Showing posts with label fat hatred kills. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fat hatred kills. Show all posts

We Resist: Day 643

a black bar with the word RESIST in white text

One of the difficulties in resisting the Trump administration, the Republican Congressional majority, and Republican state legislatures (plus the occasional non-Republican who obliges us to resist their nonsense, too, like we don't have enough to worry about) is keeping on top of the sheer number of horrors, indignities, and normalization of the aggressively abnormal that they unleash every single day.

So here is a daily thread for all of us to share all the things that are going on, thus crowdsourcing a daily compendium of the onslaught of conservative erosion of our rights and our very democracy.

Stay engaged. Stay vigilant. Resist.

* * *

Earlier today by me: I Remain Very Worried About the Midterms and More "Suspicious Packages" Sent to Clintons, Obamas, and Possibly Others.

The political press is, quite rightly, consumed by the still-unfolding story about explosive devices being sent in attempted assassinations to multiple prominent Democrats. Regrettably, they are not talking about this story in partisan terms, despite the fact that it's clearly a partisan attack, nor as attempted assassinations, despite the fact that they are, nor as the responsibility of Donald Trump, despite the fact that the targets so far are like his own personal hit-list.

Here are some other things in the news today...

In good news, Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams handed Brian Kemp his ass in their debate last night! Jennifer Brett at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution: Stacey Abrams, Brian Kemp Clash in First Debate. "Abrams hit Kemp repeatedly over voting, an issue that's attracted national attention. 'The right to vote is a right. My father was arrested helping people to register,' she said."

In less good news from other states...

[Content Note: Terrorism] Dana Branham at the Dallas News: Campaign Signs for Beto O'Rourke and Colin Allred Set Ablaze. "Five yard signs for Democratic candidates were set on fire in a Richardson neighborhood Monday night, officials said. Police received three calls in a 30-minute span — one at 11 p.m., another at 11:06, and the third at 11:28 — reporting that yard signs for Beto O'Rourke and Colin Allred had been lit on fire in the Arapaho Heights neighborhood west of Heights Park, Sgt. Kevin Perlich said."

[CN: Homophobia] Andy Towle at Towleroad: Governor Bruce Rauner Pronounces Illinois F***ed in Ad Mocking Gay Marriage. "A new ad from Illinois' Republican Governor Bruce Rauner depicts his challenger J.B. Pritzker getting married to House Speaker Mike Madigan. 'Repeat after me: I Mike Madigan, take you, JB Pritzker, as my unlawful partner in destruction,' starts the ad, which predicts corruption and higher taxes for the state should Pritzker win. 'By the power vested in me I now pronounce Illinois f**ked,' says the ad's minister."

Kyla Mandel at ThinkProgress: Early Voter Turnout Is Down in Some North Carolina Counties Hit by Florence. "Among the 28 counties receiving federal assistance for Hurricane Florence recovery, New Hanover has thus far seen the biggest increase in early voting, with more than double the number of ballots cast compared to the 2014 midterm elections. But this isn't the case for other counties still struggling to recover from the hurricane. 'Voting is not a premier issue right now with them,' Courtney Patterson, a local organizer with the North Carolina Hurricane Relief Effort and Community Rapid Response Network, told ThinkProgress. 'Survival is…everything.'"

* * *

Kathleen McLaughlin at the Guardian: I Paid $7,348 for Healthcare Last Week — So Trump's Law Changes Are Personal. "While the illness itself dictates some of the terms of my life, the looming threat of losing insurance has always been for me the bigger obstacle. Throughout my 30s, every major decision — whether to change jobs, whether to move, where to live — revolved around not losing health insurance. Losing my insurance, even in the years when the disease goes into remission, would mean eventual ruin for my health and finances. I am a living, breathing, expensive pre-existing condition, the one who jacks up other people's insurance rates, the one who makes it difficult for insurance companies to profit on healthcare. Yet profit they do."

Speaking of preexisting conditions, this was part of a must-read Twitter thread by former head of Medicare/aid Andy Slavitt:


In case you can't see the list embedded in the tweet, here are just some of the many preexisting conditions listed that may not be covered under the new healthcare bill: AIDS, Alzheimer's, anxiety, asthma, cancer, cerebral palsy, cirrhosis, congestive heart failure, cystic fibrosis, depression, diabetes, menstrual irregularities, multiple sclerosis, obesity, organ transplants, Parkinson's, pregnancy, sleep apnea, transsexualism, and tuberculosis.

[CN: Fat hatred] By way of reminder, in 2013, the American Medical Association made the reprehensible decision to declare obesity a disease. As has been extensively- and long-documented by fat activists, myself included, accessing healthcare as a fat person is a challenge, because it's often impossible to find healthcare providers who will see you as a complete human being whose health is more complicated than "fat." Far too many healthcare providers are inclined to attribute any and every healthcare concern to fatness, even at the expense of our very lives, telling us to "lose weight" to fix problems like, for instance, shortness of breath which is actually being caused by blood clots in the lungs or cancer.

In May of 2017, during a previous round of GOP attacks on healthcare access, I noted that reinstating insurers' ability to deny care on the basis of preexisting conditions takes on a whole new urgency following the AMA classification of obesity as a disease, since anything attributed to fat can subsequently be denied.

If the GOP goes through with this, it will also be a death sentence for many fat people who would otherwise be healthy with basic healthcare.

* * *

[CN: Fascism] Kelly Weill and Spencer Ackerman at the Daily Beast: Army Parrots Racist Right's Talking Points on Antifa. "Internal U.S. Army documents in 2017 on anti-fascists (antifa) parroted a fascist talking point about the far-right's supposedly non-racist creds, according to newly released material reviewed by The Daily Beast. ...'With the newly released documents, we again find a U.S. agency targeting anti-fascists as security threats while downplaying the menace posed by white nationalists,' said Ryan Shapiro, Property of the People's executive director."

[CN: White supremacy] Lisa Rein at the Washington Post: 'I Thought It Was Very Nice': Veterans Affairs Official Showcased Portrait of KKK's First Grand Wizard. "David J. Thomas Sr. is deputy executive director of VA's Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization, which certifies veteran-owned businesses seeking government contracts. His senior staff is mostly African American. Thomas said he took down the painting Monday after a Washington Post reporter explained that its subject, Nathan Bedford Forrest, was a Confederate general and slave trader who became the KKK's first figure­head in 1868. He said he was unaware of Forrest's affiliation with the hate group." The fuck he was.

Jordan Weissmann at Slate: The Actual Tax Bill Didn't Do Much for the Middle Class So Trump Wants Congress to Vote on a Make-Believe One.
Donald Trump has spent the last few days telling anyone who will listen that Republicans are about to introduce a brand new tax cut for middle class families.

...As far as anybody can tell, Trump appears to have made all of this up from scratch. White House staffers are baffled. There is no tax plan. They don't even seem to know where Trump got the idea. ...And the Washington Post reports that the White House may ask congressional Republicans to take a symbolic vote on Trump's idea.
Advisers have discussed the idea of having Congress vote on a symbolic "resolution" for a future 10 percent tax cut for the middle class, people familiar with discussions said, part of their scramble to meet Trump's demand for rapid action to blunt Democrats' economic messaging ahead of the midterm elections.

The resolution would not be binding but would attempt to send a signal to the public that Republicans are focused on helping middle-class families.
...I want to set down a prediction: If Congress does take this vote, Trump will claim they actually passed a tax cut. Because we are that far through the looking glass.
[CN: Nativism] Aaron Rupar at ThinkProgress: Trump Tries to Own Libs by Tweeting Obama Video; Ends up Accidentally Owning Himself. "While Trump seems to think Obama's video highlights how Democrats have become supportive of 'open borders' over the last 13 years, what it really does is illustrate the dishonesty of his own messaging on immigration."

What have you been reading that we need to resist today?

Open Wide...

The Wednesday Blogaround

This blogaround brought to you by curtains.

Recommended Reading:

Ali Thompson: [Content Note: Fat hatred; medical harm; death] The Recent History of Fat Stigma

Kayla Renee Parker: [CN: Racism; harassment] Beware of Wolves in Sheep's Clothing: The Tale of a Progressive Professor Who Forgot to Hide Her Racism and Got Her Ass Fired

Anne Helen Petersen: [CN: Violence; sexual assault; misogyny; ageism] Women Who Believe Women

Monica Roberts: [CN: Racism; misogyny; gender policing] Race and Gender Discrimination Sidelines Nebraska Soccer Player and Her Team

Perri Konecky: Orly's New Collection Finally Makes It Possible for Muslims to Wear Nail Polish

Vivian Kane: [CN: Moving GIF at link] Supergirl Stuntwoman Jessie Graff Made History (Again) and We're Not Sure Our Hearts Can Take It

Bryan Menegus: Watching Apple's New Shark Tank-Inspired TV Series Is Like Slowly Dying

Leave your links and recommendations in comments. Self-promotion welcome and encouraged!

