple fact is that fat shaming is heavily ingrained in our culture and an expectation that fat people will sit down and shut up is all too common, even from people who think they are fighting with us.

Actually, that's usually the issue. They don't think they are fighting with fat people. They think they are fighting for fat people. That was what came up with this commenter who wanted to be able to blame fatness on corporations. This is a very common line you see from supposed allies in progressive communities and the fact is that this is a just feeding into fat shaming. The idea is that corporations are to blame for rises in obesity levels. The proof invariable amounts to some variation on "Look at all the fat people. Corporations must have done it." Which isn't, ya know, proof. Instead, what they are doing is looking at fat acceptance through the prism of their own agenda.

I don't disagree that corporations can often have an insidious influence on our lives and culture and I certainly support more accountability for corporate action and how it impacts our environment and lives. I don't see how those goals should obligate me to accept people who want to blame my body on corporations. The whole construct of looking for someone or something to blame for fat bodies is inherently fat shaming. It inherently disrespects our lives and our experiences.

Back in 2007, fatfu commented on a story Dr. Sanjay Gupta (someone embraced in some progressive circles, by the way) did blaming working moms for the "epidemic" of fat people. She pointed our how many things are blamed for fat people...

"Actually, I’m hard pressed to think of an aspect of modernity that hasn’t been blamed for the 'obesity epidemic.' Here’s a partial list of malefactors just from the past two months’ of headlines:

.
protein in infant formula
germs
mother’s weight gain in pregnancy
reduction in the nutrient content in food
diet soda
radical diets
advertising
restaurants
abundance of junk food and the lack of physical activity
television
drought
living in a rural area
urban sprawl
living in the suburbs
plastic in baby bottles
lack of family support
mother’s early puberty
“environmental food cues”
fructose
not enough fruits and vegetables in diet
permissive fathers
irresponsible parents
emotional eating
stress
emotional issues
sleeplessness
sugar
inaccurate infant growth tables
food prices
newspaper recipes
lack of individual responsibility
britain’s one-hour lunch break
larger portion sizes
farm subsidies
lack of personal responsibility
belly fat
beverages
the fear that being slim will make people think you have AIDS
precocious puberty
reading about the obesity epidemic
sodas
poor urban planning
low testosterone
southern high-fat diet
mother’s diet during pregnancy
disruptions of the circadian clock
online marketing"

She closes with a killer line that doing a story on one particular thing to blame for fat people, "almost certainly says more about his prejudices than it does about fat." How people seek to exploit fat people invariable is about their own agenda and their own prejudices and much less about fat people. If you don't respect fat people, there will always be some way to exploit fat people for your own purposes. Some social ill to attach to fatness. Some way to continue fighting "for" fat people and doing everything to avoid fighting "with" fat people.

Fat activists are constantly being told to sit down and shut up. PeTA wants to exploit fat hatred to advance their mission of promoting veganism. Dan Savage and Jon Stewart use lazy metaphors to promote marriage quality that are premised on the lie that fat people don't experience stigmatization. We hear constant cries of "what about the thin people" trying to recenter discussions of fat stigma and fat health. Dr. Sanjay Gupta Throughout all of this, fat activists are expected to play nice while our rights and experiences are erased because others feel they are inconvenient for their own agenda. How dare we suggest that we can pursue corporate accountability, animal welfare, marriage equality, or health care access without exploiting fat shaming? How dare we not sit down and shut up? Our outrage at this is constantly invalidated. We are pressured to know our place from allies normally well versed in standing with disenfranchised communities.

I'm getting tired of it. I'm tired of being told I'm letting corporations off the hook. I'm tired of watching the fat couples fighting for marriage equality so they can marry their own partners be thrown under the bus to make some lazy fat jokes. I'm tired of constantly having to placate thin people who take any discussion of fat contexts as an invitation to center the discussion back onto people who enjoy privilege. I'm tired of hearing that ethical treatment of fat people is expendable. I'm tired of being a cautionary tale or a "consequence". I'm tired of being fodder for cheap gags. I'm tired of being a useful metaphor. Progressive allies can and must be better. Respecting fat people does not threaten your cause. It will strengthen it.

