Saturday, 28 March 2015

Wish Fulfillment

Good for Yoni Freedhoff. He was reading the book Princess Bride to his children and decided to stop when he reached the passages he quoted, read them in full but in case you're feeling link-fatigued/lazy;
The year that Buttercup was born, the most beautiful woman in the world was a French scullery maid named Annette......Annette worked in Paris for the Duke and Duchess de Guice and it did not escape the Duke's notice that someone extraordinary was polishing the pewter......the Duchess set about studying Annette and shortly found her adversary's tragic flaw.  

Armed now, the Duchess set to work. The Palace de Guiche turned into a candy castle.
Annette never had a chance. Inside a season, she went from delicate to whopping, and the Duke never glanced in her direction without sad bewilderment clouding his eyes.
Isn't that the dream? Weight as a lever of total control?

YF goes with "weight bias," in doing so inadvertently demonstrates sadly his 'field' is the genesis and the heart of liberating this kind of mal-feeling. His and other @besity wallahs credo for "weight loss" attacks the same target as the Duchess, hunger and appetite. Indeed, it sees fat people in the same way as the Duchess sees Annette, but in reverse......... (or not? Looking at all the slim people plumping up, you have to wonder.....)
And so right out of the gate The Princess Bride is teaching kids that obesity is consequent to gluttony,
Interesting. To me its telling people that weight is a lever of controlling people. A means of being able to destroy them. It's how women can beat up and degrade other women, depriving them of the ultimate prize of competition, not the male gaze, wealth.

The class element plays out too. Annette's weakness was hunger-which is always hidden by drawing the eye to food or "gluttony." She started off slim though. She was provided with food and she just couldn't resist-probably because she was common.

And of course for "chocolate" you could read how's your father.

And, @besity, so glibly off the tongue reminds us of the keying of brains everywhere into this artificial creation called @bese. This depersonalized yet deeply personal classification/prison so easily stands in for person or blocks person/ people  or individual from standing alone.

It is the wish fulFILLment inherent in this little fable that demonstrates what a turn-on the @bese construct is for so many. A lot of them feminist, who like to collude with this, overriding their principles. Competition, power getting other women out of your way.

I suppose this is the price paid for the participation called "survival"-you know when you say you dress up to survive, maybe. But it keeps alive the code that is its basis-in your mind, undermining your urge toward liberation (assuming you indeed have one). What you invest in marks you, whatever your rationale for it. 

In an age of democracy, where everyone's supposed to have a say.

People love the idea that they can run or ruin a person at their whim, just like this story. No wonder there's no urge to find resolution for what's claimed to be the greatest threat to civilisation evah.

Thursday, 26 March 2015

Post-Partum Rebound

We're all stuck in the 'obesity' calories in/out mindwarp-some are just trying to escape it. It's like being brought up in a faith then becoming ex-muslim or catholic.

The same issue inevitably appears in the issue of post-pregnancy self image. Some women- they may or may not be a small percentage but they definitely exist and are a distinct group-have bodies which instinctively re-assumes its pre-pregnancy shape on its own, give or take.

This is homeostasis, the body's self regulatory instincts, restoring it's own equilibrium. The same thing that makes their bodies snap back on their own, is what makes most people regain weight after restriction induced weight loss [RIWL].

From the outside their bodies resume an unaffected look. Either they looked like a normal post-partum and yet regained a pre-partum size/look, or straight after giving birth. Some women only look pregnant from the front. I'll never forget a fleeting glance I got of a woman from the bus. I first saw her back, slender curved in waist. Then she turned around and she had a stand out fully pregnant belly.

Human variety is intriguing.

Pregnancy marks every woman from the inside and out- if only minimally for some. Pathologists can tell if you've been pregnant post-mortem. The expectation is pregnancy should substantially and visibly affect your body, and should have to make huge effort to recover prior size and shape if at all. 