Open Wide...

Dear Doctor: It's Not Me. It's You.

[Content Note: Diet talk, fat hatred, body shame, weight loss, weight gain, disordered eating, fat-related medical malpractice.]

Dear Doctor:

Breaking up is always hard to do. I can't believe it's come to that point. You treated me with such compassion and understanding when my mother died, talking me through the physical effects of grief, and helping me find the right antidepressant medicines for the short term and the longer term. For that I will always be grateful. And yeah, from the beginning, you gave me little suggestions like “eat a weight loss diet” and “how about losing a few pounds,” but you didn’t seem to push it. After all, I was physically active, and jogging on a regular basis, and my numbers (save for my underactive thyroid) looked pretty good.

True, you were ridiculously excited if I came in and my weight was 3 pounds lower than the last time. I didn’t have the heart to tell you that it was the difference between weighing me after my period vs. before. But I never thought it would go so wrong.

I think it goes back to that time I twisted my ankle rather badly. I had to give up running, on a temporary basis at least. Let me take responsibility for my actions: I did a poor job at finding replacement exercise. I felt pretty bad about putting on a swimsuit, for one thing. The long and the short of it is, I didn’t exercise, and my numbers didn’t look so great any more. I had new stress on my life, taking on the directorship of a program at my university. You pushed the diet talk more aggressively. Finally, after months of it, and because I felt I had to be the “good fatty” for you, I agreed to try one of the diet pills you wanted to prescribe.

I’ll never forget how your face lit up, how I so clearly crossed from Bad Fatty to Good Fatty in your eyes. You got misty-eyed and said you were glad I was doing this for myself. I replied something like “Well, no, I’m trying this because of your advice on my health.” But I don’t think you heard me, not really. You definitely did not hear me when I disclosed my history of disordered eating, because the drug you put me on, Contrave (which is a combination of the antidepressant wellbutrin and the anti-addiction drug naltrexone) is specifically not recommended for those with a history of disordered eating. But more on that later.

I actually liked being on Contrave—not for weight loss but for its mental effects. The combination left me more focused than wellbutrin alone, less likely to “dither,” as my mother would have said. It’s too bad it’s a “weight loss drug,” because I bet it could be used for its psychological effects alone, and be very helpful for some people. I felt confident enough put on a bathing suit for the first time in 10 years. I rediscovered swimming, which although I’m not so great at, I do enjoy.

I also tried jogging again, building up from walking, but I discovered something new: a sharp pain and bulging muscle in my right leg after running for about 10 minutes. I went back to you and asked about it, confident that since you are a runner you’d give good advice. You said it was “probably an injury” and recommended I slow down my raining and walk/run on even ground always. You also suggested switching to pool running for some workouts, and I did. And that was okay; pool jogging is fun! I tried this for a few months, then tried regular jogging programs again. Again, I was sidelined by pain in the same area and the same horribly bulging leg muscle.

When I tried to talk to you about it, you said it was probably an old injury. I asked about sports medicine or physical therapy. You shrugged, said it would probably not help, and said I could bicycle or do aerobics instead. Two activities I really don’t enjoy. You also decided that the 6 pounds I had lost on Contrave weren’t enough, and switched me to phentermine. Again, I mentioned having a history of disordered eating. I asked about going off of any antidepressant. You said, “oh, it has a stimulating effect. You won’t need an antidepressant.”

Now, I didn’t have a pharmacological dictionary at that moment, but as soon as I looked up phentermine, I learned that it’s basically speed. My blood pressure had been high, and yet you prescribed this. I had a history of disordered eating, and you prescribed a drug definitely not for those with this problem. Why?

Still, I tried to follow your advice. And you know what? I was a nervous wreck. Sure, I didn’t feel like eating much. But I was jumpy, couldn’t sleep, and my stress levels went through the roof. What the hell was I doing on this drug?

I quit the drug. I tried to walk a few times a week, but my interest in exercise was nil. I was depressed. I felt terrible about myself. And I dreaded going to see you because I knew I’d have to deal with diet talk.

Yes, that’s right. Your fat hatred made me not want to see you, to dread seeing you. Even for problems that had nothing to do with weight, because I knew weight loss would come up.

I finally came in for a physical. I was 10 pounds heavier than when we started. My test results were terrible. There were red flags everywhere. And your answer?

You suggested bariatric surgery.

Now, I am not a medical doctor, but I looked up bariatric surgery on my phone, in your office, and asked if it was really for me. I pointed out that I wasn’t in the weight range for which it’s really recommended. I asked about the considerable risks. You said that I could try something else for a while—maybe eliminate all fat from my diet and see how that worked. I asked about going back on an antidepressant. You never responded to that question.

I’ll never forget that day. Because I also brought up pain while urinating and my suspicion of having a bladder infection. You looked at my test results and confirmed that there were white blood cells in my urine, but…it was probably just from having eaten a fatty meal.

To be clear: I asked you about a bladder infection and you reiterated that I should try a non-fat diet.

That’s when I left your office for the last time.

An urgent care doc confirmed the bladder infection and after antibiotics I felt much better.

I was also doing some thinking.

I hated to leave you. Once upon a time you had been a caring doctor who seemed to listen. But once I stepped on your weight loss train, nothing could make you get off from that track. You didn’t listen. At all.Again, you prescribed a non-fat diet for a bladder infection. You had become one of those doctors that fat people tell horror stories about.

I was trapped in one of those doctor-patient relationships that ultimately kills fat people. It took me a while to realize this, as depressed and unhappy as I was, but I finally recognized our relationship for what it was: deadly.

It was time to go.

I know it’s probably tacky to talk about my new doctor here. (And I recognize how privileged I am to be in a position to be able to GET a new doctor.) After asking friends for recommendations of physicians who weren’t fat-phobic, I’m so far pretty happy with my new doc. He’s not a fan of diet pills, and listened carefully when I talked about a history of disordered eating (and he wrote it down, which I can’t recall you ever doing.). He listened to my discussion of stress and depression and agreed that going back on my old antidepressant would be a good idea. He listened carefully to my description of what had happened to my leg when running, asked about my flexibility, and came to a totally different conclusion: I wasn’t stretching enough. He talked about blood flow and unstretched muscles, and took the time to recommend a stretching program, as well as a local yoga class that specifically focuses on stretching and flexibility. He also looked at my shoes, talked with me about my stride, and recommended a place to get effective consultation on my running shoes. My numbers were terrible, but instead of saying I should give up fat, he suggested I try the exercise modifications, focus on stress management, and come back for a second round of tests in two months.

I’ve started the increased stretching, and man, has it made a difference. The antidepressant is helping me stay focused. I’ve gone back to the pool, am walking almost every day now, and even started a slow walk/ jog program. I got out my old weights and started a little strength training. And I feel so much better, because a key part of managing stress for me is getting lots of exercise. I don’t do it to lose weight, but to take care of myself. And for the first time in a long time, I feel like I am worth taking care of.

Here’s the thing, doc. I’m a feminist with lots of knowledge about fat hatred. I spent years overcoming my negative self image, and frankly I’m not all the way yet. And even so, you were able to pressure me into going along with your (futile and counterproductive) weight loss “program,” because I felt like it was necessary to get decent care from you. What's it like for people who aren't conversant with HAES (Health At Every Size)? By almost every measure, my health got worse: my cholesterol and other numbers, my blood pressure, my anxiety, my stress levels, and even ultimately, my weight that you care so much about. Far from getting better care from you, I couldn’t get you to see my health as anything other than completely centered on weight loss.

I know you probably won’t see this. But I’m hoping other people will. Maybe even some of those doctors who think that treating fat people this way is somehow promoting “health.” I would ask them: What would you rather have: a patient who is fat but whose stress is managed, whose blood pressure is good, whose lab results are in the desired range… or, a patient who loses some weight but who reports worsening stress levels and whose blood pressure goes up? When a fat patient discloses a history of disordered eating, do you assume that means they overeat? Or do you understand that fat people could have been anorexic and/or bulimic? When they report a sports injury, do you take it as seriously as you would in a thin person? Or do you assume they probably shouldn’t be doing that activity anyway, because they’re fat?

Anyway, Doc, I’m sorry it had to end this way, because I think you actually do care about your patients. I’ll always be grateful for the care you gave when my mother died. But I just couldn’t go on like this.

It’s really not me. It’s you.

Sincerely,

Aphra

[ETA: Commenting note: I am not soliciting healthcare advice in this post, and would be grateful if comments did not include such. Thanks.]

