October 26th, 2010

Remember back when Glamour had the Girl on the Bottom of Page 194 Lizzie Miller? It seems that we take two steps forward and three steps back when it comes to the glossies. Witness this latest post on Marie Claire’s sex and love blog, straight (and apparently without being vetted by a sane editor) from the mouth of Maura Kelly, who objects to the new fat people tv shows like Mike and Molly and Huge:

I’d be grossed out if I had to watch two characters with rolls and rolls of fat kissing each other … because I’d be grossed out if I had to watch them doing anything. To be brutally honest, even in real life, I find it aesthetically displeasing to watch a very, very fat person simply walk across a room — just like I’d find it distressing if I saw a very drunk person stumbling across a bar or a heroine addict slumping in a chair.

Oh, before you get upset about this, you should know that Kelly insists that she doesn’t hate fat people, and in fact, has some friends who are pudgy, so really, it’s because she cares so much about our health. Oh, ok then! She also offers the advice that if we exercised more and ate whole foods, we’d lose weight in a jiffy.  Fat people never do any of those things! Maura Kelly saves the day! As usual, my hardcore crush Lesley nails it:

…you’re not required to find all fat people attractive, certainly, but Kelly’s comments above are dehumanizing and offensive and really have no place associated with a widely-read publication such as Marie Claire. This is not simply because their candor subverts the standard feel-good ladymag message of “Love yourself! (But not too much!)” but because sentiments like those expressed in Kelly’s post are bad for everyone: they make fat people feel terrible about themselves, and they make thin people terrified of becoming one of those disgusting fatties they so revile.

After reading Ms. Kelly’s blurb on her alumni website, I was most struck by this paragraph:

She struggled with anorexia growing up and credits the psychologists who worked with her for helping her to overcome the disorder. She was so thankful to her psychologists that she decided to major in psychology at Dartmouth so she could one day help others in the same way. Upon graduation, Kelly reread Catcher in the Rye and decided that being a psychologist no longer appealed to her and what she really wanted to do was write a book that would “make people feel less alone in the world.”

After reading the comments on the Marie Claire blog (seriously, go read them and cheer), I feel bad for Kelly. Her sizist screed against fat has obviously more to do with her own eating disorder (which she wrote about and examined in depth in this NYTimes article) and body dysmorphia than any actual concern for the health and welfare of her common man.  Check out her anecdote where  man told her that she looked “athletic” and she mentally twisted it into being called fat. Also, I’m absolutely betting that the next time she bumps into Marie Claire’s pet plus-sized columnist Ashley Falcon in the elevator, it’s going to be awwwwkward!

Good luck with that making “people feel less alone in the world” thing, Maura! You certainly have bonded the fatosphere in outrage and disbelief.

Posted by Weetabix

Filed under: Fatism, Huge, Magazines, Mike & Molly, Weetabix | 47 Comments »

October 22nd, 2010

A Sunday morning ritual at Casa Bix involves a cup of coffee, the New York Times and a pug in my lap and Food Network on the TV, where Esteban and I provide a running MST3K commentary on Sandra Lee and Rachael Ray. We love Ina the most, mostly because unlike several TV chefs, her recipes actually taste good whereas recipes from Rachael Ray and Alton Brown are hit or miss. And I freely admit that I have some fat girl bias, but I am pretty sure that my preference for Ina has to do with her recipes turning out well in my own kitchen versus any contention that the only good cook is a fat cook. Check out the fat bias in this editorial from Matt Kass at the Chicago Tribune:

Cooks require heft, to prove they eat their own creations….It’s not just the skinny women chefs. I don’t trust skinny male chefs either, especially if they’re dressed like teenage vampires in “Twilight” with their skinny black jeans and tight T-shirts and ample hair product. When I think of a chef I can trust, I think of cooks with gravitas, some weight on their bones, women who clearly are no strangers to the knife and fork.

