Response to "why it's okay to be fat."

I spent most of my 20s being really fat. And the only reason I'm not fat anymore is because I stopped trying to convince myself that being fat is okay. It isn't. It's perfectly fine to acknowledge the fact that being fat doesn't make you a horrible person, and certainly bullying people because of their weight (be they fat or thin) is not okay. But for me, accepting my body at any level of "fat" would mean accepting mediocrity. I can't and won't ever, EVER do that again. I deserve better. Loving yourself and accepting your body when your body represents years of mistreatment are not the same thing.

I think the article brings up an interesting point: semantics can be a big thing.

Even with just the title, we can have different takes on the same six words of "why it's okay to be fat".

If we take "okay to be fat" as meaning "you don't need to worry about being fat" or "you're just fine being fat", most of us would disagree on physiological grounds. As far as the physical human body goes, it is not "just fine" to be fat because it can cause problems that could be avoided. Most of us have come to the conclusion that we need to reduce or control the amount of fat in our bodies.

However, if we take it to mean "you aren't a bad person becuse you're fat", I think most of us would agree. One's value as a human being on the psychological / spiritual / social realm is not dictated by their body fat percentage, so we shouldn't value others within those realms based on it, either.

A challenge is that we often tie them together and, when people hear "it is bad to be fat", many take it to mean it is bad on physical AND personal grounds. Instead of saying "it is bad for my body to be fat", they rope their psychological / spiritual self into it and say "as a person, I am bad because I'm fat".

Personally, I have found peace and discipline by recognizing my psychological / spiritual / social identity as being a separate entity from my body, even though one is contained within the other. My non-physical identity is where my worth is. But I pay attention to my body fat and phsyiology because I still need to maintain the physical body that encapsulates the non-physical elements.

That is, however, where I do find my primary disagreement with the article. The author says it's okay "Even if and when that might mean it damages your health." Well, it's not really. Because the non-physical elements where our value as people come from rely on the survival of the physical body. You can be a great person, but if you die because you fail to take maintenance seriously, you limit your ability to contribute to society because you're dead.

I spent most of my 20s being really fat. And the only reason I'm not fat anymore is because I stopped trying to convince myself that being fat is okay. It isn't. It's perfectly fine to acknowledge the fact that being fat doesn't make you a horrible person, and certainly bullying people because of their weight (be they fat or thin) is not okay. But for me, accepting my body at any level of "fat" would mean accepting mediocrity. I can't and won't ever, EVER do that again. I deserve better. Loving yourself and accepting your body when your body represents years of mistreatment are not the same thing.

"I think the fact that almost every woman I know hates her body so much that it interferes with her life is a bigger concern.

I think the fact that the overwhelming response to a woman saying “it’s okay to be fat” (and really, “it’s okay to look like me.”) is to make fun of, belittle and call her stupid is much, much, much more appalling than the statistics about obesity in this country."

I just want to wrap my arms around this statement and never let go. Perfect. Just perfect.

I think the article brings up an interesting point: semantics can be a big thing.

Even with just the title, we can have different takes on the same six words of "why it's okay to be fat".

If we take "okay to be fat" as meaning "you don't need to worry about being fat" or "you're just fine being fat", most of us would disagree on physiological grounds. As far as the physical human body goes, it is not "just fine" to be fat because it can cause problems that could be avoided. Most of us have come to the conclusion that we need to reduce or control the amount of fat in our bodies.

However, if we take it to mean "you aren't a bad person becuse you're fat", I think most of us would agree. One's value as a human being on the psychological / spiritual / social realm is not dictated by their body fat percentage, so we shouldn't value others within those realms based on it, either.

A challenge is that we often tie them together and, when people hear "it is bad to be fat", many take it to mean it is bad on physical AND personal grounds. Instead of saying "it is bad for my body to be fat", they rope their psychological / spiritual self into it and say "as a person, I am bad because I'm fat".

Personally, I have found peace and discipline by recognizing my psychological / spiritual / social identity as being a separate entity from my body, even though one is contained within the other. My non-physical identity is where my worth is. But I pay attention to my body fat and phsyiology because I still need to maintain the physical body that encapsulates the non-physical elements.

That is, however, where I do find my primary disagreement with the article. The author says it's okay "Even if and when that might mean it damages your health." Well, it's not really. Because the non-physical elements where our value as people come from rely on the survival of the physical body. You can be a great person, but if you die because you fail to take maintenance seriously, you limit your ability to contribute to society because you're dead.