Open Wide...

The Friday Blogaround

This blogaround brought to you by coffee.

Recommended Reading:

Ragen: [Content Note: Fat hatred; medical misconduct] Waqas Khan Is a Bigot Who Should Never Practice Medicine Again

Digby: [CN: Misogyny] Classified BS

Sikivu: [CN: Misogynoir; violence; death; gender policing] Driving While Black, Female, and Fearless

Parker: [CN: Homophobia; transphobia; racism; violence] The Equality Act Is an Important Step Forward in Addressing Intersectional Violence

Sameer: [CN: Carcerality] Inmate Released by Presidential Decree: 'I Am Completely Confused.'

Ria: How This Tree Growing 40 Different Fruits at Once Was Made

Kyler: Janet Jackson's Mesmerizing Music Video for "No Sleeep" Is Here

Leave your links and recommendations in comments. Self-promotion welcome and encouraged!

Open Wide...

In the News

Here is some stuff in the news today...

[Content Note: Domestic violence] Dallas Cowboys defensive end Greg Hardy has been suspended for 10 games following an investigation after Hardy's domestic violence case was dismissed in North Carolina state court. I like (ahem) how he was suspended because his "conduct [was] detrimental to the league." THE LEAGUE. "Detrimental to the league" essentially translates to: He wasn't suspended for committing domestic violence, but because it made the papers.

[CN: Police brutality; stalking; racism] The Baltimore police officer who chased Freddie Gray, who later died in police custody, has a history of violence and intimidation. "Lieutenant Brian Rice was ordered to stay away from the man [who sought a restraining order] after a series of alleged confrontations, including one armed standoff that led to a 911 call and officers from two police departments spending 90 minutes defusing the situation, according to court filings. 'I am seeking protection immediately,' the man wrote to a court in Carroll County, Maryland, in January 2013. He alleged Rice's behaviour had caused him 'to have constant fear for my personal safety' and a 'fear of imminent harm or death from Brian Rice.'" Whyyyyyy was this asshole still on the job?! (That question is, of course, rhetorical.)

[CN: Police brutality; racism] Michael Brown's family is suing the city of Ferguson: "The family of Michael Brown plans to file a civil lawsuit against the city of Ferguson, Mo., for his death last summer. Members of Brown's family will announce the filing of a wrongful death lawsuit on Thursday at the St. Louis County courthouse, attorneys for the Brown family said Wednesday night." There will be people who make all kinds of gross accusations against this family about attention- and money-seeking, without a single shred of regard that they were denied accountability by the criminal courts.

Clinton charities will have to refile tax returns: "Hillary Clinton's family's charities are refiling at least five annual tax returns after a Reuters review found errors in how they reported donations from governments, and said they may audit other Clinton Foundation returns in case of other errors. ...The charities' errors generally take the form of under-reporting or over-reporting, by millions of dollars, donations from foreign governments, or in other instances omitting to break out government donations entirely when reporting revenue, the charities confirmed to Reuters. ...The unsettled numbers on the tax returns are not evidence of wrongdoing but tend to undermine the 990s role as a form of public accountability, experts in charity law and transparency advocates interview told Reuters."

A vaccination bill in California may, if passed, influence vaccination laws across the nation: "Vaccine laws across the nation may be toughened, observers say, if California passes a fervently debated bill that would strip parents' rights to exempt kids from immunizations based on personal beliefs. A potential end to California's opt-out provision gained ground Wednesday when the state senate's education committee voted 7-2 to require full vaccinations for almost all public school students. ...'Other states will be looking carefully at the California experience if this goes through,' said Dr. Eric Kodish, director of the Cleveland Clinic's Center for Ethics, Humanities and Spiritual Care. 'If they become a place where, as I would predict, fewer children get sick and die, it's something other states would want to look at.'"

[CN: Class warfare; environmental contamination] Every person in this country should have the right to safe drinking water: "Sherry Gobble has been wary of drinking the tap water in her neighborhood for more than a year. 'I feel like I've become very suspicious of all water,' she told ThinkProgress in November. 'When I go to a friend's house, and they offer coffee or tea, I don't drink it because I don't know where it came from.' On Monday, her fears were confirmed. Nineteen households and a church in her community of Dukeville, North Carolina were sent letters by the state Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) warning them not to drink or cook with well water due to elevated levels of toxic heavy metals, the Associated Press reported. Like Gobble's home, each is located within a quarter mile of a coal ash pond owned by Duke Energy."

[CN: Fat hatred; death] Fat hatred kills: "A 21-year-old woman died recently after she ingested diet pills made with an 'extremely dangerous' industrial chemical. On April 12, Eloise Aimee Parry of Shrewsbury, England, took eight diet pills containing dinitrophenol or DNP, according to a statement from her mom, Fiona Parry, released Monday by the West Mercia Police. The pills were purchased online. 'She had taken even more of these 'slimming tablets' than recommended on the pack and had no idea just how dangerous they really were,' Fiona Parry said." My condolences to Eloise's family and friends.

[CN: Anti-feminism; misogyny] Soraya Chemaly with "50 Reasons Everyone Is Now an 'Offensive' Feminist," in response to an eighth-grade girl having her t-shirt reading "feminist" censored in the class photo.

Stunning: "The Hubble Space Telescope has celebrated its silver anniversary with a picture featuring a spectacular vista of young stars blazing across a dense cloud of gas and dust. The 'Westerlund 2' cluster of stars is located about 20,000 light-years away in the constellation Carina." Happy Birthday, Hubble!

Mattel has announced a new line of female action figures: "The toymaker announced today that it is partnering with DC Comics and Warner Bros. to launch a new franchise centered on teenage female superheroes. The initial lineup will include heroes such as Wonder Woman, Supergirl, and Batgirl, as well as prominent female villains, including Poison Ivy and Harley Quinn (both of Batman fame)." Also in the line-up: Bumble Bee and Katana!

And finally! This is one the cutest rescue/adoption stories ever: A kitten left in a mailbox is rescued and eventually adopted by—wait for it!—a retired mail carrier. "Dan Shaw says, 'I took one look at her and I knew right away that I wanted her.'" Blub!

Open Wide...

On Larry Wilmore's "Obesity in America" Episode

[Content Note: Fat hatred; body policing; shaming.]

Last night, The Nightly Show, Larry Wilmore's successor to The Colbert Report, which premiered a couple of weeks ago, did an episode on "Obesity in America." When it was announced, I was immediately full of the usual dread, for the usual reasons. I wasn't sure I was going to watch it, but I did. And yikes.

The good news was that Wilmore's four-person panel had two fat people on it: Comedian Lavell Crawford and fat activist Marianne Kirby (@therotund). Marianne did a great job, especially pushing back against the idea that concern trolling fat people has anything to do with our health, but Lavell was there to basically play the "I'm fat because I eat so many cookies!" role, which was disappointing.

Still, it was an improvement on most "obesity" panels, which typically include zero fat people, like the ones on Melissa Harris-Perry's show.

Wilmore promised to ask the "big questions" (see what he did there?) about "obesity in America" last night, and while he did ask his panel whether fat is a civil rights issue, and they did briefly touch on the intersectionality of fat and class, the episode was rife with problems, including a number of vicious stereotypes about fat people that largely went unchallenged—like fat is inherently unhealthy, all fat people are fat because they overeat, fat people abuse disability status because they're lazy.

And the "big question" about whether fat is a civil rights issue was never answered. In one breath, Wilmore detailed that fat people face employment discrimination, then wondered if fat is a civil rights issue.

Which is a familiar discordance to any fat activist who tries to engage progressives on the issue of fat discrimination: Many liberal-minded people are willing to concede that, sure, there's demonstrable, legal discrimination against fat people, but insistently resist seeing fat hatred as a civil rights issue.

Because we're all supposed to be able to bootstraps our way out of being fat. Lots of progressives suddenly love bootstraps when it comes to fat people.

And are suddenly very anti-choice.

All of which tends to be justified on the basis of concern for our health, which is, of course, bullshit. It's about the way we look; it's about the fact that we exist at all.

Wilmore opened the episode with these words: "Tonightly: America's obesity rate creeps up to 27.7%. On the plus side, now it's higher than our math scores. A third of Americans are obese?! Well, that's the most depressing thing I've heard since that kid told me he was dead in that Superbowl commercial."

He's depressed by the mere evidence that fat people exist. He's depressed that there are so many of us.

That is considered an okay, an uncontroversial, thing to say about fat people.

Just casual eliminationism: It's depressing that we are alive, and it would be so much less depressing if we weren't.

(Setting aside the fact that many of the people who are classified as "obese" by bullshit BMI measures would almost certainly not be viewed as "depressingly fat" by Larry Wilmore and lots of other people.)