Mush

Every day I walk to the bus on my way to work and I pass a gym. They have a a large banner announcing "From MUSH to MUSCLES". Every time I see it, I have to recognize that its talking about me. For the weight loss industry, my body is useful only for the purposes of negative comparison. I'm a "before" picture. I'm mush. I'm a reason to give money to the weight loss industry. I'm what you aren't supposed to be.

Its not just the gym banner reminding me. Newspapers, magazines, billboards, web-ads, radio, and TV are all shouting at me for being fat. Heck, its not just to sell weight loss promises, either. At the Super Bowl, both Toyota and Volkswagon used fat shame to sell cars. Everyone takes for granted that I'll agree with them that my body is embarassing. That I should be ashamed to be fat. Fat shaming is used not to in spite of the risk of alienating fat customers, but in the total expectation that they will be fully on board with it. When I see the cascade of fat hatred promotion, I don't just realizing that they are talking about me. I realize they feel entitled for me to listen and care about it, too.

Well, I don't. I don't care that they think I should be sad about my fat. I don't care that they think I should feel resigned about their abuse. No, that's not true. I do care, just that I'm not willing to put up with the abuse. My body isn't mush. It is solid, not formless. It may yield to the touch, adapting to pressure but staying firm. It moves with me, moves as it needs to. You know who started calling fat bodies mush? Someone who never felt a fat body. Someone who has never lived in a fat body and who knows the form and tangibility. Someone who just looks at our bodies and thinks we are just sacks of fat. And they have used social stigmatization to make fat people feel this about ourselves.

My flesh is mine. It is not mush. It is curves and slopes and moves and adapts. I will not be ashamed of it for the benefit of someone else's marketing.

The All-New Fat Hate Bingo 3

The All-New Fat Hate Bingo 3 is finally here!

So, back in 2007 in the early days of the "fat-o-sphere", fat bloggers were weathering seemingly endless fat shaming attacks from trolls and concern trolls alike. During a discussion at Shakesville, I made a subtle reference to the history in social justice movements of using "Bingo" cards to diffuse commonly repeated attacks. Kate Harding suggested actually making a Bingo card and 90 minutes later, there it was. Fat Hate Bingo 2 followed the next day and both remain among the most popular posts at Red No. 3. Each card catalogs many of the "brilliant" put-downs fat activists face online and in our lives when we try to advocate for the horribly radical concept that maybe its not the end of the world that we're fat.

Honestly, its something a lot of fat activists try to avoid because its emotionally draining to have to hear the same thing over and over and over again, always repeated by people who are enamored with their brilliance and courage to finally say this to a fat person. I usually avoid it, too, but last fall when I started doing the Maggie sequels, I came upon a whole host of new attacks that I'd see quickly repeated endlessly by all sorts of people who don't realize they are reading from a script. Thus, Fat Hate Bingo 3 was born.

I know fat people aren't supposed to have friends, but if you did have 2 friends, now all three of you can play against each other the next time the concept of fat shaming is introduced to a not so receptive audience. Actually, since we now have 75 Fat Hate Bingo squares, just as many as used in actual bingo, maybe we can all get in the act!

[Image Description: Header Text: “red3.blogspot.com presents Fat Hate BINGO 3. We really have heard it all before.” Below is a 5x5 Bingo Card with squares in alternating red and gray colors with text in each square.

Column 1: My tax dollars are paying for your fat lifestyle. | Shaming of Dieters is the real problem. | If you don’t like being bullied, just lose weight. | If that’s true, why are you so fat? | Fat people threaten our national security!


Column 2: You can’t control fat bigotry, but you can control your weight. | Diabetes! Hypertension! Heart Disease! | You are ugly. Do something about your health. | Fat acceptance shouldn’t mean accepting an unhealthy weight. | Somebody needs to start shaming fat people.


Column 3: Take responsibility for what you put in your mouth. | You can’t all have thyroid problems. | Its not a diet… | Thin privilege doesn’t exist because you can choose to be thin. | People shouldn’t have to look at you.


Column 4: What’s next? Cancer pride? | I can’t condone your self-destructive behavior. | Instead of promoting obesity, use your energy to lose weight. | Fat people are empirically unattractive. | We are becoming an obese nation!


