Calorie Counter

You are currently viewing the message boards in:

Jillian Michael comments about Lizzo

12346

Replies

  • AnnPT77AnnPT77 Posts: 13,742Member Member Posts: 13,742Member Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    I suppose after watching that I have to acknowledge that there is something about her that just rubs me the wrong way. Maybe she reminds me of someone who done me wrong in the past :blush:

    Anyway, I still fail to see obesity being "glamorized", especially to the point we have to worry that obese people will think it's healthy. Just because there are 3 or 4 famous women at any given time who are obese and celebrated doesn't a sea change make.

    There are still thousands of young women starving themselves to be skinny. There are still actresses, models, and musicians being pressured to lose weight or have surgery to look more thin. There are still celebrities all over the internet and airwaves being celebrated for drinking ACV or doing keto or eating organic-macrobiotic-vegan or talking about the 2 hour workout their celebrity trainer puts them through. Diet and fitness books are still a multi-million dollar industry. People are still so desperate to lose weight that Peloton knows they will spend $2500 on a bike/laundry rack, stupid commercial or not. The fact that the media "celebrates" Ashley Graham and Lizzo for owning their physical presence without shame does not actually seem to be having a society-altering affect, especially considering many of the people commenting here had to go google who Lizzo was. I know lots of people who are overweight or obese, and while they believe a lot of myths, none of them believe they are healthy that way. Many of them think of themselves as unattractive and as failures because they are overweight. I know more than one who has considered self-harm. That is far more worrying to me.

    Perhaps if it seemed to me like "obese=perfectly healthy" was a growing popular trend, her whole narrative wouldn't bother me that much. But I'd guess that her promoting the idea that obese celebrities are a danger to society is just as much attention seeking as Lizzo wearing thong-pants.

    I think I mostly agree with you, in that overweight has been so demonized and shamed for so long (I think maybe especially so among women, even at relatively lower weights, but maybe I only think that because I notice that more, being a woman myself).

    I do think there's a strain of overboard-ness in the rhetoric, sometimes, though, and that's a worry. (I'd go as far as saying I do think "obese can be perfectly healthy" is an idea that's gradually increasing strength in popular culture, though it's not dominant.)

    There are certainly also thousands of women who are seriously overweight or obese and in some form of denial (slow metabolism, impossible to lose, BMI is wrong because athletes, etc., etc.), not just over-thin women who are in denial. (I agree that the get-thin industry is riding the money train more, of course. But much of that industry may also have some insight that keeping people fat, or yo-yo-ing, is important to their continuing profit; and selling (and super-sizing) candy and fast food and soda is a pretty big industry, too.)

    Yes, we see people (mostly women) here on MFP (and elsewhere) thinking they're fat at BMI 19 or less, and wanting to get thinner, posting photos of obviously posed/photoshopped IG-ers or celebrities and asking how to look like that, etc.

    But we do also see here people saying they are/were healthy despite being overweight/obese, or arguing that anything in the normal BMI range would be waaay too skinny/sick/skeletal (and not always just for themselves), or mentioning relatives who lived long and well at high bodyweights. Overweight and obesity are somewhat normalized, in a practical sense. Nonetheless, statistically, odds are pretty low of lifelong good health at an obese bodyweight.

    I am not saying those extremes are usual cases; I'm saying that there are a small number of cases of distorted thinking at both ends of the bodyweight range. Either of these extremes can be dangerous to one degree or another, and both concern me. Therefore, mystification or click-baiting around those issues, or beliefs that put discussion of health off limits, also concerns me. (One respect in which I think JM is right is that the health side of it needn't be personalized in public discourse.)

    I'm far from arguing that Lizzo is a danger to society (I kind of find her a breath of fresh air, actually, overall). I don't care for Jillian Michaels, but it seems that when you take her remarks in context, they're not deeply unreasonable, either.

    Both people are celebrities who have some practice at presenting themselves in public, more so than most of us. Nonetheless, they are just people in the last analysis, and people are going to put things in ways that can be misinterpreted or that don't fully reflect their considered opinions, are going to act impulsively at times, etc. They're real people.