Typically, many formerly slim women have allowed themselves to become so self righteous about what could for them quite pronounced changes-when you consider the fetid air of body hierarchy. They can be careless, displaying hostility toward those whose bodies respond less dramatically. The thin/slim ones obviously, though some fat women's bodies also barely change or not much.

Celebrities, rather like models get paid for their appearance. They employ staff to coach them through strenuous work outs, have nutritionists on call and often personal chefs to prepare those recommendations.

It's like insurance for their earnings. They're less likely to take a chance waiting to see how their bodies respond, if they can help it. They need to restore their pre-pregnancy image quickly, often its as much about image as anything. They do not wish to appear to weakened by anything, they wish to have a sheen of being unaffected by anything associated with ordinariness. It can ruin their expensively cultivated aura.

Letting go of that must be something like one of us letting go of a lifetimes investment in (internalized) fat hating of ourselves.

Post-partum is especially a time to be kind and gentle with yourself and other women in the same situation. No look is more authentic than others, that kind of thing is unnecessary, the envy and resentment is all too obvious. It's not however the fault of the thin rebounder their body is as responsible for that as yours is for the way it is.

I suspect it's entirely possible that they are how bodies are supposed to respond and those getting pompous are more anomalous- though they may seem more prevalent. Trying to almost cast quick rebound as bad form is silly.

Often its a question of time anyway. Many recover more slowly, some much more. It's probably another example of forgotten/lost knowledge of how to help the body's natural restoration process along.

Wednesday, 25 March 2015

Magic Fat

I am not currently ill. But I cannot say, I'm healthy-to mean I am not unwell, despite it being fact, because 'obesity' construct.  I am classed as disease, not diseased dis-ease. Diseased is when you a human or other being are affected/infected with disease, the idea of you is distinct and separate from the disease. People cannot be separated from themselves. Check out this story about extending the plain packaging from cigarettes to food:"Big Mac's make big children."

The distinction is unprecedented. No one else is classed as disease because no one else is subject to such uninterrupted stupidity-which I consider to be a hidden but prominent object of repression.s

Enforced stupidity.

For the sake of their integrity, I'd advise all fat people to consider developing the more arch slightly removed aspect of their personality. Such a notion should have been stopped before it could get off the ground. By any proposer's inner critic or by someone around them saying WTH?

Some are trying to do a "people first," that is, people with 'obesity', which is like "people with thin or slim." 

Being so bestowed, I cannot assert the objective truth. I am not ill. I also cannot assert that I am actually ill, in the fullest sense.

The unprecedented truth is that if you're dis-ease, you cannot become diseased. A disease cannot have a disease. You can only have a related outgrowth of the dis-ease of you.

I'm sure you've heard electronic scooter users-who are fat, are deemed not disabled, but sitting down. These cognitive errors are a product of cognitive errors (delusions) in definition, in construction of terms. And of refusal to stop before a term or even metaphor has utterly exhausted  itself.

Fat/ness fat people has/have become magic! Sort of uberuntermenchenfrauen-the demand is that we must play both-'cos this is about role play after all.  Weak  and sickly but somehow neither and both. Invincible and dead person walking, corrupt but pure and untouched by genetic lottery, hazard, eccentric function, accident or life itself.

Innocent, yet blah, blah, blah you get the picture, maaaaagic.

[It's only a matter of time before people touch a fatty for luck. I'll bet they already are. ]

Tuesday, 24 March 2015

Don't make Weight Laws-Dismantle Weight Divisions

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to think about Dr. Sarah Jackson insisting weight should become a protected category included in anti-discrimination law. You may say, brava, well meaning. Jackson tells everyone including doctors to stop the hate against fat people.

Except that this trivializes racism and other discrimination, whilst mostly overlooking the root cause promoting discrimination against fat people.

If you want to end discrimination against fat people, stop telling lies about human biology. Stop making this a question of humanities rather than science. Weight is product of a process you don't understand nor can reliably manipulate to reverse said outcome.

