Wednesday, June 28, 2006

I am sick to death of hate mongers claiming that their fat-bashing is motivated by concern for their fellow humans' health. If they were truly concerned, they would not trot out venom and vitriol every time the subject arises. Even if their concern were as genuine as they tell themselves it is, the "facts" that they hold as though they were handed down on divinely-inscribed tablets are questionable, to say the least.

There are a dozens medical studies pretty much proving that most of the conventional wisdom about obesity is myth and that much of one's tendency to gain weight is hereditary. It was recently proven that a low-fat diet doesn't even protect women from disease.

I'm seriously considering suing Lucasfilm for royalties for basing the Jabba the Hutt character on my baby pictures. (OK, not seriously, but the resemblance is striking.)

Dieting is a multi-billion dollar business. Even most obesity researchers are funded by the diet industry.

What this means is that the studies are not scientific in the sense that they seek the truth. They are designed specifically to "prove" that fat is unhealthy. In any other discipline, that front-loaded conclusion would be laughed out of peer review as junk science.

Skinny <> Healthy. When was the last time you saw an obese junkie? How many people have you met in your life who eat garbage in huge quantities while lying around the house and who look all but skeletal? I've known several. They have the metabolisms of hummingbirds. Everyone accepts that their bodies just work like that. Why can't they accept the opposite? Some of us are Humvees, going half a block on a 1000 calorie and others are Priuses, and could walk 100 miles with the same 1000-calorie expenditure. (OK, slight hyperbole, but you get the analogy, nonetheless.) We don't all function the same way and shouldn't be expected to conform to an ideal that has no basis in our individual realities.

Don't bother with the "Law of Thermodynamics" argument. Even if humans were "closed systems," scientists have discovered that the human body has quirks that can't really be explained in the lab (yet).

Yes, as a nation, we are getting heavier, but we're also getting taller and possibly more muscular. (I'll bet you never saw Donna Reed hitting the gym.) As muscle is denser than fat, a taller, more muscular person will weigh more than shorter, fatter one. Even if there is more "fat" than "muscle" in the increase, if obesity is such a freakin' "epidemic," why are death rates dropping sharply even as we, as a nation, get heavier? Could it possibly be that fat is not the demon we've been led to believe?

In my case, Henry Ford himself called my grandfather "the biggest Ford dealer East of the Mississippi" - all 400 pounds of him. I have obesity on both sides of my family, so I'm fighting a losing battle out of the gate. I have been diagnosed with a "sluggish" thyroid, but it goes untreated because I don't want to have to go to the doctor every six weeks to get a new blood test and a prescription renewal. As for the claim that someone made that most doctors automatically test for hypothyroidism in obese patients, that's simply not true. If a patient presents with multiple symptoms (not just weight, but sleep disturbances, hair falling out, etc.) a doctor may grudgingly agree to the simpler of two known tests. This test does not detect sub-clinical hypothyroidism which is fairly common. Thyroid problems also become more common with age. Most heavy patients have had the experience of being told that losing weight will solve their medical problems, regardless of the problem presented. I was once told to go on a diabetic diet because there was "nothing but post-nasal drip" wrong with [me]." Well, when I banned the smokers at work from my work area and put in an air filter, I suddenly got better without losing an ounce! Overweight and obese people frequently receive sub-standard care because their doctors can't see beyond the number on the scale.

A Yale study on the stigmatization of obesity found that not only were the obese judged harshly, so were those who associated with them.

"On both implicit and explicit measures, health professionals associated the stereotypes lazy, stupid and worthless with obese people," said Dr Schwartz.

"The stigma of obesity is so strong that even those most knowledgeable about the condition infer that obese people have blameworthy behavioural characteristics that contribute to their problem, i.e. being lazy," she said.

"Furthermore, these biases extend to core characteristics of intelligence and personal worth."

In response to that study, Dr Ian Campbell of the UK's National Obesity Forum stated:

"It is disappointing but it is not surprising to see that health professionals have the same ingrained prejudice against obese people as the general public," he told BBC News Online.

"It is becoming increasingly clear that as much as 80% of people who are obese are predisposed genetically.

