Tag Archives: fat

Talking to Kids About their Bodies

I am sad to say that September is Childhood Obesity Awareness Month. I cannot see the need for this particular marker. I don’t know a single adult who isn’t aware that there are fat children in the world. And the vast majority of them are wringing their hands and worrying about what we should do about it. Schools are still sending kids home with BMI report cards despite significant evidence that this practice is not only not helpful but is often actively harmful. And most doctors still tell parents to put kids on a diet when kids vary even slightly from the statistical norms.

And it’s not as if kids are unaware of “the childhood obesity crisis”. Hospitalizations for eating disorders are up 119 percent among children under 12 years of age. 80 percent of all 10-year-olds are afraid of being fat and 42 percent of all 1st through third grade girls want to be thinner. Just who is it that remains unaware of a societal desire for kids to be thin? The whole thing is so deeply depressing I didn’t know how I was going to write about it. That is until I came across an article somebody posted to Fit Fatties yesterday about a dance teacher working to change the language she uses to talk to kids about their bodies.

Worried about how her words as a dance teacher were affecting the body image of the girls taking ballet lessons, dance teacher Amanda Trusty took several weeks off to work on the language she used in her classes. Trusty noted that many of the traditional commands from dance class like “tuck in” or “suck in your belly” or “pull in the butt” were not only imprecise, but tended to confirm a societal notion that kids bodies should be smaller and tummies and tushes should disappear.

In her article Amanda says,

I realize now where all my insecurities started. They started in first position at age seven at the barre.

And now here I am, 20 years later, catching myself doing the same things to my own seven year old students.

Oh, but I refuse. Nuh-uh. No way. I’m a body love advocate. How can I tell my ballerinas to suck it in and tuck it under, knowing how much that shaped my childhood?

So Amanda consciously and thoughtfully worked to change the language with her students. The new language was not only more imaginative and precise, but also managed to remove body judgement from the equation. Now rather than telling them to tuck the butt under, she asks the students to imagine they have beautiful tail feathers. And she asks the students to send their tail feathers down rather than out. Instead of asking kids to lift their chins, she tells them to imagine they are wearing a beautiful necklace and she asks them to display the necklace to everyone else.

Kids are perfectly well aware that many, many grownups are freaked out beyond all reason that their bodies are not thin enough. We don’t need a month dedicated to getting adults more freaked out about childhood obesity. And we don’t need a month dedicated to convincing fat kids that they should not exist, that there is a worldwide movement to eradicate them from the planet. What we need is a month dedicated to thinking about how we talk to kids about their bodies. We all need to take a time out like Amanda did, to figure out ways to communicate health and wellness to kids in a way that isn’t damaging to their body image and doesn’t send them charging down the road towards a life of eating disorders. Now that’s a month I could get behind.

Love,

Jeanette DePatie (AKA The Fat Chick)

P.S. Want to hear me speak with YOUR group about how to teach fitness to kids in a way that isn’t damaging to them? Book me to speak!

P.S.S. Want to get free stuff? Join my list!

New Electronic Food Police can Cyber Bully You About Eating Habits

1 Reply

Ahhh, gone are the days where you could simply count on your Uncle George or your Mother to track every morsel of food you put in your mouth. And past are the days where you simply penciled your sins into a small tracker page in your purse so you could pore over the results every week in your “Fat Bashers”(TM) meeting. Now you can count on a digital plate to track how much you’ve eaten and a little wristwatch to track how fast you’re putting the food into your face.

The Bite Counter watch subtly clocks the movements between your wrist and your mouth, and is being developed by researchers at South Carolina’s Clemson University. Here’s how they determined the effectiveness of this puppy. They tracked 77 people for a week and determined that the average calories per bite were 17 for men and 11 for women. (I presume, during the study that the women were either taking “petite” bites or had teeny tiny forks.) They multiplied that times 100 (a suspiciously round number if ever I heard one) and said that since 1100 calories and 1700 calories represented low calorie diets, 100 bites is the optimal number of bites for people trying to lose weight.

They also noted that those who counted their bites ate fewer calories than those who didn’t. (At least during the short-term study). And the researchers suggest that the bite meter could be used to measure the rate of speed at which the food was consumed–suggesting that eating more slowly leads to weight loss.

Another device used to measure how fast somebody eats is the new talking plate. FANTASTIC. Now I can have a battery operated widget to ask me if, “I really need to eat that?” and ask me why I haven’t finished my broccoli. It’s like a digital gateway to disordered and non-intuitive eating. YAY! (Not.) The plate also claims to measure my fullness (how I can’t imagine.)

Except all of this is based on some notably faulty assumptions. Low calorie diets have not been proven to lead to long-term weight loss–ever–for all but a tiny fraction of participants. There is absolutely no reason to believe that these gadgets wouldn’t fall into the familiar pattern of lose some weight in the short term, gain it all back in the long term, and then a little more.