    What I do think is that regular everyday people who are eager to rationalize their own risky behavior - at either extreme of weight range - will seize on rhetoric in popular culture that helps them shore up those rationalizations. That's not necessarily a conscious choice, either.

    I guess I'd still argue that the one of the most negative forces in all of this are the clickbait slingers who take things out of context, to fuel the outrage flames and the "culture wars". By and large, I think they know what they're doing, and do it intentionally, out of pure self-interest. It's on us when we get hooked by that.

    If I feel outrage when I read something, and want to share/repost/click etc., I think that ought to be a mental prompt to think a little harder and dig a little deeper before doing so, because it's likely that someone is trying to manipulate me, whether for simple profit, or for more pernicious reasons.

    And I still think it's pretty silly to be outraged at Lizzo's near-bare behind, when there's a whole troupe of women on the court paid to shake those thangs, whose cheekiness is only maybe 30-40% covered vs. Lizzo's 10% covered (I'm making up those numbers, but trying to make it a fair estimate in consideration of differing BMIs. The Laker girls, at times, perform in pretty high-cut bikini bottoms, though sometimes with a flirty li'l skirt or fringe on top that flies up oh so charmingly as they dance ;) ).

    Yes, Lizzo was more extreme, but outrage at her while ignoring them or thinking of them as somehow much more wholesome also carries some cultural baggage, IMO. There's always a line in what degree of public self-exposure is considered "decent", but the actual difference in exposure here is slicing it pretty fine, IMO. :lol: I think it's making a difference that she is who she is, and is unusual; and they're just a routine part of the normal show that we take for granted.
    edited January 17
  • FoodBodyChangesFoodBodyChanges Posts: 29Member, Premium Member Posts: 29Member, Premium Member
    Of course a fitness trainer is going to speak to health and fitness. The more interesting question is why the interviewer focused on a very large woman as opposed to a female figure whose body displays too low body fat to be healthy. As a culture we celebrate the physiques of models, ballet dancers, gymnasts, and bodybuilders. Let's talk about the cardiovascular dangers of things like cutting, anorexia & bulimia - and the added dangers to women when their body fat gets so low their menses stop.
  • lynn_glenmontlynn_glenmont Posts: 7,554Member Member Posts: 7,554Member Member
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    jseams1234 wrote: »
    jm_1234 wrote: »
    Regarding Lizzo... Lizzo rubs her body in people's faces in a way that seems like a PR stunt. As an example just google Lizzo Lakers and warning what she did at the Lakers game is NSFW. Lizzo does the same thing other celebs do but she is appealing to a different demographic so she is using a different tool.

    I interpret JM as saying Lizzo should not be defined by and should not get value by her body but more so by her singing. While it doesn't objectify via reduction to Lizzo's body, it is wrong also.

    IMO the saddest thing about this and most movements is companies & celebs are telling people what emotions are ok to feel - and now we should only feel positive emotions about our bodies. It should be ok to feel all emotions about our bodies because we are human, our self worth and value is not based on external changeable factors but on the sole fact we are human.

    Unless she made physical contact with people's faces, she is not rubbing her body in people's faces. She's just going out in the world in the body she lives in, and how other people react to that is their choice. (I don't click on NSW videos, so I don't know what she did, but since it's "the same thing other celebs do" I have to assume it's not illegal, like indecent exposure.)

    It's not a literal term and you know that. She wore a dress that had a giant circle cut out of the rear that showed her complete *kitten* which was only covered by a thong. She then, in a public place, with tens of thousands of people present - many of them young children, twerked that uncovered *kitten* for everybody to see.

    Nice "whataboutisms" further down - but I don't think Madonna, Howard Stern, or any other celebrity that I can think of has done something like this at a sports game in recent memory... maybe on stage or in Howard's case to promote a stupid movie.