"Although it is very rare to find a case where obesity is purely genetic, there are many cases where it is not in the patient's control."

As for genetic predisposition of obesity, there are numerous studies of twins separated at birth whose weight is comparable regardless of the lifestyles of their adoptive families, even when corrected for social and economic factors. That is, both twins will be fat or slender, regardless of the financial status or the eating habits of their respective adoptive families. The most famous of twins studies was performed by Dr. Albert Stunkard at the University of Pennsylvania in 1990, and studied both separated twins and those raised together. It included both identical and fraternal twins.

They found that the identical twins, whose average age was 58 at the time of the study, had nearly identical body-mass indices, whether they were reared apart or together and that the fraternal twins varied much more, even if they were reared together. This means that ''almost all the differences in weight between members of a population are due to genetic differences,'' said Dr. Jennifer R. Harris, a researcher with the study who is from the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm.

You may be able to convince yourself that that's coincidence. I don't buy it.

Recent studies show that being above the "recommended" BMI actually DECREASES one's chance of death in relation to being under or at a so-called "normal" weight. To me, that says that our national perception of "normal" and "healthy" are set too low. According to the "recommended BMI," the following celebrities should drop a few pounds:

OVERWEIGHT:
Barry Bonds: 6'2": 228 lbs: 29
David Boreanaz: 6'2": 218 lbs: 28
Tom Brady: 6'4": 225 lbs: 27
President Bush: 5'11": 191 lbs: 26
Nic Cage: 6'1": 210 lbs: 28
George Clooney: 5'11": 211 lbs: 29
Tom Cruise: 5'7": 170 lbs: 26
Matt Damon: 5'11": 187 lbs: 26
Johnny Depp: 5'7": 190 lbs: 27
David Duchovny: 6'0": 212 lbs: 29
Vin Diesel: 6'2": 200 lbs: 26
Cheryl Ford: 6'3": 215 lbs:27
Harrison Ford: 6'1": 218 lbs: 29
Brendan Fraser: 6'3": 234 lbs: 29
Richard Gere: 5'11": 187 lbs: 26
Ethan Hawke: 5'9": 172 lbs: 25
Hugh Jackman: 6'2": 210 lbs: 27
Lebron James: 6'8": 240 lbs: 26
Dale Jarrett: 6'2": 200 lbs: 26
Bobby Labonte: 5'9": 170 lbs: 25
Nick Lachey: 5'10": 180 lbs: 26
Karl Malone: 6'9": 259 lbs: 28
Dr. Phil McGraw: 6'4": 240 lbs: 29
Yao Ming: 7'6": 310 lbs: 27
Brad Pitt: 6'0": 203 lbs: 28
Keanu Reeves: 6'1": 223 lbs: 29
Cal Ripken: 6'4": 210 lbs: 27
Andy Roddick: 6'2": 197 lbs: 25
Will Smith: 6'2": 210 lbs: 27
Denzel Washington: 6'0": 199 lbs: 27
Bruce Willis: 6'0": 200 lbs: 29
Billy Zane: 6'2": 210 lbs: 27

OBESE:
Mel Gibson 5'9": 214 pounds: 32
Matt LeBlanc: 5'11": 218 lbs: 30
Mark McGuire (playing weight): 6'5": 250 lbs: 30
Donovan McNabb: 6'3": 240 lbs: 30
Steve McNair: 6'2": 235 lbs: 30
The Rock (Dwayne Johnson): 6'5": 275 lbs: 33
Arnold Schwarzenegger: 6'2": 257 lbs: 33
Sammy Sosa: 6'0": 220 lbs: 30
Sylvester Stallone: 5'9": 228 lbs: 34
Mike Tyson: 5'11 ½": fighting weight between 218-235: 30-32
Jesse "The Rock" Ventura 6'5": 255 lbs: 30.2

Mel Gibson obese? Please. I detest the man, but he's certainly not obese!