Before you start thinking about this being a win for fat acceptance, think again: I don’t care if it’s disregarding Beth Ditto on the runway because she’s over size 12 or disregarding Padma Lakshmi because she’s under size 12, it’s still sizism no matter how you slice it.  Sure, fats are getting the positive assumption that they are more competent when it comes to food, but it’s just as damaging as assuming an athlete is stupid or a gay person is good with fashion. And the assumption that you’re such a good chef that you can’t stop eating your own creations is insulting at best, not to mention the bad reasoning that fat OR thin chefs are only eating their own food. Certainly, we can point to some anecdotal evidence to support the stereotype of a great chef at a higher BMI but we can just as easily point out situations to the opposite. For every Mario Batali, there’s a Grant Achatz who is amazing in the kitchen (trust me, the man’s food is perfection)!

What do you guys think? Do you distrust thin chefs? The comments are dying for some juicy morsels!

Posted by Weetabix

Filed under: Beth Ditto, Fatism, TV, Weetabix | 23 Comments »

October 19th, 2010

1. Kirstie Alley’s new “weight loss program” is probably based on lies, according to the ever-reliable National Enquirer. (Hey, they were right about John Edwards.) (Note: the article uses slightly fat-phobic language.)

[Alley] recently bragged on her Twitter site that she’s lost 50 pounds with exercise and her Organic Liaison weight-loss program. But those close to her say she’s lost barely half that weight and that there’s no way she’s down to 180 pounds!

What’s more, a photo taken on Sept. 29…shows that the plus-size actress hasn’t lost nearly as much as she claims… The struggling star “has been goosing her weight-loss numbers” – insisting she’s dropped 50 pounds, when it’s more like 25…

In September, while in Italy, she tweeted that she had lost 50 pounds, posting a photo of herself surrounded by handsome men. But the picture appeared to be air-brushed to make Kirstie look thin, and she hid her lower body behind one of the hunky men.

As if weight-loss programs aren’t enough of a scam, hers doesn’t even temporarily work! I hunted down that picture so you can see for yourself. She does look pretty airbrushed, no?

2. Ricky Gervais has lost weight recently, and now feels like jokes about fat people are off-limits.

“Now I’ve got to stop making jokes about fat people, which is annoying. When I was fat, it was okay,” the creator of ‘The Office’ tells People. Gervais, 49, lost “20 or 22 pounds,” he says. “It wasn’t so much about the weight. It was more that I was a fat, lazy, out of shape slob, to be honest.”

Ricky Gervais shutting up about fat people is probably for the best, then, isn’t it? Oh, Ricky.

3. Kim Kardashian posed nude for W Magazine (photos at this link are NSFW) and the pictures are everywhere. There have been a lot of ugly comments that I’m sure you can find if you search for about ten seconds, but I liked this one:

I’m 5’1 and I love the way I look, and it’s nice to see more women with hourglass figures in the media lately, being unafraid to [bare] it all, like Christina Hendricks and Ms. Kardashian here. I’m not going to stop loving myself just because I have the figure of a cartoon character.

Stop the hate, people! There’s so much hate in the world, do we really have to tear each other down over how we perceive each others’ bodies?

4. Crystal Renn is a size 10, and Manolo for the Big Girl is over it.

There’s nothing wrong with being a size 10. She’s had a tough row to hoe body-image wise and if that’s where her body is happy then far be it from me to complain.

But she’s a size 10.

That’s not plus-sized, that’s not close to plus-sized and even though I am the biggest fashion industry apologist on the planet, I just can’t pretend that she counts as a plus-sized model in any meaningful sense and therefore she deserves no more and no less press or attention than any other model who doesn’t wear plus-size clothes.

I’m a big proponent for variety and I’d rather see a size 10 model as a staple than a size 20 as a gimmick every few years, but the days of breathlessly reporting on her every move as a victory for fat girl kind –inasmuch as I ever have– are over.

5. Via