Concentrate on getting that done, start with those who's weight gain is linked to things like brain tumours or chronic conditions and remember this is not only about them. It's about better treatments for all sorts of things, given the wide-ranging nature of metabolic function.

Stop defining people as disease or with fake "identities" such as @bese and @overweight. And stop conflating weight loss with weight loss dieting and claiming the latter works- it does not.

All this will do more than any law.

In fact, dismantle the construction of 'obesity' as a field of study-it's clearly divisive and pointless. Stick to studying weight as part of metabolic science as that is what this is really about. Its the crude social engineering that's creating division and discrimination. The rogue sociology.

The pretext for this sounding is the second of couple of uh....studies, you may remember the first.

The upshot is shaming fat people should now stop. Not because its ethically wrong, causes harm to human beings, cheapening those participating in bullying, but because it "doesn't work". Meaning it a) doesn't enable proto-anorexia and b) it (purportedly) increases instances of eating calorie dense grub, and the likelihood of future fatness.

So there. 

I can see that this could be seen as a more effective appeal to fat phobes motivations. Undermining fat people's mental and physical health could never have been solely about making fat people slim. In order for something to be for a certain end, you must have a clear idea of what that end is. Seeking to use and generate negativity cannot be for positive ends. The momentum and power of negativity takes on a life of its own, takes over the wheel and ends up driving you. It becomes the end.  

The identity of slimness with its attendant halo also gets in the way. If anyone can be slim, that loses currency. The urge is to sabotage reversal of weight. Maintain an increasing source of vanity. This is hardly predictable, but it has been evident enough for a while.

Replacing opprobrium with "support" i.e. coercion is the same mis-use of terms, legal protection which would entrench this faux identity of weight. What's required is genuine application of objective science and intellect a removal of lies and falsehoods. We need rational thought to be restored.

If this campaign for anorexia-by-proxy was about weight reversal, it would have been stopped decades ago without much say so from us. Science would have made way more inroads in how to actually achieve this properly. It may have done it by now, though nothing is promised. It just strikes me as doable in a way that other things that have been done seem less so.

i.e. In real disease news there was recently a drug was being publicized that decreased sharply the transmission of HIV from positive to non-infected partner in certain conditions.Who would have predicted that when we were reminded, no virus has been cured?

That didn't come about by insisting people wear condoms for sexual intercourse.

Objective science, not social engineering. Is anyone really going to tell me that finding a 'vaccine' against HIV is easier than stabilizing a person's weight? Or reversing hunger? Let alone weight? There's a clear lack of desire at the heart of this. 

The picture being shouted against-'obesity' timebomb zomg is exactly what is being perpetuated. It helps if instead of seeing this as a position-@besity's bad let's get rid of it, versus a target, all people slim. Step back and see the whole as a tableau. It's all part of parts. The desire is to keep this going, with no endpoint, just continued repetition of the same as the last 40 years.

On the one hand fat people are treated as a distinct class-a wholly bogus confection (yes) of the 'obesity' crusade which depends on the absence of genuine weight reversal. At the same time as being a staunch advocate for "weight loss" meaning calorie restriction which equals the same as up to now.

The previous very weak study in describing "obesity promoting behaviours" listed "refusal to diet" that's right, saying no to neuroses; increased energy conservation, rebound weight gain, hyperphagia, binge eating, bulimia nervosa, depression and possibly bringing on some forms of diabetes, is what promotes 'obesity'.

Now I recognize this sentence: "Instead fat people must restrict calories and waste energy, because that will ensure a continued fat class to be discriminated against" might sound "eliminatory." That's something I can't answer fully here. All I will say is that if you use the framework of  the 'obesity' construct to decide your views, no matter how FA you are, you'll end up with a weird symmetry of agreement with it. 

Fat people are not the "opposite" of slim people.