A famous study conducted in the 1960s in Roseto, Pennsylvania, a small town populated almost entirely by Italian immigrants, found that in spite of a high prevalence of smoking and a diet heavy in saturated fat, the town had a remarkably low incidence of heart disease. This fact was attributed to the closeness of the community and the persistence of communal rituals. "People are nourished by other people," wrote physician and co-author Stewart Wolf. Additionally, when younger members began to leave Roseto, those who were perceived as "overweight" by the general population started to have heart-related problems at approximately the same rate as other minority populations. So, were the heart problems a result of their weight or of being marginalized by society?

Anorexia and Bulimia cost the businesses $1.3 billion (that's with a "b") every year, yet people who suffer from those diseases are pitied, not vilified.

A great deal of the CDC's "societal health costs from obesity" figures were bogus. The CDC attributed any death of an overweight person to that person's weight, even if that person were 98 years old or hit by a bus. See The Emperor's New Crisis to see how the CDC manipulated the figures.

As for the "days of work lost," if I sprain my ankle, or catch the same bug that caused everyone else in the office to take time off, or have a baby, my lost time is attributed to my weight, where it wouldn't be if I were of a BMI under 25. For the past five years running, I, the "fatty" in the office, have clocked the highest number of hours worked in my company. My boss finally told me that I'm no longer allowed to work overtime, because those with families are taking advantage of my being single to foist all the crunch time work off on me. The slenderest person in the office is actually the one who has taken the most time off due to her health. I on the other hand, tend to be as healthy as a horse. I do have respiratory problems and fibromyalgia, but I had those when I was underweight, too. In fact, I had either strep or staph almost the entire time I was slender. I had to have a tonsillectomy at 22 to fix that problem.

What Everybody Knows About Being Fat is frequently wrong.

Until I see figures that say how much our national obsession with making everyone fit in the same (ectomorphic) mold costs the healthcare system related to anorexia, bulimia, malnutrition, depression, psychotherapy, and "healthy lifestyle" choices such as strains, sprains, broken bones, etc., I will not consider the "health care costs of obesity" a compelling argument for or against anything.

Besides, even if it were true that obesity were merely a matter of self-discipline, why should I have to obsess about food and exercise 8 to 12 hours a day (which is the only way I have ever maintained a socially-acceptable weight), making my life pretty much joyless just to conform to society's aesthetic preference? Why should I have to be miserable to look good just to avoid offending some stranger's sensibilities. I'm not killing kittens or bilking retirees out of their lives' savings. Why is it considered socially criminal to be aesthetically different? Should all ugly people be required to have plastic surgery? Who gets to make the call?

The last time there was such a national obsession with appearances, it was for blue-eyed blondes. That didn't work out too well for anybody

Of course, those who believe the hype will ignore all this and tell me that I and the (by their estimates) 188,424,911 Americans and who knows how many others worldwide are "delusional" because we insist that our experience doesn't match theirs.

I have decided that if my choices are to live emotionally starved or physically starved, I'll pich the former. I've done the latter and find that I'm happier alone and fed than starving and "acceptable" to strangers. As long as I feed them, my cats don't give a rat's ass about my BMI.

40 Comments:

At 28/6/06 5:51 PM, Blogger tonylav said...

Not fat, its called being cudly:)

 
At 12/7/06 11:51 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Please. Sounds like someone has done a lot of research to justify her daily need to consume 4000 calories a day. Fat is NEVER healthy and being obese is a tragedy. You should be ashamed of yourself for spreading so much bullshit. It's a good thing no one reads this blog since I appear to be one of "two" comments, one being from "tony" who is most likely your internet boyfriend and has a penchant for spelling cuddly wrong. Is it that hard to walk every day? To eat less? I have never been a thin person myself but I know that when I am thin I am healthier. My system runs smoothly. Its common sense. Gluttony is disgusting and so are you. I pray that one day you get out of your delusion and start losing some pounds. Your life depends on it.

 
At 12/7/06 12:20 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

That's one WHALE of a post!!

Hahahhahahahaha

I crack myself up sometimes...

:))

 
At 12/7/06 1:16 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let me guess: you sweat Crisco!

 
At 12/7/06 1:47 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"hate mongers claiming that their fat-bashing is motivated by concern for their fellow humans' health."