Column 5: BMI may be flawed, but we have to do something. | Its not hate if you really are unhealthy and disgusting. | Your fat activism is killing people! | Since when is laziness like gender or race? | You can’t argue with facts.]

A Cure for All

This afternoon, Susan B. Komen for the Cure, our nation's most prominent charity in the fight against breast cancer, made the shocking and appalling decision to pull all of its grants for breast cancer screening from Planned Parenthood. The rational is a sham investigation by House Republicans who have made a political agenda out of withholding all financial support from Planned Parenthood's women's health programs because the organization separately provides access to abortion services. This excuse is a barely disguised fraud intending to suggest Komen for the Cure is not taking sides, while they are actually doing exactly what one side wants. It is a craven and heartless deception which has not gone unnoticed by the thousands who have protested on Twitter an inexplicable decision that will put lives at risk.

I stand with these protesters in disgust with an organization that has opted to play politics with cancer prevention. There are many who disagree with some of what Planned Parenthood does, as is their right. There are plenty who disagree with some of the activities of some of the religious organizations that Komen for the Cure also supports. For decades, we have found a way to come together and work towards a common goal of providing better access to cancer screen, care, and research. Today, Komen for the Cure has taken a despicable stand against common cause and have instead opted to endorse divisive politics over people's health.

Most of this country rejects this kind of alienating action. Most of this country believes that there are things we can all work together on. Fighting breast cancer is a noble goal, something that can unite us all in fighting for a better world. We must all stand against those who think we should only fight cancer so long as it is politically convenient. That we must only fight cancer in the way one political agenda approves of. That we all must live under the limitations of a few. We all stand together for a cure and we stand against those who would limit the cure based on political agendas.

Komen for the Cure is acting because of the voices of the few have been weighted above the rest of us. Komen caved because some people promised to withdraw their support if their politics didn't limit Komen. It is time for the few to stop dictating terms to the many.  It is time that corporations and foundations think twice before consenting to the limitations the few wish to impose on them. It is time that the rest of us be heard and for the charade of "not taking sides" while doing the bidding of one side be challenged.

We must call upon the corporate sponsors and partners of Komen for the Cure to redirect their much appreciated support to groups who do not put politics over fighting cancer. Groups who are fighting for a cure for all. Continuing to support Komen for the Cure now means supporting politics over cancer screening. It means supporting some, not all. If an organization will support such divisive politics on such a grave issue, they will not enjoy my support and I will make my voice heard. My voice will not be alone.

I am the 95% of dieters who regain the weight.

I am the 95% of dieters who regain the weight.

I didn't try to be part of the 95%. When I gained weight in college, I was struggling with accepting my changing body but also knew that dieting wasn't an answer. But then one summer I got very ill with a drug-resistant Strep infection and was basically on an extreme diet for 4-6 weeks when I could barely keep down food. After putting on about 50 lbs over a year, I lost it all in a month. When I recovered, though, the weight came right back on and then some. My weight stabilized after about a year and remained fairly stable for the next decade with a natural fluctuation of about 15 lbs up and down.

There is an old saying in Fat Acceptance that losing weight is as easy as holding your breath. Keeping it off is as easy as continuing to hold your breath. Dieting has breed a myth of its success off the fact that its not hard to induce weight loss. This period of "success" is what convinces dieters that its their fault when the diet fails. The truth is that the diet failed and was always going to fail. When I did might sound extreme, but its actually tame compared to some commercial diet plans. Even the most pseudo-reasonable "lifestyle change" relies on a fundamentally unsustainable formula. Sooner or later, we need to breathe. The diet industry, though, thrives on sustainability. Every time a diet fails, that's just a new customer. More billions to make off of peddling fat stigmatization.


I am the 95%. I did not fail. A culture of fat shame and fat hate has failed me.

There is a reason my picture is at the top of the page

Wow. You losers really love taking your marching orders from an obsessive dweeb you probably would have beat up in middle school. Not because you were tough, of course, but because he was weird and defenseless and made for easy prey. Its ironic that he now is both desperate for your approval and simultaneously directing you to swarm at his command. I mean, really fucking pathetic, but ironic, too.