If the fact that fat hatred kills isn't enough to convince someone that fat is a social justice issue, then maybe letting that shit sink in will be: I had to watch a person say, to laughter and applause, that it's depressing to hear that fat people exist in large numbers.

My appearance, my body, my existence is depressing.

Here's a "big question" about fat that I have for Larry Wilmore to answer: How the fuck do you think that's okay?

This is the reality that fat people face in the US: Even people ostensibly sympathetic to the discrimination we face are more inclined to voice that they are depressed about our existence than they are to voice that they're angry about the vast fat hatred that we face every day.

Even people ostensibly sympathetic to us are more likely to suggest we try to change our very bodies, even though that could mean literally killing ourselves in the process, instead of suggesting that people who despise us change their fucking minds.

It is not the responsibility of marginalized people to change themselves to accommodate bigots.

That fat people are routinely admonished to do so should be what depresses you, Larry Wilmore. It sure as shit depresses me.

Open Wide...

On the Latest in Fat Eliminationism & Healthcare

[Content Note: Fat hatred.]

In today's blogaround, I linked to a piece by Ragen Chastain about proposed medical guidelines that exhort physicians to "treat the weight first" in fat patients, i.e. literally deny fat people healthcare unless we lose weight first.

This already happens unofficially all the time: Fat patients are routinely told by many doctors that they must lose weight before they will be approved for certain surgeries, e.g. knee or hip replacements, using bullshit rationales about safety and fat surgical patients, never mind the fact that these same patients would be ushered into bariatric surgery with no questions asked.

Anyway. I've been doing some tweeting this afternoon about these guidelines, about the silence of allies, and about what caring about fat people's health really looks like.

For those who aren't on Twitter, I've Storified my tweets.

If you'd like to find more smart and decent people saying smart and decent things on this subject, you can check out my timeline. I didn't include their tweets in my Storify, because I didn't have a chance to seek their consent for inclusion.

Have at it in comments. And please remember that fat people's right to healthcare is not up for debate in this space.

Open Wide...

Fat People, Smokers Denied Routine Surgery

[Content Note: Fat hatred; "headless fatty" image at story link.]

This is utterly heinous:

Smokers and the morbidly obese in Devon (UK) will be denied routine surgery unless they quit smoking or lose weight.

Patients with a BMI of 35 or above will have to shed 5% of their weight while smokers will have to quit eight weeks before surgery.

The NHS in Devon has a £14.5m deficit and says the cuts are needed to help it meet waiting list targets.
They need to save money, so someone has to not get surgery—and it might as well be people for whom no one will be inclined to fight.

Just to underline how completely arbitrary this horseshit is, someone with a much higher BMI (which itself is a garbage measurement) than 35 could lose 5% of their weight and still have a BMI over 35.

So what's the point?

The point, of course, is setting a threshold for access to healthcare that most people won't be able to meet.

The new restriction is "only" on routine surgery and not lifesaving surgery. (So they claim.) Among those routine surgeries are "hip and knee operations for the morbidly obese." If you're thinking, gee, it might be difficult even for people who can lose weight via diet and exercise to lose weight without full use of their hips and/or knees, welcome to the world of being a fat person who can't fucking win.
In a statement the Royal College of Surgeons said it was "concerned" by the move and warned the region was merely storing up "greater pressures" for the future.

It said: "The need for an operation should always be judged by a surgeon based on their clinical assessment of the patient and the risks and benefits of the surgery - not determined by arbitrary criteria.

"Losing weight, or giving up smoking is an important consideration for patients undergoing surgery in order to improve their outcomes, but for some patients these steps may not be possible.

"A blanket ban on scheduled operations for those who cannot follow these measures is unacceptable and too rigid a measure for ensuring patients receive the best care possible."
Well, at least the Royal College of Surgeons has some fucking sense. For some patients these steps may not be possible. Imagine that! It's almost like it's a terrible fucking idea to draw arbitrary exclusion lines instead of doing your job and taking the time to work with patients on an individual basis.

Granted, arbitrary exclusion lines are so much easier.

The thing about successful surgical (and other healthcare) outcomes is that patient compliance is the most important component. It doesn't matter if someone is a thin non-smoker; if they don't follow post-surgical recommendations, don't comply with recommended physical therapy, don't take their meds, etc., they're not going to have a successful outcome.

Certain types of mental illness or neurological disorders tend to be incompatible with rigorous patient compliance. The line is not drawn there, however, even though this is ostensibly about best outcomes, because it would be an outrage for healthcare providers to suggest that someone with mental illness doesn't deserve access to routine surgery because they might not make good decisions afterwards.

(This does, by the way, happen. Individually and quietly. There are profoundly disablist policies in healthcare services, including here in the US, especially around lifesaving surgeries like transplants, used to deny people care. It just tends not to be made public so brazenly.)

This is a public policy position, and so they make the choice based on stereotypes about fat people and addicts (but only addicts to cigarettes, who are "nuisances" and not addicts)—people who are largely assumed to not give a fuck about their own health and who are widely despised with impunity.

It's an outrage to draw this line anywhere. Individual patients need individual care and individual decisions.

Fat people are being scapegoated, targeted by people who don't want to make tough decisions. So instead they make lazy ones.

And, the truth is, many of the "routine" surgeries they want to deny meaningfully affect people's ability to move and thrive. This isn't a neutral decision. It will negatively affect fat people's and smokers' health. But we're not supposed to think about that. Or care about it, because, hey, they're definitely for sure obviously already unhealthy anyway.

This could shorten people's lives. But who cares.

Fat hatred kills.

Open Wide...

Today in Fat Hatred

[Content Note: Fat hatred; injury; death; eliminationism.]

Fat crash test dummies—or the lack thereof—have been in the news lately, and here's the latest: "As drivers get fatter, so do crash dummies." Here are just two juxtaposed snippets from the piece:

A University of California-Berkeley study, published in 2013, found that obese drivers are up to 78% more likely to die in car crashes.

...However, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has no plans to incorporate the obese dummy into its testing program.

"It's not clear what would we learn that's different by using a heavy crash test dummy. When the structure (of the vehicle) holds up, that helps protect people of all shapes and sizes," IIHS spokesman Russ Rader said. "When there is structural collapse, the risk of injury is higher, but it's not clear that's different for small people as compared to heavy people. ... Obese people are at higher risk in crashes, but it's not clear using heavier crash test dummies would reduce those risks."
"It's not clear what we would learn." Well, you might learn how to save fat people's lives. But who the fuck cares, right?

This is what I mean when I say, over and over, that fat hatred kills.

Especially fat women: "Researchers also concluded that obese women had a greater chance of dying in car crashes than obese men." Fat women are much more likely to die in a car crash. And the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety doesn't see the point of using fat crash test dummies.

This is one of the many ways in which it is conveyed to me every day that my life is literally worthless to people, because I am a fat woman.

This is also why fat is a feminist issue.

What I love, ahem, most about this shit is that, on the one hand, fat is epidemic and fat people are going to destroy America and eventually the entire world! And yet, on the other hand, we are too "fringe" for our bodies to be considered worth studying.

Anyone who has been paying attention might reasonably draw the conclusion that not studying our bodies to save us, while instead using science to shame, scapegoat, and pathologize us, is by design. The solution to our "epidemic" destruction of not-fat people is simply to let us fucking die.

Open Wide...

Today in Fat Hatred

[Content Note: Fat hatred; eliminationism.]

There is an absolutely breathtaking article in Fortune today, accompanied by an image of Chinese children stretching poolside at a "fat camp," because the pathologization of fat children (who are often merely children about to have a growth spurt) is all the rage these days.

Actual Headline: "Fat-the $2 trillion burden on the world's economy." Note how profoundly othering that is: Fat is a burden on the world. As if we are not part of the world. This is a common rhetorical device I've highlighted before, often in discussions about how "taxpayers' money" is being somehow wasted on fat people, as if fat people ourselves aren't taxpayers.

Actual Lede: "Obesity is now a threat to the world economy to rival war and terrorism, according to a new report published Thursday."

Holy shit.

This is what I'm talking about when I say there is an eliminationist campaign against fat people. We are compared to fucking terrorists.

And that heinous demonization is done on the basis of studies on higher healthcare costs and lost productivity which are total bullshit. They are based on correlations and "obesity related diseases" that not only fat people have, and not all fat people have.

They fail utterly, utterly, to account for prejudice against fat people in medical care: Major illnesses missed because symptoms are misattributed to weight; fat people discouraged from seeking preventative care because of bias. They frequently do not address or control for systemic factors contributing to weight gain.

These numbers are totally cooked, and they're being used to compare us to motherfucking terrorists.

