|
sissymaidlola -> RE: Let's get a sense of balance here (5/9/2005 2:28:58 PM)
|
Hi Madame M,
Let sissy say up front here that he was not advocating in his original post on this thread that discrimination against - nor hatred, dislike or even disapproval of - fat people is OK ... discrimination, bigotry or hatred are certainly always wrong, and sissy will return to the topic of dislike or disapproval a little later on in this post. sissy Was merely trying to address with his post ManOwner's ludicrously over-zealous argument that discrimination against fat people is "the most virulent hatred human beings are capable of." In doing that it was necessary to also point out a little history of rabid bigotry and hatred against fat people (i.e., there isn't any, and nobody has contested that fact!) and to also make the distinction between bigotry and hatred arising out of emotions weaned on a need to preserve hegemony or out of a simple irrational fear or loathing of something different from oneself, and bigotry and hatred (or simply dislike) arising out of mere disapproval. In doing the latter, sissy slipped into the role of playing Devil's advocate while trying to present the rationale for why people disapprove of fat, rather than presenting simply his own preferences.
ManOwner's contention that the persecution of fat people in society (any society on this planet, not just western society) is on a par with the kind of vile bigotry and hatred that led to the WW2 Holocaust genocide of six million plus Jews, or other Nazi pogroms that led to a similar massacre in concentration camps of over a further six million Gypsies, Slavs, Catholics, homosexuals and various other minorities and disabled persons (as well as political enemies of the Nazi regime - particularly Communists), or even their latter day equivalents in Cambodia (under Pol Pot) or Rawanda ... or even in the Sudan right now ... is just insulting to the memory of those victims, the pain and suffering of their family, friends and descendents, and totally trivializes the momentous tragedy of those events.
Granting ManOwner some slack - since She has not returned here to argue Her own case - and interpreting Her "most virulent hatred human beings are capable of" statement to only be comparing the persecution of fat people in society to the bigotry and hatred applied to other heavily discriminated against minorities (but which does not cross the line that leads to death camps, genocide and wholesale massacre) is still equally insulting to modern day victims of racism, religious fundamentalism, homophobia, and transphobia. As someone that is both Rubenesque (one of sissy's preferred terms ... You are NOT fat, Madame M) and of African American descent, surely YOU of all people can appreciate this distinction, Madame ?! [:(] sissy Finds even this softer interpretation of ManOwner's position to be as equally galling as ShiftedJewel's contention (on another thread) that non-smoker's attitudes towards smokers are as equally egregious as rabid racism, homophobia and hatred born of religious zealotry. IsHO, ManOwner loses Her argument because She insists on overloading it, and Her basic contention is just too stupid and radical to be given any more credence ... and it is not without significance that She has not returned to this thread to better present Her case because She can't! At least, not without looking like a total idiot!
In order to further discuss this topic intelligently on this thread some sliding scales of terminology need to be first established. People can refer to themselves as "fat" because they are 2-3 pounds over their preferred weight, or because they are 20-30 pounds overweight, or because they are 2-3 times their normal body weight. There is a big difference in those degrees of fatness. Some kind of increasing scale needs to be established so that everyone is singing from the same page when discussing this topic. For someone to refer to themselves as "fat" because they are fifteen pounds overweight may be far too harsh, and similarly, for someone that weighs in at 440 pounds to refer to themselves as "voluptuous" is just plain and simple self-delusion! Until such terminology is defined, anybody that posts their disapproval here of "fat" because in their mind they are envisioning the 440 pound beached whale types are going to whip up into a fury all of those people that call themselves "fat" because they would like to lose twenty pounds!
Another sliding scale of terminology that needs to be established before this topic can be intelligently discussed here, rather than flamed, is WRT levels of societal persecution. It's one thing for someone to say that they are not turned on by someone that is not HWP (height-weight proportionate), it is something else entirely to run a pogrom to wipe all people that weigh more than 250 pounds off the face of the earth! Or even to just discriminate against them in the work place. One of the things that sissy tried to establish in his other post is that the level of societal persecution that fat people complain about is nowhere near as severe as that experienced by other persecuted minorities such as blacks, Hispanics, Jews, gays and CDs (to name just a few groups).