It's not what motivates me. I just hate fat people. Fat people should never go outside, so us normal people don't have to look at them. You're just disgusting, and I can't wait until you have angina so that you die from being fat and there's one less fat person to have to look at.

 
At 12/7/06 1:57 PM, Blogger Kate217 said...

WOW!!! You anonymous posters really told ME! I hope that makes you feel better.

 
At 12/7/06 2:21 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow, way to kick some ass.

Take no Prisoners!

and annonymous: cowards are not assigned any importance. Give your name, Oh Pathetic One.

 
At 12/7/06 4:07 PM, Blogger Laura said...

Hi Kate.

I enjoyed reading your post, and to hell with these anonymous comments. I disabled the anonymous function on my bog.

I think you are intelligent, and you write very well.

 
At 12/7/06 4:12 PM, Blogger Kate217 said...

Thanks, Laura, that's very kind of you. I have your blog bookmarked. Love your picture, BTW.

If I could disable the "anonymous" function without making people register, I would, but I don't think that can be done.

 
At 12/7/06 5:22 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Again, you get no comments other then today so why not make it anonymous? You aren't very smart. Don't flatter yourself thinking people read this other then to feel better about themselves. Moron.

 
At 12/7/06 6:55 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear Kate,
I applaud your entry! Some people feel they have to justify their hatred of others by pretending they care about our health...I feel badly for all of the abuse you have been dealing with. It just shows that even though humans have evolved somewhat, there are still neanderthals dwelling amongst us.
What I have read today made me feel sick to my stomach. I hope you don't mind me going anonymous. I don't wish to attract any of this scum to my site.

 
At 14/7/06 12:29 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear Kate,
I just wanted to add something else. I understand what you are trying to do to reason with these hateful people...but you can't reason with someone if they don't want to understand. These people are very comfortable degrading and hurting others because it makes them feel better about themselves. No amount of education or understanding will change that.
It's like trying to explain the theory of relativity to a bunch of chimpanzees. They don't want to learn, but I also think that they can't understand reason.
These people are miserable in their own way. The reason why I say that is because anyone who is truly happy and successful and has a great life, wouldn't be on the internet bashing strangers because of their weight.
I really hope that this abuse ends soon. I hate to see another plus sister getting insulted and villified.
Please take care,
Jennie

 
At 14/7/06 4:03 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What cracks me up is the somewhat warped views of themselves some of these people have.

They keep saying things like "I am a nice person. I am not a hater. I just think fat people are gross and dont deserve to walk on the same earth that I deign to put my precious feet upon. But I might tolerate them a little tiny bit if they can start loathing themselves as much as I loathe them"

Um...ok. The truth is that those people generally dont bother me too much. But how many more people have those kinds of views but have the social skills to know that it is more polite to keep their mouths shut?

 
At 14/7/06 4:04 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh and another thing. I love this post and I love your comments on other blogs. Just so you know. Not everyone on the internet is a complete jerk.

 
At 2/8/06 4:24 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

First, thanks for the kind words in the Fatty McBlog comments section... and yes, DC is closer than London... plus the Toad the Wet Sprocket thing (one of my all-time favorite songs is "Crazy Life", but that figures):-)

Anyway, thanks. I'm glad I thought to check your blog because it's very cool and leaves me thinking a lot... I'm a big believer that most "studies" are idiotic wastes of time because they take into account the tendencies of groups but apply them to individuals. I know few people think about these things except me, so I'll be brief and somewhat sarcastic and offer my own theory for you to contemplate and perhaps study: on average who would be happier and live longer:

A) the members of a group of fat, happy, comfortable and outgoing people who laugh a lot and seem to enjoy their lives for the most part despite the occasional setback...

or B) the members of a group of young, thin, dissatisfied and morose people whose entire lives seem to be driven by the overwhelming need to jam a cell phone to their collective ears.

I only think this because a little while ago I looked out the window and saw three women, all large, walking their dogs together and smiling a lot, whereas a couple who lives near me would seem to have everything (each other, a couple cute kids, and a bunch of friends) but I've never seen either of them smile or otherwise look happy or exchange ANYTHING resembling a knowing (much less longing) glance between each other.