Obesity in and of itself doesn't kill. But fat hatred does. And this, right here, is some rank fat hatred.

Open Wide...

Not Good Enough

[Content Note: Fat hatred.]

After a number of complaints, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has temporarily shelved a website called "Lean Works!" which "offered an 'obesity cost calculator' to help American bosses tally financial losses linked to their overweight employees."

The federal program drew recent criticism from some nutritionists and advocates for [fat] Americans who claimed the site and its obesity calculator fueled workplace discrimination and perhaps even led some companies to fire fat people.

...[CDC spokesperson Brittany Behm] said via email that content once posted at Lean Works! "is under review," adding: "The calculator is also under review and will be potentially updated with new information, technology."

"The recent attention to the LEAN Works! program caused us to put this part of the website at the top of the list for review, hence why it is currently down," Behm wrote. "…The potential misuse of this information is something we will certainly consider in our upcoming content review."
Not good enough. This website needs to be blown the fuck up and never even proposed as a serious policy measure ever again.

There is no sound justification for the argument that fat people are costing their employers more money, in actual dollars or productivity. (Though, coincidentally, there sure are persistent stereotypes of fat people being unhealthy and lazy!) But here is the CDC using tax dollars—the same precious tax dollars that fat people are supposedly wasting with our very existence—to build a website in order to calculate something that isn't actually happening, in order to underwrite a prejudice that will only create more barriers to employment and equal pay for fat people.

This shit doesn't exist in a vacuum. This is part of a sustained eliminationist campaign against fat people in the United States, which has seen the American Medical Association declare obesity a disease and the First Lady writing in the pages of the Wall Street Journal that fat people are a "problem is solved once and for all" for American businesses.

We are continually and dishonestly identified as a drain on society, a threat, a problem that needs to be solved. This is the language of eliminationism that has been used by privileged classes against marginalized groups for as long as such political, social, and cultural scapegoating has been documented.

There is an abundance of evidence that most fat people will never be able to achieve and/or permanently maintain a not-fat body. There is an abundance of evidence that the stress of being incessantly shamed and policed negatively affects fat people's health. There is an abundance of evidence that fat hatred kills.

And the insistent refusal of policymakers to acknowledge that evidence tells me that they're pretty much fine with that.

[H/T to Shaker MMC.]

Open Wide...

Here We Go Again

[Content Note: Fat hatred; disablism; misogyny.]

Professional fat-shamer Katie Hopkins decided to gain and then lose 50 pounds in order to "prove" that fat people cannot be happy and that fat people are liars if they say they can't lose weight.

The TV personality said that after years of relentlessly reminding overweight people that if they just tried a little bit, they too could be skinny. A live TV moment triggered her to finally do something to take her anti-fat theories to an extreme.

During her appearance on the "Late Late Show" back in February, Hopkins was torn apart for her bullying.

"I don't believe you can be fat and happy. I think that's just a cop out," she said on the show in response to the critics. "It's living a lie. It's not having the balls to cope with things and make a conscious effort to say, 'I'm going to do something about the state I've gotten myself in.'"

Just then, a 250 pound woman in the audience stood up and said she actually was fat and happy. Hopkins claims this is the moment that inspired her to prove the "fat and sloppy" woman, and everyone else who is overweight, wrong.
screen cap of a tweet authored by Katie Hopkins reading: 'For my new American friends. Fat and Back is my journey to prove fat people are lazy and eat too much. I gained 50lbs to prove a point'

So Hopkins set about gaining weight by eating nearly 6,500 calories a day. Which of course is not the typical caloric intake of any person, fat or otherwise. And once she had gained about 50 pounds, and found herself miserable, as anyone with a pathological hatred of fat people would be, she declared her experiment a success. She had definitively proven that fat people can't be happy, because she wasn't happy.

screen cap of a tweet authored by Katie Hopkins reading: 'Good morning good people of Britain. And to my fat friends - how are we doing? Continuing to live in denial? Or deciding to get a grip?'

Fat people who claim to be happy are thus crazy liars.

And the entire thing was documented on camera, naturally, and will air in the United States as a TV series titled Fat and Back. Because what fat people need is for people who bully and harass us to have more ammunition to use against us. Terrific.

I've already said everything I have to say about people who imagine that it's impossible to be fat and happy. I'm never going to convince someone like Katie Hopkins that I'm content, so I won't even bother trying.

What a waste of my emotional energy to try to convince someone who believes I'm a delusional liar if I express my own genuine lived experience.

I do, however, want to point out that this is a basic form of oppression: To deny even the possibility of people's authentic emotional expression by deeming it a lie, deeming it evidence of not having a grip on reality, before they even speak.

And this, too, is a basic form of oppression: To privilege the pronouncements of someone who is not part of a marginalized community over the reported lived experiences of the people who are, even if that person readily admits to despising us.

Finally, once more I will note that this seething hatred is simply about the way we look. It is not about our health. If any of the people who engage in this vile garbage were the slightest bit concerned about our health, they would:

1. Care about our emotional health, and the deleterious effect it has on one's overall health to be constantly policed and bullied.

2. Stop trying to demonize our bodies and shame us for having them, and instead get on board with the idea that there is little incentive to take care of a body you hate, that fat hatred is a barrier to seeking care, that fat hatred kills.

The reason Hopkins can't imagine for a moment that I am happy with my body is that she is so unhappy with my body. That isn't about my health. That's about rank hatred.

Open Wide...

B-b-but Calories In Calories Out!

[Content Note: Fat bias; "headless fatty" imagery at link.]

Here is yet another article confirming that "it's nearly impossible to permanently lose weight."

There are a lot of problems with this article, starting with the headless fatty imagery right at its top, but it's effective at highlighting the value of a Health at Every Size paradigm and noting that the belief about people's ability to maintain permanent weight less is really rooted in anecdotal evidence about outliers.

And there's more to it than just that, of course: The media loves to feature stories about people who lost lots of weight "through old-fashioned diet and exercise," but does not love to feature stories about people who find that even "old fashioned diet and exercise," even when those "lifestyle changes" are maintained, are generally not effectively in preventing weight regain.

The article also addresses the role that "obesity researchers" are playing in maintaining the facade that permanent weight loss is possible for most people:

So if most scientists know that we can't eat ourselves thin, that the lost weight will ultimately bounce back, why don't they say so?

Tim Caulfield says his fellow obesity academics tend to tiptoe around the truth. "You go to these meetings and you talk to researchers, you get a sense there is almost a political correctness around it, that we don't want this message to get out there," he said.

"You'll be in a room with very knowledgeable individuals, and everyone in the room will know what the data says and still the message doesn't seem to get out."

In part, that's because it's such a harsh message. "You have to be careful about the stigmatizing nature of that kind of image," Caulfield says. "That's one of the reasons why this myth of weight loss lives on."
They're worried about "the stigmatizing nature" of the message of natural body diversity, but not worried about the stigmatizing nature of the message that fat people are just lazy pieces of shit whose bodies are evidence of our moral failure. Neat!
Health experts are also afraid people will abandon all efforts to exercise and eat a nutritious diet — behaviour that is important for health and longevity — even if it doesn't result in much weight loss.
Perhaps that's because fat people are routinely told by "health experts" that we can't be healthy if we're fat.

If there was as much emphasis on the message that, in fact, fat bodies can indeed be healthy bodies, fat people might be inclined to believe that there was a worthy health objective for which to strive. But we're not given that message at all. We're given the exact opposite message—that we can only be healthy if we lose weight.

"Health experts" aren't actually centering fat people's health. They're telling us that our bodies aren't worth taking care of unless they're thin, and then behaving like it's a fucking mystery that lots of fat people don't feel an incentive to care for our fat bodies unless we lose weight.

I say once more: I do fat advocacy because I care about fat people's health.

And anyone who purports to be concerned about fat people's health will stop trying to demonize our bodies and shame us for having them, and instead get on board with the idea that there is little incentive to take care of a body you hate, that fat hatred is a barrier to seeking care, that fat hatred kills.

[H/T to Shakesville Contributor and Moderator Aphra_Behn.]

Open Wide...

Today in Fat Hatred

[Content Note: Fat hatred; dehumanization.]

This is currently on the front page of NBCNews.com:

image of a news story headlined 'Infographic: Obesity Skyrockets Across the Globe: An unprecedented report paints an alarming picture of obesity around the world. Take a look at the countries that fared the worst.' accompanied by a photo of the midsection of a fat white man, the top and bottom of whose body have been cropped out

Fuck you, NBC. That man whose cropped torso you're using as a cautionary tale; the man whom you've turned into a headless fatty, as disembodied as possible while still retaining vague traces of humanity even as that humanity is reduced to its FATTY FAT FATNESS; he is a human being.