People commit hate crimes (e.g., the murder of Brandon Teena) against these people, they stalk them, they initially refuse employment to them for no good reason except because of who they are (e.g., Hispanics), or they revoke their current employment for no good reason except because of who they are (e.g., the transitioning TS), or they employ them but at a wage much lower than the going rate or with no career advancement opportunities (e.g., glass ceiling syndrome), or they deploy a whole lexicon of derogative and demeaning terms against them (e.g., the "N" word, "spic", "faggot", "sissy") in order to keep them as an underclass of society. In most cases only the derogative words apply to fat people ... they are not so much irrationally hated by certain segments of society, as disapproved of by some. There's a big, big difference between virulent irrational hatred and rational disapproval with some mitigating basis!
So the second sliding scale of terminology that needs to be established before this topic can be rationally and calmly debated here is level of societal persecution, such as: victims of pogroms and genocide; victims of serious hate crimes (e.g., murder, rape and violent assault); victims of minor hate crimes (e.g., muggings and graffiti); victims of discrimination in the workplace and social settings; victims of invective and derogative terminology; victims of not being popular (i.e., marginalization in society), and so on. IsHO, fat people don't really make the grade when it comes to being real victims like some of those other marginalized groups do. But he will repeat here what he said before ... dislike, hate or rejection are all equally hurtful when one is on the receiving end of it.
However, being marginalized in the dating game because the "Twiggy" look is what is fashionable amongst dating males (or even philandering husbands!) is not nearly the same as what the drag queens and transvestites had to contend with in their battles for social acceptance during the various homosexual rebellions of 1967 through 1969 that started in San Francisco and culminated in the Stonewall riots in New York in 1969, and which gave the gay movement its teeth and sense of purpose that we recognize today. Nor does it compare with the racial riots of the south during the turbulent sixties that led to the assassination of MLK and formation of the Black Power movement that irrevocably changed the power dynamics in America for African Americans.
For a fat person to compare him/herself with the people that fought and died, or were unfairly imprisoned, during these battles for major social change in America because someone refused to date them because they are not HWP makes sissy totally nauseous. Get over yourselves and join a gym! When was the last time any of you fatties were arrested on the street just because you are fat ? Have any of you been taken down a police station and ridiculed in front of others just because you are fat ? What is the percentage of fat people on death row ? Exactly how many fat people were targeted during the McCarthy era because they were not HWP ? How many of you fat people have had to roll over and sign everything over to your ex-spouse because she threatened to expose your dirty little fat secret if you didn't ? How many fat people were drafted to Vietnam and gave their lives for their country there ? (BTW, the answer to that last question is "none" because genuinely fat people fail the physical!) How many of you fat people can look a real victim of social prejudice and discrimination or political hegemony in the eye and really claim to be their equal ?
Being marginalized by mainstream society is NOT the same as being discriminated against! Shy people are also marginalized; people with no social graces are also marginalized; people with smelly feet are also marginalized; people with nervous ticks are also marginalized; bald people are also marginalized; alcoholics are also marginalized; bipolar people are also marginalized; hell even great genii such as John Nash are marginalized for being too geeky! Let's get a sense of balance here.
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: sissymaidlola
But the bottom line is that those people that are self-disciplined and do things in moderation and take pride in their appearance and presentation (all of which takes considerable effort) tend to resent the laziness, lack of discipline, and avarice implied by the overweight condition.
quote:
That is just BS judgmental assumptions about people who are bigger.
It is very narrow to think oneself more wonderful, more disciplined and more beautiful simply because may you wake up at a certain time, eat less than you may want (frequently acting bitchy because of low blood sugar), and go to the gym. I have family members who have thin genes, eat more/exercise less and are in worse shape than some of the bigger people in my family... You can hardly conclude all of the above based on size alone.
sissy Doesn't disagree with Your comments, Madame. sissy Was presenting a reason (possibly not the only reason) why non-fatties have a general bias against fatties. He was not endorsing or justifying that bias, but merely presenting it as the Devil's advocate. The key word and phrase here is: "implied by the overweight condition." In many cases it may well turn out that the "fat" person follows a more rigorous exercise program and sleep schedule than the "slim" person that looks down on him.
quote:
ORIGINAL: sissymaidlola
That statement that you can never be too rich or too thin is false; one often comes from plain greed if not theft (unless you're born into it), and the second also happens frequently before one dies.