And I know my study isn't scientific; it's not a study at all but just an example. Still, judging by these people I'd much rather be fat. And to tell the truth I am somewhat fat. So lucky me! :-)

Anyway, Kate, thanks again and keep writing; I find it interesting and I'm sure a lot of others do (or will) too.

Oh, and don't let cut-and-paste idiots get you down.

 
At 3/8/06 12:46 PM, Blogger Kate217 said...

Mikey, your theory is exactly what they found in the 1966 Roseto Cardiac Study.

Ironically, my aunt's family were a sizable proportion of the Roseto population at the time in question. Most now live in nearby Bangor. She went on to become a nurse and has bought lock, stock, and barrel into the "fat is bad" school of thought.

The site linked to above also has the following section:

V. SOCIALIZING AND LONGEVITY

A study published in the British Medical Journal in 1999 found that people more than 65 who like to eat out, play cards, go to movies and take part in other social activities live an average of two ½ years longer than more reclusive people. Simply mixing with people seems to offer as great a benefit as regular exercise. Social and productive pursuits are equivalent to and independent of the merits of exercise.

In a similar study at Harvard, it was found that those who were most engaged in productive pursuits were 23 percent less likely to die than those least involved in such pursuits. When each activity was examined individually, doing a lot as opposed to not much, extended live in almost every case regardless of the activity.

Does humor matter? While it is popularly accepted that laughter speeds healing and fights disease, some researchers say that laugher isn't the best medicine after all. A review of humor research does not confirm a direct therapeutic effect of laughter.

Does love matter? In a study of 10,000 married men, it was found that-in the subsequent five years-men who felt love from their wife had significantly less angina that those that felt no love.

People who perceived themselves as socially isolated were found to be two to five times more at risk for premature death from all causes. Persons with low interpersonal conflict in their lives do best.

 
At 17/8/06 7:30 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm sorry but there is no way Johnny Depp is 5' 7" and 190, same for a lot of the other weights you posted. Mel Gibson 214 lbs? No. As for some of the others, it's a well known fact that the bmi is flawed for athletic people (e.g. bodybuilders.) since muscle is much hevier than fat. I'm not bashing you, I'm just saying. (heven't read the other comments)

 
At 18/9/06 1:20 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What's wrong with wanting to be healthy and look nice? Gees...

 
At 28/9/06 10:44 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Kate - I just cannot understand how you can knowingly have a thyroid problem, yet refuse to take responsibility for it because you can't be bothered to go to the doctor every six weeks. That just doesn't make sense.

Sorry, I just got it - if you managed your thyroid problem, you'd then have one less excuse for your weight. Silly me!

Gee - equating the desire to lose weight with anorexia, bulimia and the Final Solution. It's a nice little self-deluded world you've constructed for yourself there, but it doesn't bear the most casual scrutiny.

Never mind, you'll always have the other losers - sorry, I mean "plus sisters" - on the internet to comfort you.

 
At 29/9/06 12:31 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Kate - I'd like to say how brave you are posting your real name on this blog.

"Like millions of nobodies around the world, I have a mid-level, wage-slave job and will probably always have a mid-level, wage-slave job."

Has it ever occurred to you that your weight is holding back your career? Of course, I'm not saying that plus-size people can't do well professionally, and many do, but your weight will always count against you in the workplace. It's sad, but true.

 
At 29/9/06 12:58 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

2 Things Worth Noting:

All the "Oh-the-BMI-is-so-strict" celebrity examples are MEN. Now has it ever occured to you that most of these men happen to be extremely muscular? And that their lifestyle probably differs greatly from yours, i.e. they might eat a lot but many of them exercise regularily.

The BMI is calculated in such a way that people who, under older measurement techniques, would have been told to lose weight, can still consider themselves to be healthy. Where does that leave you?

With all due respect, stop using your obviously bright mind to justify yourself when you could instead be making so much more of your life. NOBODY is asking you to be a size 0. Not even a 4. Or an eight. You could be pretty healthy as a size 12, and while that might seem difficult for you to attain, it must be possible and it would leave you with other options than choosing between feeding your cats or yourself.