And, if he's like most of the halved headless fatties whose cropped bodies accompany alarmist news stories about the obesity crisis, he didn't give his consent for his body to be used for this purpose.

Fat hatred kills. Using this picture is not a neutral decision. Demonizing fat bodies, talking about us like we're a plague, is not a neutral decision. Dehumanizing imagery that upholds and justifies eliminationist campaigns against us is not a neutral decision.

You cannot claim to give a fuck about fat people's health when you clearly don't give a fuck about fat people.

Open Wide...

I Get Letters

[Content Note: Fat hatred.]

One of the most frequently leveled charges against people who do fat advocacy is that we don't care about fat people's health, that encouraging people to love themselves and live their lives and not hate their bodies is tacitly encouraging people to be unhealthy.

(Never mind that fat does not axiomatically equal unhealthy.)

Yesterday, I received this email from a Shaker, who wishes to remain anonymous but who gave me hir consent to share its contents:

Hi Melissa,

I'm a long time lurker/reader on Shakesville and wanted to thank you for all that you and the Shakesville community have done to educate me on my internalized fat-phobia/fat shaming.

Reading Shakesville is what convinced me that my doctors were wrong, that the excruciating pain I felt when I walked was NOT because I was fat. You made me look at myself and say, "Wait, why do I believe that I'm lazy about this when I work 80+ hours a week?" Your writing gave me permission to believe that I deserved to be able to walk without pain, that the stabbing pains I had in my lower leg were not punishment for being fat, but an indication that something was seriously wrong and my body needed help.

I found a solution because of you. Not because of doctors. Not because of medicine. Because you and Shakesville told me I deserved it.

Thank you so much.

[Name Redacted]
I do fat advocacy because I care about fat people's health.

And anyone who purports to be concerned about fat people's health will stop trying to demonize our bodies and shame us for having them, and instead get on board with the idea that there is little incentive to take care of a body you hate, that fat hatred is a barrier to seeking care, that fat hatred kills.



My inbox is always open, if you need emotional support in seeking healthcare while navigating fat hatred.

Open Wide...

Today in Fat Hatred

by Shakesville Moderator Hallelujah_Hippo

[Content Note: Fat hatred, dehumanization, medical malfeasance, fat bias]

We have had extensive conversations in this space about how fat hatred kills people. We have these conversations over and over and over again, because it continues to be something that kills people, over and over and over again. Today Liss shared with me, via Shaker P, yet another example of just how deep-seated fat hatred is in medical practice and I felt the need to call it out once again.

On Monday, the ever progressive (not actually a true statement) Washington Post published a piece by Edward Thompson—a doctor who I believe is writing under his real name—which is, as Liss described it, one of the most vile, dehumanizing, exploitative pieces of fat hatred I've ever read."

The actual title is 'A Morbidly Obese Patient Tests the Limits of a Doctor's Compassion,' so right away we're made aware that this piece is about Compassionate Doctors and the trying fat people who are so terribly cruel with all their testing the limits of everyone's compassion with their fatness.

The first sentence sets the tone:

The patient is large. Very large. At more than 600 pounds, he is a mountain of flesh.
And I almost stopped reading right there because when you start out by reducing a human being to a 'very large…mountain of flesh,' there is very little hope that you are going to say anything that I want to read. The piece just gets worse from here.
"My stomach hurts," he says, his voice surprisingly high and childlike.
Fat Stereotype #1: Fat people are 'childlike,' simple fools unable to take care of themselves and their own basic needs. The implication of this stereotype is inevitably, as here: If they'd just grow up and take some responsibility they'd be thin and pleasant to look at just like everyone is morally obligated to be.
Asked if he's ever felt this kind of pain before, he says, "No, never. At least, not like this."

"Well, what'd you expect?" the unit secretary mutters, only half to herself.
Fat Stereotype #2: Fat people are all—and should expect nothing other than to be—in debilitating pain. Never mind that fat people, like not-fat people, generally seek medical treatment when they experience pain that isn't normal for their bodies.

But, referring back to Fat Stereotype #1, obviously, the only reason anyone is fat is because they are an irresponsible, uninformed, and stupid person who cannot properly understand the world around them. Including important rules like: You aren't allowed to be simultaneously fat and comfortable.
The patient is in his 40s. He spends his days on the sofa at home, surviving on disability checks related to his back pain.
Fat Stereotype #3: All fat people are fat because they lounge around all day, every day, sitting on their asses doing nothing but eating junk food and watching TV. Fat Stereotype #4: All fat people are lazy, and lots of them are scam artists who mooch off hard-working, honest, thin taxpayers by tricking the government into paying them for their back pain.

Never mind that there is no indication whatsoever, if this doctor even bothered to inquire, whether the patient's weight and/or inactivity was, in part, a result of his disability, or whether, as is clearly implied, that his disability is the result of his weight and inactivity.
Facing him, I feel momentarily put off.
Fat people are gross. In case you hadn't heard. Off-putting by virtue of their existence. Like ghouls and monsters.
I'm not sure just where to start the examination,
I'm no medical doctor or anything, so I could be wrong, but my totally uneducated guess would be: Wherever you start the examination with every other human you see in the ER complaining of abdominal pain. But, like I said, I'm not a doctor.
when I begin, my hands look small and insignificant against the panorama of skin they're kneading.
Again, let's remind everyone that this man has a panorama of skin; he's hugeand freakish and makes the doctor's hands look small and insignificant. Not for nothing, but this is definitely analogous to how monsters are frequently described in literature all the damn time.
It's hard to tell, exactly, but I think his pain is coming from somewhere around his stomach.
Again, I'm not a doctor, but this does not seem terribly surprising since, in the patient's own words, his stomach hurts; but it's a good thing the doctor verified it (as best he could, there's a whole panorama here to circumnavigate, remember) because we also need to remember that fat people are fat because they are stupid and simple, so they can't be trusted to actually know what's what about anything, including their own bodies.
Awaiting [the surgeon's] arrival, we try to shoot some X-rays. When we roll him onto his side, though, he turns an unnatural shade of blue-gray and can't tolerate the position long enough for us to put the X-ray cassette behind his back.
Which is obviously and exclusively because he's a fatty fat person, and not at all, possibly, because he's suffering from acute abdominal pain. Again, I'm not a doctor, so my thoughts on this are clearly suspect.
We try a chest X-ray, turning up the power to the maximum setting. All we see is white… he is a walking lead shield.
Again, excellent use of dehumanization and monstrous construction. This isn't a normal human; this is a walking wall of lead. How can he even expect basic medical care or decency in a hospital for humans when he is barely human himself?
Our standard GI cocktail of shot-in-the-dark digestive tonics plinks into his stomach without any effect.
"Plinks." Because, as a fat man, he obviously has a GINORMOUS stomach that cannot possibly be remotely affected by 'standard' medical quantities.
Morphine at doses high enough to make me dance on tables merely makes him a bit drowsy.
This is not an unusual phenomenon among people—of any size—with chronic back pain. Something of which, one imagines, any doctor would be aware.

But this doctor is more concerned with his own unhappiness at giving his fat patient so much morphine—a thought that even seems to supersede concern that the patient is still in acute abdominal pain. After all, fat people are monstrous non-entities completely to blame for their own discomfort and health problems; what matters is how medical providers feel in relation to them.
I talk to the patient between procedures, trying to get a sense of him as a person. He recites a litany of consultants he's seen for his back pain, his headaches, a chronic rash on his ankles, his shortness of breath, his weakness, his insomnia and his fatigue.
Fat Stereotype #5: Fat people are whiny hypochondriacs. Fat Stereotype #6: All fat people's health problems would magically go away if they would just stop being fat!
"All of them have failed me," he says, adding that the paramedics didn't have the proper ultra-wide, ultra-sturdy gurney to accommodate his body.

"The Americans with Disabilities Act says that they should have the proper equipment to handle me, the same as they do for anyone else," he says indignantly. "I'm entitled to that. I'll probably have to sue to get the care I really need."
(emphasis added)

Fat people! Expecting basic medical care like everyone else! Where do they get off with their entitlements and outrageous demands!! If they want medical care like everyone else, then they should try being thin like everyone else! They're clearly just looking for handouts and clogging up the legal system with frivolous lawsuits because they are whiny and immature and have no sense of personal responsibility. Etc.