But the thing that absolutely terrifies me about these new measuring devices is the probability that fat people will ultimately be shackled to them by insurance companies and corporate wellness programs in the name of cost cutting and discrimination–oops I mean better health. The research behind them is shaky and has been called out by other scientists in the community, the reasoning behind them is flawed in a way that seems obvious even to the most casual observer. But I predict, that in short order, we’ll have fat people on food oriented house arrest in order to keep their corporate insurance policy.

Big Brother is here and he’s watching you–eat.

Want to learn new ways to fight against injustice for fat folks? There’s still time to register for the Fat Activism Conference!

Love,

Jeanette DePatie (AKA The Fat Chick)

80 Odd Years of Happy

1 Reply

The title of this post might refer to the notion that you’ve been hearing that infernal song for 80 years. But in this case it does not. It refers to a whole bunch of folks, some well into their 80’s dancing around to that infernal song. Which is happy-making indeed. And I feel like sharing this video with you because I feel like we could all use a little happy in our lives today.

It’s been kinda a rough week. Many of us have been deeply saddened by the passing of Robin Williams, a deeply talented movie icon who brought joy to so many of us. And many of us have been deeply angered by George Takei’s need to not only present a deeply troubling meme bashing disabled people on his feed, but also his ridiculous need to defend his actions using the tired “people are just too sensitive trope”. I’m not going to post the awful meme here on my blog. In case you’re curious, I am going to post a link here to Lisa Egan’s article about it which explains the whole thing so much better than I ever could.

Nope, today, I am going to simply post this video and share a little of the love I feel about it:

I am aware that there are some problems with this video. I think it’s pretty likely that this is a branded entertainment piece for the retirement community. And the super high production values lead me to believe that the retirement community spent a whole lot of money on this thing. That said, I love the fact that there are so many people of all ages, shapes, sizes and abilities doing their thing in here. See that George Takei? Old people dancing! People with walkers boogying down. Put that in your meme and stuff it, George.

I also love the way the video depicts old people as being powerful and vibrant and fun. I think as a society, we are so quick to dismiss older people. We see them as a problem or an expense. We see them as a throwaway society. But all people in our society have value. Everyone has something to give. I was reminded of this yet again with another amazing video I came across in my Facebook feed today.

As a person who works as a producer this is something that I think about constantly. How can we get everybody involved? How can everybody contribute? How can we help everybody not only feel valued but also be valued?

If you’ll forgive me for feeling all the feels in this very public way, I just want to tell you this. We are a deeply troubled world. We can make things better, but we need all the help we can get. So let’s begin with a deep commitment to not exclude or throw away a significant percentage of the population who don’t meet some arbitrary standard of age, ability, weight, sex or beauty, OK? Every BODY has value.

Love,

Jeanette DePatie (AKA The Fat Chick)

P.S. We are only 10 days away from the Fat Activism Conference. Join us in making the world a better and more inclusive place for people of all sizes. Register today at www.fatactivismconference.com.

Study Proves “Not all Fat People are Unhappy”–Follow up to indicate Papal Affiliation With Catholicism

2 Replies

So I got a notice in my inbox this week that a study has been announced that indicates “Not All Fat People are Unhappy.” And honestly, my first thought was, “Duh.” I mean it seems quite obvious to me that not all Fat people are miserable, much as it seems obvious that the Pope is Catholic. But apparently the notion that not all fat people are sick, miserable, about to die and ready to throw in the towel is something we need to prove again and again.

But you know, before I cast to many aspersions on the study, I think maybe we really just need to look at the headline drawn from the study results. Because there are actually quite a few interesting things indicated by this piece of research. Let’s look at a few:

1. Your happiness seems to have a lot more to do with homogeneity than body size. If you are a fat person who lives in a town with lots of other fat people, you tend to be more happy than if you live somewhere with no other fatties.

2. The study creators speculate that being fat does not in itself make people unhappy. In the accompanying press release, study co-author Philip M. Pendergast states:

“In that light, obesity in and of itself, does not appear to be the main reason obese individuals tend to be less satisfied with their lives than their non-obese peers. Instead, it appears to be society’s response to or stigmatization of those that are different from what is seen as ‘normal’ that drives this relationship.”

3. Women tend to pay a higher emotional price for being fat than men do. The study creators speculate that this is because women face more social stigma based on body size then men do. In the press release Pendergast also says,

“Think about the advertising we see on television or in magazines—we are bombarded by images of thin women, and we are told that is the ideal,”

So here is yet another study that seems to indicate that how we feel about our size may have a lot more to do with our actual health and wellness outcomes than what we weigh. It follows on the heels of many other studies we’ve talked about on this blog regarding stigma and health outcomes like this one or this one. And all of these studies lead me to ask one very important question.

Even if we knew how to make people permanently thin (which we do not) should we ask them to change their body size to fit in? If being different leads to social stigma, and social stigma leads to poor health outcomes, should we encourage everybody to be the same for the sake of their health?