Have fun being sad, worthless people who disappoint everyone around them!
So, someone on reddit linked to my post about White Knights today and my traffic shot up. I'm always amused by this in Blogger stats. They have a little chart of my blog traffic that defaults to the current week and usually there are normal little ups and downs but sometimes something throws off the curve and I get a straight line hugging the bottom of the chart and then a line going straight up to the top. This happens most reliably when I get linked on reddit or when I get linked from Shakesville.

Anyhow, someone made a sad little quip about supposed "white knights" and someone responded to them by linking to my deconstruction of that line of attack. It will not surprise you to learn that the response was a whole lot of guys dismissing me as a white knight and generally belittling me in a general.

Quite a few took the time to mock me for being fat. They saw my photo in my blog header and decided they could just stop right there. Clearly someone so fat wasn't worth listening to. It was a potent reminder of how much risk fat people face when they are publicly fat. Of how much entitlement people feel to insult and demean us on sight. Which, as it happens, is precisely why my photo is up there.

I put my photo on the top of my blog specifically to say "fuck you" to each and every person who thinks I don't matter because I'm fat. I put it up there knowing it would incite hatred and wanting that reaction. I don't want to comfort these assholes by hiding. I don't want to feel like I'm not putting myself out there to stand behind what I believe in. Mind you, I don't think this is something fat people are obligated to do. The risks are real, after all, and I can't ask anyone else to take on those risks. I can ask myself, though. I can decide for myself that I can take the abuse. When I was considering it, I was thinking about all the other fat bloggers who I knew what they looked like. It might not be because their photo was on every page of their blog, but they are putting themselves out there. I found that really inspiring and when I took some great shots of myself in Santa Monica last year, I decided to just go with it.

I'm not going to lie, there are moments where the insults hurt. Where the risks are realized and they sting, but they are getting less and less. Today, reading the insults, I mostly just laughed. Really? That photo up there is so outrageously ugly that you can dismiss everything I have to say? Bullshit. I look great in that picture. I love that picture. Not every fat person can get to the point where the really love how they look, even for just a moment in one photo. I am fortunate to have gotten to that point and its something that I can come back to in the times when I'm struggling. Is that vanity? Maybe. Maybe some vanity is a good thing for fat people to have. Given the way we are told to feel about ourselves, I don't really think there is any danger in going too far in the other way. That scale is never going to get imbalanced that way so we should have no shame of whatever bit of vanity we may get.

I put my photo in my header because I think I look awesome and I want the people who hate me to see it and know just how awesome I am. I want them to look at that picture and then tell me I'm ugly so I can know that they don't know what they are talking about. Never am I more confident than when responding to someone trying to strip me of my confidence. For me, the vulnerability of being fat and visible is ultimately a source of strength.

Like I said, I don't think this needs to be everyone's choice. Even those who shy away from linking their photos to their fat politics are still living their lives visibly fat. Even those who still hate their bodies are publicly fat and that should inspire us all. There is tremendous power in being seen. That is why people want to drag us down. They want to take that power away from us, but they never can. Our bodies are powerful and we can be inspired by this power. Not to put our photos on the internet, but to do anything in our lives. Being seen while fat is a real power we all have. They will never take that from us.

A Message to My Fellow Fat Admirers

Dudes!

What up?

So, I've noticed some of my fellow male fat admirers throwing tantrums when women object to be sexualized without consent. These dudes whine about how the women are telling them aren't allowed to find fat bodies attractive.

Cut that shit out. Like now.

No one is out to confiscate your boners. Sexual attraction to fat bodies is totally awesome. There may be people out there who want to shame you for your sexuality, but its not these women. So, by all means, holster your outrage and listen up.

The issue these women are complaining about isn't sexual attraction. They are asking to be treated with respect and dignity. Try not to be shocked at this stunning request. You still get that be sexually attracted to fat women. Just, maybe respect them.

And actually, strike that maybe.