I just saw someone who wrote that she argued with someone else for praising fat women's sexual abilities. This was interpreted as a slight-bullying against slim women. Polarity. Like male being seen as the "opposite" or female.

I long since left the latter behind and I'm not on board with the former either. Fat people are not as different from slim people as we can seem from the outside. That might be behind "headless fatties" tending to be outliers. The majority of @beses let alone @verweighties do not look "opposite" what's defined as the norm, which is also not as slim as it imagines

Just because words are in opposition, doesn't mean those words used to define human ( or other animal) traits that people are by that, set in "opposition" to each other.

Being fat or slim makes little difference to the essence of you. How we define each other does because it often dictates how we treat each other. Weight division is a tool of the crusade. Some in FA are perhaps inadvertently taking that on, as that's where their heads have been put by that very crusade's mal-logic.

My attitude is and has always been differences don't fall across any weight categorizations. "Weight loss" as in calorie restriction dieting and its epic failure just adds a sense that we are looking across a massive biological chasm.

We aren't.

Far from wishing to eliminate us the 'obesity' cultists are in two minds. Their actions though speak to wishing to establish division using weight.

Always note, does this differ from anything they've been telling us to do before?

Though the approach may change on the surface, the answer is no.

Sunday, 22 March 2015

Useful Humiliation

During one of the recent tawdry non-discussions about 'obesity' from the anorexia worshiping classes, humiliation was proclaimed a time honoured technique to control unwanted elements and that it actually works.

And indeed it does. It clearly worked to suppress gayness. Which illustrates the point, the ends don't justify the means.

It's an often heard cry from fat activists that bullying and stigma don't work. This is of course untrue, they did. It's what people were being bullied into sticking with that didn't. Fat people willingly participated in dieting. Like everyone else we thought it would work.

Fat people started off dieting with crusaders zeal. We had no reason to doubt. Whether we were put on diets as children, many of us, or chose to in childhood like myself to, as often our first masterplan of continued self will.

Though they don't necessarily state it clearly, religious fundamentalists are aware that being gay is a pronounced, unconsciously directed orientation. They didn't care either about the damage repressing people into self repression and staying their does.

They too wish/ed to punish gay people for being gay.

Punishment is a powerful urge, when it is allowed to lead it will overturn into compulsion. It will become the end.  Ditto humiliation.

Yes, it's probably the case that humiliation can reset a person's ability to stick with starving themselves for longer, or any other action they're body is fighting. But dieting is inherently undesirable and goes nowhere.

If everyone's so desperate to reduce anyone's eating, whether normal or not, then humiliation should be scientifically tested. The right kind should be clearly identified and the ability to provoke it should be exact, repeated over and over, to get the same results in experiments.

Of course humiliation is unlikely to stand up to such disciplined inquiry, assuming it was ethically permitted. But if even if it did, you know what? I'd still say shelve it. 

Saturday, 21 March 2015

Blinds Up

I like my window allusions, so.....continuing with that theme-or not...just a word on why fat phobes/those with inured with the conventional take on weight are so messed up in the head with it.

The first critic is your inner one. If I say; "The UK Prime Minister is an expert on metabolic function." I know before I've got to the end of that sentence, whilst composing it in my head, that this doesn't appear to be so.

I have other knowledge, understanding, information, already that my minds checks through to make sense of what I'm thinking. Like when you sound out your friends for their response.

Your mind attempts to run info coming it and going out, via the relevant facts it already knows. So quick and brilliant is the-organ-that-seems-to-be-you, that often before you've finished thinking a thought, it's already worked out how much sense it's made.

The amazing thing is not the extent of our cognitive errors, but how few of them there are compared with how many there could be.

Anyway, the conscious mind is like the blinds covering a window, to your greater mind. Blinds adjust to let the light in i.e. being receptive to incoming information, open minded. Or they can keep it out and you become unreceptive to info, closed minded. When the blinds are down obviously.