 
At 29/9/06 2:10 PM, Blogger Kate217 said...

Anonymous whatever (I don't feel like scrolling up to get a time for someone who can't be bothered to type in a name). There's absolutely nothing wrong with "being healthy and looking nice," just in assuming that all others need to ascribe to your definitions of "being healthy and looking nice." I know an awful lot of unhealthy skinny people, so I don't find the weight = health argument terribly persuasive.

Pam, apparenly all you gave it was a "casual perusal." I do not equate "the desire to lose weight with anorexia, bulimia and the Final Solution." I purport that society's simultaneous deification of slenderness and demonization of fat leads to anorexia and bulimia. (Feel free to disagree, but I'm not alone in this belief.)

The Final Solution reference was an admittedly over-the-top means of illustrating the point that we haven't yet accepted inner beauty as even the equal, let alone the superior, of physical beauty. To me, that priority is all screwed up. I find the cult of beauty in this country to be troubling. Look how much money actors and athletes make in comparison to what teachers, or even doctors and lawyers make. It's obscene.

As for my thyroid, it's mostly a matter of economics. Having to take so much time during the work week to travel to the doctor's office (both for tests, and for the prescriptions after the tests are processed) coupled with the costs of the constant visits and the medication, the little help that the thyroid meds provide doesn't seem worth it. (I'm talking my time, my money, my body's reaction to the medication. I in no means advocate others to come to the same conclusions for themselves unless their own experience leads them to those conclusions independent of me.)

And I don't need "excuses" for my weight, thank you. It is what it is because I choose to enjoy life, not turn it into a boot camp.

What's holding me back in my career is that I work for a very small company with little room to advance. The reason I haven't left is that it's the first place I've worked since my first job in high school that I feel I'm valued as a human being, rather than being viewed as an expendable, easily-replaceable, and emotionless drone. So my work isn't vastly fascinating or exorbitantly lucrative, it is honest work for honest pay and feeling appreciated by both my company and our main client company is worth a great deal to me. My weight has nothing to do with it, and our major client has many employees (both men and women) who make me look downright petite. Their jobs range from suppport staff to managers of multi-million dollar projects.

Anonymous 2:58, you state:

The BMI is calculated in such a way that people who, under older measurement techniques, would have been told to lose weight, can still consider themselves to be healthy. Where does that leave you?


That leaves me saying my entire point was just that - even if one grants for the sake of argument that fat is inherently unhealthy, the BMI is a crap measurement for determining health, as it doesn't differentiate between muscle and fat. Unfortunately, though, it's not under "older measurement techniques" that people are being told to lose weight. The BMI is the gold standard used by the government, by public schools, and by the mainstream media.

I'm not trying to "justify" myself; that would imply that I have something to defend. I don't feel that deciding to live my life taking pleasure in it rather than adhering to some spartan regimen for purely aesthetic reasons is anything that I need to be embarrassed about or apologize for.

As for attaining a size 12, that's probably not an option. I have a lot of muscle under my fat. I'd probably be able to get down to a size 16 and have a socially-acceptable amount of body fat, but why should I have to? I'm not hurting anybody else. Why should I spend my life striving for the "difficult to attain?" I'd much rather spend it doing the things that I actually enjoy doing.

All I really want is for all people, regardless of race, creed, color, sexual orientation, or size to be judged by their characters, not their physical attributes. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who consistently treats himself and others with compassion and honesty is a worthy person, regardless of any other characteristics.

 
At 29/9/06 2:33 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't feel that deciding to live my life taking pleasure in it rather than adhering to some spartan regimen for purely aesthetic reasons is anything that I need to be embarrassed about or apologize for.

It sounds as though you get most of your "pleasure" in life from food. I get pleasure from knowing I'm fit and strong enough to run 10 miles, climb up a rockclimbing wall, and squat more than I weigh.

And no, I don't undertake this "spartan regimen for purely aesthetic reasons", just because I "take pleasure" in doing these things.