Don't act all mystified at this concept. Its possible to interact with people you feel a sexual attraction towards without sexualizing them. Sexual attraction doesn't mandate objectification. That's just you being an asshole. Trust me, I've been attracted to fat women as long as I can remember. I'm still able to appreciate context and react accordingly. Its NOT. FUCKING. HARD. I'm sick and tired of men acting like this is impossible and that people are trying to police their arousal. Are these women saying its wrong to have sexual desire for fat bodies? NO.  Its not about your sexuality. Its about THEIR sexuality. They may well be very happy to experience a fat admirer's sexual desire, but on their terms and with their consent. This isn't outrageous or obnoxious. Its their right.

I get that no one has ever told you that you should respect fat women, but you should. I get that men are often taught by our culture to sexualize and objectify women constantly, but that doesn't make it okay and it certainly doesn't make you the victim when people tell you to stop. Our culture systematically attempts to strip women of their sexual agency and men have a responsibility to do their part to stop that. Which mans starting with not doing yourself and continues with telling other men to stop doing it.

This is especially important for fat women who already live in a culture that conspires to desexualize them. They often find themselves in scenarios where they are told to choose between never being desired sexually or always being objectified sexually. That's fucked up and wrong. You should be able to know that by just basic empathy, but I'd submit that as fat admirers its in our interest to combat thin privilege and male privilege. Not just because standing with our current or prospective romantic and sexual partners on issues of basic human dignity is the right thing to do (though that really should be enough), but its in our self-interest, too. Those restricted options women face impact us, too. We are being taught that our sexuality is wrong and that if we act upon it that we are deviants. We are told we don't deserve to open, loving relationships with partners we are sexually attracted to. We are told we shouldn't date them because they are "unhealthy". We are told there must be some defect that causes our sexuality. We are being denied the opportunity to embrace our sexuality in the ways men with conventional attractions take for granted. The women who complain about objectification of fat women aren't trying to take away our sexuality, they are trying to fight for it! We should stand with them and resist those who tell us to sexualize and objectify fat women because they don't deserve better and we don't deserve better.

I know there must be a lot of questions circling your head right now. Like, "but, Brian, how will I masterbate?" First off, find someone with a hand to spare and ask them smack you in the back of the head. What did I tell you about no one confiscating your boners? I'm telling you to recognize context as an element of personal expression. Fat people have a lot of reasons to display their body that have nothing to do with your personal gratification and that's what you need to respect. Maybe its body-positive photography on Tumblr. Maybe its burlesque dance. Maybe its just going to the beach in a bikini. These things aren't done to get you off, and that's okay. You can appreciate what they are doing for what it is. You can and should support fat women being affirmational about their bodies without expecting that is being done for your limited benefit. Its okay to just say "that's beautiful". It doesn't have to be about what's going on in your pants.

And, in case you hadn't noticed (and of course you have), there are fat women who want to express their sexuality in a way which DOES consent to your sexual gratification. You are lucky in that if you want to consume pornography that you have a wealth of options that are produced and controlled by the women appearing in it. These women have a made a choice for their own sexual expression and agency. Women of a myriad of shapes, sizes, colors, ages, and even gender identity. So fucking spare me the complaints when women who don't consent take issue with being objectified. The problem is respecting their sexual agency. Objectification means you don't. Indeed, you probably specifically seek out women are not trying to express their own sexuality. Don't be that guy. Be better.

Maggie does a Podcast!

Okay, so maybe not Maggie and more me. I was honored to be invited to join the Friend of Marilyn radio show and podcast from Access Manawatu, but Maggie was the topic of discussion. Check out the October 12 episode on iTunes or RSS as I talk with host Cat Pause about the Maggie book and my appropriation of Maggie for body positive messages. I'm surprisingly happy with the discussion considering how self-critical I can be about these things. Download and listen now!

Also, check out Maggie's recent adventures from my Tumblr:

“Maggie Explores the Galaxy”

“Maggie Reclaims the Word Fat”

“Maggie rejects Fatphobic Fashion Dictates”

“Maggie Makes a Yay Scale”

“Maggie Goes to the Beach”

“Maggie Takes Up Hiking”

The right way to fat shame our children

Of course, there isn't a right way to fat shame our children, but that won't stop folks from trying. "Maggie Goes on a Diet" was clearly the wrong way, buts its not like people want fat kids to feel okay in their bodies. The solution? Why, semantics, of course!