    So the parents of these young children are okay with the uniforms of the Laker Girls, which expose nearly as much, but seeing Lizzo's body is the bridge too far? We see as much of other celebrities all the time. Opposing it as a general trend, I get, but claiming that Lizzo is somehow worse is ridiculous. She's not the first celebrity to appear in the thong, she's not the first celebrity to twerk, she's not the first celebrity to reveal to kids that adults have butts.

    Has Madonna done something like this in *recent* memory? Not that I'm aware of. But come on, you're acting like bringing up *Madonna* isn't relevant in a discussion about how Lizzo isn't the first female singer to display her body? That's not "whataboutism," it's acknowledging the reality that Lizzo is part of a hearty and longstanding tradition of female singers, she's just one of the biggest people to engage in it.

    The way I understand it she was an audience member showing her *kitten* at a game not a performer. The last time I saw a sporting event none of the cheerleaders or scheduled entertainers were wearing visible thongs.

    NBD, she is most likely somewhere around 14:30 on her 15:00 minutes if she feels she needs to do that to get attention.

    So the argument is that it is appropriate to show parts of your body if you're performing, but if you're merely part of the audience it isn't? I am not convinced of this. What's the relevant difference?

    If she had been performing at halftime in that uniform, it would somehow be more acceptable?

    The spectators generally know what the cheerleader look like at a sporting event and the leagues have certain standards they must abide by. They also have rules for costumes used by any of the entertainment at the game. If a spectator doesn't want to see the league approved dress (cheerleaders or entertainment), they have the right not to go to the event.

    If the NBA says a thong is fine dress for an entertainer, go for it with my blessings. If a publicity hound chooses to drop his or her drawers at a sporting event not really a fan of that.

    She didn't "drop her drawers." She was wearing a revealing dress, one that is legal. You've seen just as much of other pop stars. We don't have a right to control what others wear just because we're buying a ticket to an NBA game.

    Do you think that if you as a spectator at a game wore the same outfit, revealed yourself and acted in the same way you wouldn't at the very least be told to quit or possibly, more likely get kicked out and/or get a disorderly conduct violation?

    It was a cheap publicity stunt that people paying good money to attend the game shouldn't be subjected to IMO. If the team authorized it another story.

    My thoughts don't change regardless of her appearance.

    The "team" (in the sense of the business) let her in dressed that way and apparently chose to play one of her songs knowing she was sitting court-side, and then apparently chose to display her thong-exposed rear while she was dancing to her song on the jumbotron, so, yeah, I don't think there's any "if" to whether the team authorized it.

    You have obviously researched this more than I have (afraid what ads, suggestions, etc I would get if I Googled Lizzo twerking). It sounds like a publicity set up. Let them go for it. Fans that don't like that type of thing at a game can vote with their wallets and stay home.

    That said, my earlier comment still stands - "she is most likely somewhere around 14:30 on her 15:00 minutes if she feels she needs to do that to get attention".

    My only research was reading this thread. I didn't google or click on the links for the same reason you mention. Thus all the "apparently"s in my post -- I'm taking the (unchallenged) accounts of what happened at face value.
  • nooshi713nooshi713 Posts: 3,926Member Member Posts: 3,926Member Member
    shunggie wrote: »
    nooshi713 wrote: »
    I see nothing wrong with what she said. She wasn’t being insulting. We are entitled to our opinions

    @nooshi713 I like how someone disagreed when your last line is we are entitled to our opinion. I'm assuming they don't disagree with that part :)

    Yep!!
  • neugebauer52neugebauer52 Posts: 1,096Member Member Posts: 1,096Member Member
    ...and J.M's. opinion is important because?.....
  • bobsburgersfanbobsburgersfan Posts: 2,449Member Member Posts: 2,449Member Member
    jm_1234 wrote: »
    The real issue is attaching our body to our self worth in general, even if it is positive. Our value should not change no matter how we feel about our body. There are days I feel like a monster and days I feel good looking - but my value never waivers.
    >light bulb< Thank you for saying this.
Sign In or Register to comment.