Here, I would like to insert that a lot of what we talk about around here has to do with human rights and that ALL people are entitled to food and medical care. That includes fat people. Fat people exist, period; just like people with latex allergies exist and people who can't take penicillin exist (and those are not mutually exclusive from fat people). Casting the provision of basic medical care for fat people as some bizarre and extravagant luxury rather than a basic human right they are entitled by by virtue of being human is a pile of eliminationist and hostile garbage.
We've placed the patient in a room with an oversize hospital bed, so at least he's resting comfortably.
We've done the bare minimum of providing him with a bed; we are spectacular human beings!
Finally, we move an ultrasound machine into his room — it barely fits between the bed and the wall
Because this man is SO FAT that he needs a larger bed, he is breaking the hospital procedures; this is all his fault for existing the way he does. This is clearly, according to the doctor, not a case of a gross lack of accessibility, having rooms too small to accommodate both diagnostic equipment AND a fat patient who needs it; this is a case of fat people being too inconvenient for the world to deal with and they really should stop it already.
A half-hour later, the chief of radiology comes out of the room, rings of sweat under his arms. "I think we have something," he says. "A gallstone."
(emphasis added)

Remember everyone, this dude is totally fat!! He's so fat the chief of radiology is sweating from the effort of trying to diagnose him! This is a truly trenchant and relevant detail for the story; I almost forgot it was about a fat man who is beyond an inconvenience to everyone with whom he interacts.

There follows a description of the surgeon assigned to the patient spending time and making phone calls trying to get the patient moved to another hospital rather than admitting him where he is, because the surgeon just doesn't want to deal with him. The way it is narrated, this is taken to be understandable; there is certainly no critique or even implied disapproval of the surgeon's actions. I guess this hospital's policy is: Fat people—unload them anywhere you can, because we don't have time to deal with them; we have real humans to see.

But, it turns out no other hospital can take this monstrous man until the next day:
"Don't put him in a room right over the ER," whispers the unit secretary to the admission clerk. "The floor won't support him. He'll come crashing through and kill us all."
Ah hah hahha! My aching sides! You know those fat people—those monstrous, lead-walled, panoramic fat folks—they'll break the world!!! Ceilings in hospitals were never designed to hold several hundred pounds at a time!

As awful as this piece is up until now, I was still surprised by how awful the next sentence is:
Glancing across the hall at the patient, I see by his eyes that he's heard her comment, and I'm suddenly sure that he's heard all of the side remarks aimed his way.
(emphasis added)

Fat people! They exist in the world and can hear you! They may even be entirely aware of your loathing, your disgust, your discomfort, and your judgment. They may even (probably) take these things into account when deciding if the acute pain in their side is bad enough to face the dehumanization, the hatred, the vitriol, and the humiliation of interacting with medical staff (you know, those compassionate care givers ostensibly tasked with giving a shit about their well-being and health and trying to diagnose and help them) or if they should just wait it out and see if it gets better.

Fat hatred kills people. Not least of all because sometimes living with pain and not knowing what is may just be preferable to being dehumanized, hated, and sneered at by the people you have to trust in order to access medical care.

I wish I could say this is the end, but it's not. Things get worse from here.
Finally, a slew of huffing, puffing, grunting attendants wheel him down the hall, leaving me to reflect on his plight.
Let's remind everyone that he's fat, in case anyone has forgotten, and share that it takes a whole crew of people doing strenuous labor just to move him down the hall! I mean, one sentence ago we almost acknowledged that he was a person with feelings completely aware of the abuse and hatred leveled at him by everyone in his vicinity; let's not reflect on that or anything, let's get back to focusing on the thin people (ie, real humans who actually matter).
He lies at the very large center of his own world—a world in which all the surgery mankind has to offer cannot heal the real pain he suffers.
So, again, this man isn't just in the center of his own world, it's a very large center. Because he's SO FAT; get it? Did you forget he was fat? I almost did; I'm glad our narrator made sure to remind us again that this entire situation is a result of how completely and utterly fat this particular patient is.

Additionally, (again, as a non-doctor), I feel like 'all the surgery mankind has to offer' could start healing his pain by removing his gallstone and then maybe not treating him like a piece of filthy and inconvenient garbage that is just SO MUCH trouble to deal with.

But, bitter sarcasm side, I know what the narrator means.

Fat Stereotype #7: All fat people are broken and in terrible emotional pain.

He doesn't mean 'the abdominal pain so bad this man sought medical attention even knowing the rank amounts of hatred and disgust he would be subjected to,' he means 'the inner pain that all fat people have which they try to assuage with eating and laziness.' Because no one is fat for any reason other than emotional dysfunction and a lack of loving themselves. Fat people are broken from the ground up and that brokenness is clearly proved by their fatness.

This narrative is utter reductive, dehumanizing, and vile garbage. The only thing you can tell about a fat person by looking at them is that they are fat. You know nothing about their emotional state, their life, or their inner self; to claim that you do is to continue to silence, marginalize, and dehumanize them.
The patient lies trapped in his own body, like a prisoner in an enormous, fleshy castle.
Again, this doctor has NO WAY OR KNOWING how this man feels about his own body, he is projecting lazy, dehumanizing narratives onto a man he doesn't even see as fully human.

Also, we were in danger of forgetting this patient is fat, so we needed another reminded that it's not just a castle, but an enormous (not big), fleshy (i.e., Ewwww!! Gross!!!!) castle.
And though he must feel wounded by the ER personnel's remarks…
Honestly dude, you don't seem to give much of a shit about how wounded this man may or may not feel by the way EVERYONE in the story (including, you, Dr. Thompson) have treated him during this entire encounter, so just shut the fuck up about it, okay. One sentence pretending you care doesn't make your writing any less of a garbage nightmare of fat hatred and eliminationist rhetoric without an ounce of empathy or self-reflection.

Especially when you finish the sentence with:
…he seems to find succor in knowing that there's no comment so cutting that it can't be soothed by the balm of 8,000 calories per day.
Fat Stereotype #8: Fat people are fat because they soothe away the vile way the world treats them with emotional eating! It's a fact, proven by science! This is a doctor, so he clearly knows everything about everything, including why all fat people are fat.

(Note from Liss: The doctor claimed in comments of the piece that he knows how many calories the patient consumes because the patient told him. In which case: I question whether publicly disclosing that information is not a breach of doctor-patient confidentiality. If it's not a technical breach, it is certainly breaches the spirit of the provision, as far as I am concerned. Further, if it is accurate that the patient was consuming 8,000 calories per day, that is evidence of disordered eating, which is something doctors should be keen to treat as a medical issue, not ridicule and sneer at with disgust on the pages of a major international publication.)
Later on in my shift, still feeling traces of the patient's presence, I sit and stare at my 700-calorie dinner, all appetite gone, wondering where empathy ends and compassion begins.
That truly is a question for the ages, Dr. Thompson. I'm also not a philosopher, but I have a sneaking suspicion that neither empathy or compassion (neither of which have been displayed by anyone in this narrative, by the way; quite the opposite, in fact) are anywhere near write a naval-gazing and dehumanizing piece about a fat patient, how he was totally gross and disgusting and awful, how he is stupid and childlike and whiny, how he is an emotional and stunted human unable to care for himself and how he is an object lesson in what not to do; with a side-helping of fat hating narratives and projections.

But, that's just me, I guess we disagree on this one.
I know why my colleagues and I are so glad to have this patient out of the ER and stowed away upstairs…
Stowed away, like an unused piece of furniture, because he's huge and unwieldy and just an object of inconvenience, not an actual human being.
…he's an oversize mirror…
Another reminder that he is fat ("oversized"), in case you'd forgotten, and another example of describing him as an object rather than a human being.
…reminding us of our own excesses.
Ultimately, he is not a person in his own right, but a symbol. A breathing metaphor for excess. A lesson for thin people to learn from and guard against.
It's easier to look away and joke at his expense than it is to peer into his eyes and see our own appetites staring back.
Appetites. In case, again, you forgot he was fat.

How about you try peering into his eyes and SEEING HIS HUMANITY you unmitigated, unempathetic asshole? You could try that, just for a start; maybe then it wouldn't be so easy to 'look away and joke at his expense.'

And again, this patient is still an object that reflects thin people's (implied: real humans) appetites back at them. Did you forget the patient was fat? He's totally fat; he's a symbol of 'appetites' because he EATS ALL THE THINGS, ALL THE TIME; that's why he's fat.

And this is how the piece concludes:
Though I have no way of knowing it, within a few months a crane will hoist the patient's body through a hole cut in the side of his house, a hole that allowed EMS personnel to lower the body onto their new ultra-wide, ultra-sturdy gurney.
There is then a note about the author:
Thompson worked in emergency medicine for 32 years and now practices family medicine in Frederick County, Md. This is an edited version of a story that appeared in Pulse — Voices From the Heart of Medicine, an online magazine of stories and poems from patients and health-care professionals.
Let me just tell you: If I lived in Frederick County, MD, I would feel TOTALLY unsafe going to an ER for help after reading this; I would have no reason to expect I would be treated like a human being worthy of empathy or understanding, or as anything other than a freak, an object, and a moral lesson for not conforming to expectations of what a human should be.