You saw this dynamic a lot in the hand-wringing over "Maggie". People thought it was really important to do something about all this fat kids, but Maggie's attempt just seemed mean. Surely they could have all the shame without the guilt? Well, if there is one thing the diet industry specializes in, its guilt-free through cheap pretense. The problem with Maggie isn't its content or intent. It was the word "diet". Just take that out and everything will be okay.

Well, fat activists aren't likely to agree, but unfortunately lots of people are. The semantics around "diet" are something a bedrock in the weight loss industry. While Maggie's author clearly didn't get the script, another new book for kids gets the pretense right. Former New York City mayor Ed Koch has also written a children's book about how awful it is to be a fat child and how fat kids should really do something about that. Unlike "Maggie", Koch's book, "Eddie Shapes Up," might end up in a lot of homes and classrooms. While the celebrity author helps a lot, it also keeps to the agreed upon script.

According to reviews, the book gives lip service to ideas of there being "all kinds of bodies" and makes sure not to use the "d" word. Diet has a bad reputation, you see. Why? Well, because diets fail. Like, virtually all of the time. That's created quite a marketing problem for the diet industry. They solved it through a masterful bit of unified denial. Diets are what everyone else is selling you. Diets are what everyone else is buying. Diets are everything you did before now. Diets are never what you are doing now, because we all know that diets don't work. So Eddie doesn't go on a diet. He "shapes up" and "gets healthy".

This semantic game is played a lot. It sort of acts like a dog whistle to allow fat shaming while letting everyone feel less guilty about it. Inevitably, it gets defended with lines like "how can anyone disagree with this". Indeed, the plans often offered in these scenarios could be fairly innocuous and fat neutral. The problem is, these scenarios aren't fat neutral and that is the problem. Their proposals are secondary to their purpose. So long as the purpose is to "fight" to existence of fat children (or combat, wage war, or whatever other violent vocabulary is favored), they are still working to shame fat children. No matter what semantics they use to advance their war, that statement of purpose is what is creating the problem.

"Eddie Shapes Up" will no doubt curry favor with a lot of people who don't want to think they are shaming fat children, but still feel a deep need to wring their hands over fat kids. It'll be compared quite positively in relation to Maggie. Don't believe this hype. There is no right way to fat shame children. We don't need to teach fat shame to teach healthy eating and activity. Indeed, you can't. Because actually healthy eating and activity is not some magic that makes fat people into not fat people. It can improve health for those who desire that, but its not likely to make you weigh less. So, what do you get when you teach people those things as a means to weighing less in response to an "epidemic" of fat children? You teach them that their bodies are wrong that healthy eating and activity don't work to fix it. Every time someone self-righteously demands to know how I can be against this sort of thing, I have to think, "How can I not be against it?"

We need to move past fat shaming and fat stigmatizing if we actually care about the health and well-being of our children, both fat and thin. All kids should learn that all bodies are okay. None of the exceptions and qualifications so often tacked on. No matter the content of one's proposals, so long as its being taught under the banner of fighting childhood "obesity", then its just a pretense.

ALL fat bodies are made into a public concern

Like most fat people, Chris Christie is apologetic for his body. Most fat people have internalized the fat shaming that gets directed at them every day of their lives. Most never even think to question it. Of course they shouldn't be fat. Its not a topic they ever give any consideration. Indeed, they often have more hostility towards fat activists because of this. Its important to remember, though, that internalizing fat shame doesn't immunize you from it.

There has been lot of concern trolling of Chris Christie lately along those very lines. People are gravely concerned about the prospects of him running for President. Not for his politics, mind you, but for his health. He obviously is much too unhealthy to consider higher office. This concern trolling has now reached the editorial pages of the Washington Post thanks to a supremely self-righteous bit of concern trolling from Eugene Robinson. He acknowledges that Christie feels ashamed of his size, but this merely justifies his paternalistic lecture about how Christie needs to lose weight if he plans to run for President. It is a shameful hit-piece and has no place in our political discussion. It builds on all sorts of tired and clichéd attacks on fat people.