 
At 29/9/06 2:46 PM, Blogger Kate217 said...

Your assumption is a case in point for my assertion that people make judgements based on no knowledge but visual.

I actually don't eat that much. Eating once a day is not only not unusual for me, during the work week, it's the norm. The "pleasures" I was talking about include (but are by no means limited to) reading, watching movies, playing with my cats, attending concerts (mostly singer/songwriter and indie pop), dancing, and walking. I'm also beginning to teach myself jewelry making and quilting. I used to love to cook (especially baking, although I always foisted the results off on other people; after smelling the baking goods all day, the last thing I want to do is actually eat them. There are clubs in the DC area where they ask what goodies I've brought them as soon as I walk in the door.

If you get pleasure from knowing that you're fit and strong, from running, rock climbing and lifting, more power to you. For you those things are not for aesthetic reasons because you actually enjoy them.

I don't. I can't run since I have fibromyalgia and running wrecks my knees (and did even during the 20 minutes in college when I was underweight; I had to give up lacrosse because the amount of running required trashed my knees. I was, however good at both volleyball (in spite of my stance) and softball, and did a lot of low-impact dancing.)

I think that it's the height of hubris to say that your pleasures are "good" because they lead to the type of physique you want and mine are "bad" because they don't. In the end, we're both still doing what we enjoy.

 
At 29/9/06 2:56 PM, Blogger Kate217 said...

Oops, I forgot to say that I stopped cooking because I moved into an apartment with a kitchenette, not a kitchen. It's a pain in the tuchus to cook anything but the simplest things in it, and baking is just out of the question. I do eat pasta more frequently than I should, but I also eat lots of fruits and veg, lean meats, and a lot of salads, because I like them, not because anyone else thinks that I "should." I live in a fourth floor, walk-up apartment, too, which I access quite comfortably unless I'm carrying something heavy. Even the college age, athletic movers who helped me move in were as winded as I was carrying boxes up three flights of stairs.

During the monthly lunch that my company has, I always bring home a "doggie" bag and end up finishing my lunch for dinner. The skinny people always seem to finish their meals, even when they've ordered the same dish I have.

 
At 3/10/06 4:37 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

kate, make my time a little more interesting by posting something!
love

 
At 5/10/06 7:13 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hmm... maybe she's run out of research studies which "prove" that dieting will kill you.

 
At 15/10/06 12:04 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

[Crickets chirping]

Yep, there's only a finite amount of research that proves it's not unhealthy to be obese.

 
At 15/10/06 4:57 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting... I've just caught up on the debate between Kate and Pam about their interests.

Kate, while I agree with you that it's stupid to assign moral values to different activities, for example, jewelry making and quilting are no more "good" or "bad" than rockclimbing or running, the world will look at you two ladies very differently. People will look at the running, rockclimbing gal and say "She looks fit". But they'll look at the result of your sedentary activities and say "She's lazy".

It's not fair, but that's the way the world is. And I think you know it, hence your defensiveness. But then, isn't that the whole point of this blog?

 
At 17/10/06 11:12 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What's holding me back in my career is that I work for a very small company with little room to advance [...]My weight has nothing to do with it, and our major client has many employees (both men and women) who make me look downright petite.

Kate, I think your weight does have something to do with your less-than-stellar career. You've basically said here that you haven't looked for a better job because you feel comfortable working with people who are fatter than you. Sad.

 
At 26/10/06 7:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

No new posts? What's happened to Kate?

Maybe she fell down, couldn't get up and has been eaten by her own cats?

 
At 2/11/06 12:01 PM, Blogger Buttercup Rocks said...

What's sad, Chris, is your deliberate misinterpretation of Kate's comments about her nondiscriminatory employers. Haven't you got something more fun to do? Like, maybe, pulling the wings off flies?

 
At 2/11/06 7:54 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I stand by my original interpretation of Kate's description of her career. And accusing me of pulling the wings off flies is a very childish comeback. Well, it's not really any kind of comeback, is it?

 
At 3/11/06 6:51 AM, Blogger Kate217 said...