And this is part of how fat hatred kills people.

This attitude, blatantly recounted in a doctor's own words, is what fat people can expect to face when they ask for help. The game of 'is the pain bad enough to deal with dehumanization and humiliation just to find out what it is?' of 'I don't know if I have the personal fortitude to deal with those looks and those comments and that hatred today.'

Fat hatred kills people.

It is unacceptable and needs to stop.

Open Wide...

Fatsronauts 101: Permission to Live

[Content Note: Fat hatred; eliminationism; weight loss talk.]

The "war on obesity" is eliminationist. That is not hyperbole: It only sounds like it is because its warriors aren't honest enough to call their crusade what it really is—a war on fat people.

Aside from the equally contemptible embedded fallacies arising from the false equivalence between "fat" and "unhealthy," the "war on obesity" is contingent on profoundly dishonest rhetoric which wrenches apart fat people from their actual bodies—"We're not waging a war on you, heavens no! We're just waging a war against your disgusting fat body!"

This is precisely the same sort of reprehensible semantic game that underwrites "love the sin; hate the sinner" needle-threading identity-policing. When you seek to wrench apart the components of people's whole selves and throw away pieces of their identities, or their very bodies, it's just eliminationist rhetoric dressed up as Concern.

And nothing exposes that more nakedly than the fact that there are plenty of fat people for whom not being fat would necessitate sacrificing one's health, or one's very life.

This war on fat people kills people. And when it isn't actively trying to literally eliminate us, it's discouraging us from participating in the world, from being visible, from living.

It's telling us we have to lose weight before we start dating, before we go sleeveless, before we take that dream vacation, before we ask for a promotion, before we buy a bike, before we get tattooed, before we sign up for dancing lessons, before we splurge on a beautiful dress, before we get the haircut we really want, before we go the doctor, before we go to the gym, before we set a wedding date, before we have kids, before we even think about doing anything wonderful that fat people don't deserve.

It's telling us to lose weight before pursuing our dreams. It's telling us to lose weight before wearing a bathing suit. It's telling us to lose weight before "knowing real love and real fear, walking naked in the winter snow and in the summer tide, playing like a child, thinking as a martyr, making love to a stranger, tasting sin and purity at the same moment in time, being as a lamb in a den of wolves." (Whut? I know.) It's telling us to lose weight before living the life we want to live.

Which is entirely in addition to the too-small seats, the too-low weight maximums, the higher costs for clothes and healthcare and travel and anything else the price of which can be hiked and justified by fat bias, the totally legal rules against hiring, serving, treating fat people, and all the other deterrents and disincentives against our participation in the world.

graphic of nondescript human form standing in front of a door labeled: 'Life: Enter Here' that has a 'No Fatties' sign hanging on it

The incessant drumbeat of messages that we aren't entitled to live a full life, that our fat denies us the all-access pass, creates in many fat people a shame so deep and intractable that we become unable to give ourselves permission to do any of the things that fat people aren't "supposed" to do.

I can't. I can't put myself out there. I can't wear a sleeveless shirt. I can't wear tight jeans. I can't cut my hair short. I can't try to be beautiful. I can't go on a beach holiday. I can't wear a bathing suit in public. I can't show my legs. I can't go to the gym. I can't have my picture taken. I can't go to a club to dance. I can't join the Peace Corps. I can't fall in love. I can't let myself be loved. I can't be happy. I can't live.

Not until I'm not fat anymore. And then I'll deserve it. All of it. Then I'll have permission from the galactic granter of access to life to do all the things I want to do.

That is bullshit.

It is dehumanizing bullshit. It is internalized eliminationist bullshit. It is harmful, hateful, despicable bullshit that exhorts us to remove ourselves from life as much as we can, so as not to sully it up with our imperfect aesthetics.

We are not obliged to delay life, to hide from life, to participate in life on some kind of reduced plan in accordance with arbitrary rules about what fat people are and are not "allowed" to do.

We don't need body policers' permission to live just as we are.

That said, I know what it's like to be in a space where it's nigh impossible to give yourself permission to life, just as you are. So, if you're still in that place where it helps to have someone else tell you what a lifetime of hatred makes it difficult for you to tell yourself: You have my permission to live your life just as you are. I give you the permission that our garbage fat-hating culture won't.

You have permission to live.

You do not have to wait until you lose weight to do anything that you want to do and can do right now. You have permission to live right now.

You have permission to be in the world, to participate, to take up the space that you need without apology. And you have permission to say FUCK YOU to anyone who disagrees.

We have a right to live as we are. Get out of the way, haters.

Open Wide...

Bloomberg's Soda Ban Halted by Judge

[Content Note: Fat bias; eliminationism. Background: Blame the Fatties; Today in Fatties Ruin It for Everyone.]

New York City Mayor and "Anti-Obesity Crusader" Michael Bloomberg's proposed ban on sugary drinks in sizes greater than 16 oz at restaurants, street carts, and movie theaters has been struck down by a judge one day before it was supposed to take effect:

In an unusually critical opinion, Justice Milton A. Tingling Jr. of State Supreme Court in Manhattan called the limits "arbitrary and capricious," echoing the complaints of city business owners and consumers who had deemed the rules unworkable and unenforceable, with confusing loopholes and voluminous exemptions.

...The mayor's plan, which he pitched as a novel effort to combat obesity, aroused worldwide curiosity and debate — and the ire of the American soft-drink industry, which undertook a multimillion-dollar campaign to block it, flying banners from airplanes over Coney Island, plastering subway stations with advertisements and filing the lawsuit that led to the ruling.
It gives me no joy that it was corporate pressure, rather than respect for fat people's agency, that resulted in this ruling, but I'm nonetheless glad for the ruling, which subverts the execution of a campaign that centers fat hatred.

As with all of these campaigns, lest anyone imagine I am seeing fat hatred in a "health initiative" where none exists:
Mr. Bloomberg said he would immediately appeal, and at a quickly arranged news conference, he fiercely defended the rationale for the rules...

"I've got to defend my children, and yours, and do what's right to save lives," the mayor said. "Obesity kills. There's no question it kills."
Actually, there is a lot of question about that. People do not die of "obesity." Some fat people die from complications of what are commonly known as "obesity-related diseases," like heart disease and diabetes, but those diseases have only been shown to be correlated with fat, not caused by fat. (Which is why thin people have them, too.) So it's not even accurate to assert that obesity kills indirectly.

This, however, is a thing that is accurate to say: Fat hatred kills people all the time.

One of the most widely linked comments I have ever left in this space is this one, in response to a commenter who took issue with the idea that fat people are an endangered population.
No, there is not a documented epidemic of brutal murders of fat people for being fat, but there is a documented epidemic of failure to provide life-saving healthcare: Google will easily help you find stories of fat people who died while emergency crews laughed at their weight and appearance, of fat people who were told they should lose weight to fix problems actually caused by blood clots, cancer, internal injuries, infections, and myriad other problems that later killed them, because their doctors couldn't see past their fat to properly treat them. Google will also easily help you find stories of medical equipment that cannot accommodate fat bodies, of anesthetists who accidentally kill fat people in surgery, of doctors who prescribe wrong doses for fat bodies, of drug trials that make no attempt to include fat patients. Google will also easily help you find stories of fat people who did not seek life-saving healthcare because they had been so viciously fat-shamed by doctors their whole lives that they had given up hope of finding sensitive and caring providers who would treat them.
The blog First Do No Harm is an invaluable resource in its documentation of fat prejudice in healthcare. (See also. And here. Also over here. Etc.)

Obesity doesn't kill, but fat hatred does.

Additionally: "A 2013 study reported in the Journal of Eating Disorders documented that weight bias and stigma cause both physiological and psychological harm."
Internalized weight bias was associated with greater impairment in both the physical and mental domains of health-related quality of life. Internalized weight bias also contributed significantly to the variance in physical and mental health impairment over and above the contributions of BMI, age, and medical comorbidity. Consistent with the association between prejudice and physical health in other minority groups, these findings suggest a link between the effects of internalized weight-based discrimination and physical health. Research is needed on strategies to prevent weight bias and its internalization on both a societal and individual level.
Would that Mayor Bloomberg were half as concerned about the harm he and his fellow "anti-obesity" crusaders are doing to fat people's health.

I can (and do) choose not to drink sugary soda. I cannot, however, choose a life that is free from other people's public, shaming, harmful, bullying, dehumanizing, eliminationist fat hatred.

If you don't care at least as much about that as whether I drink a fucking soda, you're not interested in my health. And I'm not going to humor that sanctimonious codswallop anymore.

Open Wide...