Perhaps the most fundamental being the notion that this needs to be said. It is always preposterous when you see people so proud of themselves for stepping up and telling a fat person to stop being so fat. Already, we're seeing other pundits contribute to this by congratulating Robinson for saying the things that needed to be said. Why does everyone person who tries to put fatties in their place think they are the first person to do so? Heck, Robinson even quotes Christie saying he knows all of this. Christie AGREES, but that's still not enough to prevent the smug satisfaction over "telling it like it is".

Robinson also asserts that Christie is obviously too unhealthy to run for President. His proof? Well, just look at him being all fat and stuff. It takes him a while to offer anything more than his obvious fatness to justify his obvious lack of health, and even then the evidence is weaker than he'd like us to believe. Christie has had problems with asthma and was hospitalized for it briefly over the summer. When this happened, Christie obviously takes responsibility for his fatness, but also noted that he's relatively healthy by objective indicators. That doesn't slow Robinson down who proceeds to threaten Christie with the usual litany of fat diseases he's obviously going to fat himself with any day now.

Robinson continues by trotting out some dubious statistics about how fat people are causing the national health crisis. He tries to be clear that he's not blaming Christie for the National Debt crisis, shortly after blaming all fat people for the National Debt crisis. Easier to blame us collectively than individually, but don't forget that you can't do one without the other. We can't all be responsible for something without being responsible as individuals. Fat people having higher health care costs is something oft asserted, but with little discussion of what goes into that. Reading through Robinson's evidence, at least part of the increase is just based on costs associated with trying to make fat patients into not-fat patients. We'll never know much of the increase is due to fat people not receiving adequate preventive care due to stigmas involving seeking medical treatment while fat nor how much may be attributable to the life-time of weight cycling seen in virtually all fat patients who have made countless attempts to lose weight.

Robinson concludes by giving false lip-service to the notion that Christie isn't at fault for his weight. Sadly, this kind of tone is used by a lot of liberals eager to shame fat people collectively but rightfully squeamish about doing it individually. They like to talk about how they understand genetic factors, or they may try to blame evil corporations. Anything to comfort themselves with the notion that they aren't bullying fat people even while they are talking about how we need to eliminate fat people. Its an extremely hollow bit of pandering that I'm getting quite sick of. You can't write a whole column about how Christie needs to stop being so fat already and just assert that you aren't blaming him so you are somehow so terribly mature. Its a charade and one fat people aren't falling for. When you fixated on shaming and stigmatizing fatness, you are shaming and stigmatizing fat people. I don't care if you want to think you're better than that, but you aren't. You aren't saying anything different than all of the other people who tell us every day that our bodies are unacceptable. Your message is substantively NO different, no matter how you want to excuse it to yourselves.

Again, though, the tragedy of all of this is like with most fat shaming, its directed at someone who agrees with it. Maybe Christie will object to the the tone or venue, but he's repeatedly endorsed the substance. Yet people will still make a point to shame him over and over and over again. Christie will win himself no reprieve for his own acceptance of shame for his weight. It simply doesn't matter to the people doing the shaming. To them, if he didn't want to be shamed for his body, he should just stop being so fat at them.

What bothers me the most with Robinson's article, though, is his self-justification where he explains why this is his business. Christie's weight isn't a private matter, you see, because he has chosen to enter the public arena. Much like the "hasn't anyone told you to stop being fat" sentiment, this is the sort of wildly divorced from reality assertion that any fat person should just laugh at it. Really, his body is a public concern just because he's a public figure? Funny, because to most fat people, it seems like people are always making our bodies their business. No special justification needed, this is just another day in the life for a fat person. Our bodies are always treated like public property and we are subjected to repeated shaming and belittling for our transgressive size. Robinson may want to act like he's just making a special allowance for himself, but this is no special risk Christie faces for being in the public eye. Going out in public while fat is enough to make it a public issue for most people. What is happening to Christie is happening to fat people every day. Don't think for a second that he's some kind of special victim for being a fat politician, nor that he faces some sort of special responsibility for it, either. This is positively mundane.

I'm no fan of Christie politically. I think he'd make an awful President. There are lots of ways to make that case without concern trolling him for being fat. That is unequivocally wrong and I demand better. There is nothing mature about fixating on his weight instead of his policies. Christie gives people ample reason to oppose him based on his ideology. That has far more to do with how he'll govern than his pants size.