Then you can just have the blinds right up, in order to let something in that wouldn't otherwise pass muster in your conscious mind. You suspend the sense that would activate your bullshit detector. The other knowledge you have in your mind would stop it.

In order to accept the mindrot that is the 'obesity' construct and its attendant bullshit, one has to have the blinds up. That is why those who accept it  can make little sense. i.e. let's pretend bodies are disease and the workings of those bodies are disease in action.

But, though its disease its also a choice, but a bit genetic, but mostly passed on through "bad habits," it can be totally prevented but not cured and no cure/resolution is possible, we aren't looking for or advocating for one either, our failed strategy's failure is depressing, but we'll keep it anyway, it's treatment, but you have to do all the work and it does nothing, so isn't treatment...............

When all that's required is-let's find out how the system/s concerned work. Then let's find out how to manipulate it to change its outcome/s to what we demand.

That's the least you can do, if you insist.

From there we can see how those manipulations affects problems with that system and have an idea on further potential for solving them completely or partially. And so on. You'd think they'd want to help those they haven't cast as villains.

Only with the blinds up, could you be trying desperately to 'prove' what you don't believe in order to claim that leads to everyone submitting to a failed modus operandi.

Thursday, 19 March 2015

It takes a hell of a lot of effort to be an 'obese'

Celebrity response to fat phobia are something I've never been invested in. Overwhelmingly, no matter how honest and positive they can be at any one moment about being human whilst fat. They'll likely be examples of them being otherwise.

Millican once make one of those execrable paedo [fat] phobe remarks about a fat boy's chest being more greatly endowed than hers. Word to the wise, never again.

I don't feel 'betrayed' by weight reversals, along with the societal pressure on everyone, the business they're in but more importantly the fact that they tend to become wealthier if not outright rich makes that pretty much an inevitability at some point-to whatever degree/time frame or other.
Mindy Kaling on wasting energy merely to remain 'normal'/chubby  

Overall, Kaling has a pretty much mainstream attitude to weight. The specific point she's making seems to me to be refutating the default brainwart that if you are anything above thin-you don't engage in calories in/out style wasting. Though the context it was said in was fat =bad. Ragen felt it was a good fatty thing [I'll get onto that later].

As some of us can see, such is the bankrupt dysfunctional inefficiency of wasting energy to supposedly regulate/ lose weight-or "weight-management" cannot reliably be expected to consistently/ permanently reverse anyone's weight, no matter their starting point. It's not an 'obese' thing as is being sold by 'obesity' quacksters and restriction diet shills. 

Common or garden "working out" and having a healthy or restrictive diet leaves most people above thin remaining pretty much where they are, give or take and those who are thin do not have to take breaks because they're dematerializing.

In fact, many of them start to gain bulk from the former, for the first time. Part of the so called "French secret" and why you don't see as many of the size that is being sized-out for being small as you did pre 'fitness culture.'

I've always wished women would come out of the closet and own up to how much cals in/out they actually practise. Regardless of weight. It might make it make more sense for fat people to say what they do also. And what some don't. Because fat people are not a monolith.

Oh!Bese etc., is convenient fiction.

Some fat people do as much as slimmer people who say they "do nothing" or do lots-the latter possibly cut down on activity elsewhere too-who knows? Polarity of slim/fat is false. Fat people vary as does everyone. The more people speak honestly, being widely varied in habits and approved effort, at the same or similar weights the better.

If that's "confusing" tough.

Fat people haven't just dieted in ways that could make honest people weep. We've also expended and suppressed a tremendous amount of energy play dehumanizing dis-ease-which of course you have to blunt yourself with insult to achieve said effect. There's having to suppress your most basic critical faculties and ultimately intelligence-to repeat the same folly over and over, expecting some other outcome as well as "fitness" and dietary restriction.

It takes most effort of all to be an 'obese' its draining and unrewarding for the effort expended. Which is of course roundly denied by all and sundry.

Often led by the fat person most of all.