You may "stand by" your original interpretation of my post, but you are still wrong.

I haven't looked for another job because I'm happy where I am. It may be "less than stellar," but I love the people I work for and with. Over my career, I've had a string of bully bosses that you wouldn't believe (and they treated the beautiful people as harshly as they treated me, so it wasn't my weight causing the bullying).

My current bosses treat me as a human first and an employee second, not as an easily-replaceable cog in a money-generating machine. Just for the record, I start on a new contract in a couple of weeks, doing something interesting and with more room for advancement, even though I'm staying with the company in which I'm happy.

You may define me as "unsuccessful" because I'm not rolling in cash, but I'm happy in my job, which is a success that is much more important to me.

 
At 12/12/06 12:28 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Kate posted this the other day at Big Fat Blog:

I have no SO, no children, and (given my age and residence - the image-obsessed DC area) absolutely no hope of ever having either.

In other words, food is more important to her than relationships. How utterly pathetic.

 
At 12/12/06 1:07 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not quite as pathetic as seeking out people you don't know on the internet just to insult them. Get a life, dude.

 
At 12/12/06 5:09 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, I'm not the one who sits at home night after night with only my hot buttered popcorn to comfort me, or who sets up a blog spouting a lot of crap to defend my obesity.

 
At 12/12/06 6:04 PM, Blogger Kate217 said...

It would appear much of your celebrated exercise consists of jumping to conclusions.

Just because I have no SO (and don't particularly want one; for most of my life I've been a caregiver and now that I'm not, I'm enjoying some solitude) doesn't mean that I sit "at home night after night with only my hot buttered popcorn to comfort me."

I'm very happy in my own company and don't need anyone else to "comfort" me.

Tonight, I happen to be at work, but I am perfectly willing to and capable of having a social life without being in a "romantic" relationship. I go to concerts, dances, plays, art galleries, museums, movies (where I do happen to enjoy hot buttered popcorn), flea markets, parties, and any number of other places by myself or with friends. It's how I met many of them. I also volunteer for a couple of charities.

Next month, I'm going on a cruise (www.therockboat.com) by myself, not because I can't find anyone to go with, but because experience has revealed that I prefer to travel by myself. I will also not only attend an ALS masquerade ball, but am volunteering my time to help organize it. I've been invited to half a dozen New Year's Eve parties.

I'm a regular at several of the music venues in the area, where the staffs know me and treat me very well. I currently have tickets to 8 concerts over the next 10 weeks, all but one of which are artists whom I know personally. Those are the ones I already have tickets for, but I'll undoubtedly attend several more. If money were no object, I'd be going to a lot more.

I have open invitations to visit friends literally all over the world. Once again, if money were no issue, I could happily be a jet-setter.

I'm also perfectly happy to be at home with my cats, reading, sewing, or watching tv or a movie (with or without buttered popcorn, although I'm more likely to be chewing on ice). I used to do a lot of baking, but with the so-called kitchen in my current apartment, I haven't done much of that recently.

I wonder what's missing in your life that you feel the need to spend time putting total strangers down to make yourself feel better. You have my sympathy.

 
At 12/12/06 8:31 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

And I wonder what's missing in your life, Kate, that you have to go to such lengths to defend your lifestyle, eating habits and obesity to total strangers.

Actually, I have a good idea of what's missing in your life. It's hard to have any self-esteem when you've chosen to be so grossly overweight, isn't it?

 
At 12/12/06 8:41 PM, Blogger Kate217 said...

I thought about that as I was responding thinking that you didn't really deserve an explanation. I should have followed that impulse.

The only thing that's missing in my life is unlimited funds, but I'm in the vast majority in that.

I hate to disappoint you, but my self-esteem is just fine. I haven't actually "chosen" to be "so grossly overweight," I've just chosen to enjoy my life rather than capitulate to those who would have me be a slave to things that I hate to do.

Just because you assume that you know about my habits doesn't mean that you actually do; however, since I've gotten bored with the anonymous haters, I've chosen to require a registration to post. That way at least I'll have designations with which to distinguish those who'd rather feel superior to others than work on their own lack of compassion.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home