Like many pithy sayings that capture our imagination it doesn't stand up to more intense scrutiny does it, Madame ?
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: sissymaidlola
For most of history "fat" has implied in the Judaeo-Christian world, to greater or lesser extent, three of the seven deadly sins ... avarice or greed, gluttony and sloth.
quote:
I hope you're kidding, because if not, I think that is plain Bullshit.
When you are from a poor country where there isn't enough food, being bigger meant that you were financially/socially better off than most. I definitely don't recall the priest or any part of catechism stating we had to be thin, and go to the gym regularly.
That's a very good point, Madame. However, sissy doesn't think it makes the point he made invalid or "Bullshit" though. Once again sissy is/was not advocating that particular religious bias or judgment, he was merely documenting it as part of his explanation to ManOwner for why there exist biases in western society against fat people. You cannot deny the existence of the Seven Deadly Sins, Madame, nor the earlier (meaning, say, pre-twentieth century, pre-modern) Christian churches' emphasis of lambasting their congregations from the pulpit over their avoidance. The Christian churches didn't teach, "go out and discriminate against fat people" but they did teach that the committing of any of the Seven Deadly Sins was ... well exactly that, deadly! [:D]
How individual Christians have interpreted what the absence of greed, gluttony and sloth should entail has probably changed over the years and also between individual Christian cultures / nations. But the bottom line is, if you work hard at attaining something, or give something up at great personal sacrifice, in order to observe your Christian faith, and then you see someone that also claims to be Christian seemingly circumventing or flaunting those rules, you will tend to resent that person for achieving the same status as yourself without the same level of commitment. If someone (rightly or wrongly) interprets another's being curvaceous as a sign that they are committing the sin of gluttony (while they are being temperate), they will tend to look down on that person, in the same way that those of us that study to pass an exam will look down on the person that cheats in order to pass. This is not a justification of that bias ... but an attempted explanation of it.
quote:
God did not intend for all of us to be the same size.
Amen, Sister!
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: sissymaidlola
It is not a deadly sin to be effeminate, to be homosexual, to hold different religious beliefs, to have a darker skin tone, nor to be handicapped.
quote:
LMAO, must be nice not to be cursed with a deadly sin; would you change if your Xdressing was a deadly sin?
Well other areas of the Bible have been quoted (or more accurately, misquoted or quoted out of context) in order to justify Christians' general bigotry in many of those other areas. In the case of crossdressing the usual out of context quote is Deuteronomy 22:5 if sissy remembers correctly. If the flame wars that You have experienced on these boards have taught You anything it should be the ease and dangers of quoting things out of context!
There are even more areas of the Bible that can be quoted out of context or misquoted to justify the views of the homophobes ... not least the story of Lot and the destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. What do You think the residents of Sodom were doing that angered God so that he had to destroy the city ? [sm=lol.gif] LOL
Just as an aside, have You ever gomorrahed anybody, Madame ? <giggles> We all know what the sin of the Sodomites was ... but what the hell were the Gomorrahans up to ? IsHO, whatever it was was SO DAMN KINKY that it is best left buried in the annals (keep it clean, Madame, sissy said "annals") of history! What this sissy would give to get hold of a Gomorrahan toy bag, hee, hee!! [sm=lol.gif]
quote:
I hate these size arguments, because they always inevitably become reduced to "I like this, and this is what's right", and some poor folks making excuses for why they are the way they are....
I will NEVER appologize for being bigger, and wish all women who are naturally curvaceous (natural appearing) would tell the establishment to kiss our collective behinds. M
Both metaphorically and ... the best part being ... physically too! You don't have to apologize for Your size, Madame. To do so is the sin of timidity (lola's secret eighth Deadly Sin!). But even worse would be to make oneself a victim when You are not ... that is the sin of dishonesty!
Respectfrilly Yours,
sissy maid lola
[image]local://upfiles/21203/7550AAD373274EA8911F0BC3852D002C.jpg[/image]
|
|
|
|