Even if we knew how to make people all be the same size (which we categorically do not) it seems to me that the answer is to deal with stigma rather than to make a completely homogeneous society to reduce stress on everyone involved. What if we actively worked to fight stigma based on body size? What if we actively worked to help people accept their own differences? What if we could feel better about our bodies? Might we be singing a song like this magnificent lady right here?

I mean just check these fabulous lyrics:

I looked in the mirror
What did I see a brand new image
Of the same old me ohhhh
But now I wonder why should I be surprised
I like the things about me that I once despised

There was a time
When I wished my hair was fine
And I can remember when
I wished my lips were thin

Makes no difference now y’all
How you may feel
I’ve done reached the point
Where I wanna be real
I’m tired of living living in disguise
I like the things about me that I once despised

Let’s face it, Mavis Staples has got it going ON! But she leads me back to my original question. Why can’t we take some of this time, money and energy that we are currently spending on stigma-inducing ineffective advertising that convinces people that they not only must be thin, but may easily obtain this state of grace by eating yogurt, and spend it on something that might actually help people feel better? It will help them feel better emotionally, and it will help them feel better physically. Why can’t we take some of the time, energy and money we are spending driving wedges into our society, by creating classes of otherness which we can blame for all our problems from the high cost of airplane tickets to soaring healthcare prices and spend it on something that teaches us to celebrate our differences. It will bring us together. It will help us live and breathe as a community rather than a simple pile of competitors in a winner-take-all, Victoria’s Secret model competition. When will we reach the obvious conclusions? Bears poo in the woods, stigma doesn’t help people, and yes, the Pope is indeed Catholic.

Call me captain obvious if you like. I’ve stopped spending on diets and weight loss schemes and self hatred because I like the things about me that I once despised.

Love, Jeanette DePatie (AKA The Fat Chick)

Join my mailing list and get free stuff! Get a boost! Have a Laugh! ;o)

Friday Dance Break

3 Replies

It’s been a tough week for me and in many ways a tough week for our country. So I thought for today’s blog I would post a FRIDAY DANCE BREAK!

Whatever else you may have to say about this week, it has been a great week for dancing. Here’s just a few of the things that have popped on my feed this week.

First, I ran across this wonderful piece of a plus-sized pole dancer on Britain’s Got Talent. I braced myself for Simon to be a total tool, but (spoiler alert) aside from some eye rolling, he managed to keep it together and be a gentleman. And perhaps the best news is that the comments are disabled on this YouTube clip so I don’t even have to tell you not to go there! Sweet!

And then there was this fabulous clip. This is a group called Company and they took SECOND place in the Vibe Dance competition. Props for the fabulous dancing and at least a teeny, tiny bit of body diversity. There were definitely some khaki’s above a size 00 out there. And this group is tight. And SO much fun to watch. Check it out!

There’s another version of the video with more closeups available here. This gives you a better chance to see the different bodies that are rocking it out.

And last but not least, this week, I ran across this adorable dancing kid on my Facebook feed. I mean how cool is she? Seriously?

Werk it girl. WERK IT! And it just goes to show, that when you get on our there and shake your thing, other people will want to join the fun. It takes the little guy a while to get with the program, but he does eventually get to steppin.

So there you have it. Not a lot of thought or philosophy. Just chock full of wiggling, jiggling bodies of all ages, shapes and sizes. You’re welcome!

Love, Jeanette (AKA The Fat Chick)

A Different Sort of Tennis Star

3 Replies

You’d think since being rated the top Junior player in the United States, tennis phenom Taylor Townsend would be best known for her prowess on the court. However, aside from Townsend’s legendary on-court tennis battles, are plenty of battles of a different sort. Two years ago, the United States Tennis Association (USTA) asked Taylor to sit out of the 2012 Open Junior Tournament due to concerns about her “conditioning”. And by conditioning, they meant body shape. And by body shape they meant how Townsend looked in a dress. According to Tom Perotta of the Wall St. Journal:

Her coaches declined to pay her travel expenses to attend the Open and told her this summer that they wouldn’t finance any tournament appearances until she makes sufficient progress in one area: slimming down and getting into better shape.

“Our concern is her long-term health, number one, and her long-term development as a player,” said Patrick McEnroe, the general manager of the USTA’s player development program. “We have one goal in mind: For her to be playing in [Arthur Ashe Stadium] in the main draw and competing for major titles when it’s time. That’s how we make every decision, based on that.”

But it doesn’t just stop at funding. According to Perrotta, the USTA actually requested that Townsend skip the U.S. Open, denying both her petitions for wild cards into either the U.S. Open main draw or the qualifying tournament. In the end, Townsend’s family decided to pay out of their own pockets for Taylor to compete in the U.S. Open Junior Tournament. She was ultimately defeated in the quarterfinals by Anett Kontaveit of Estonia.

It’s clear that Taylor knows on which side her baguette is buttered. In 2012 Townsend said: “I’ve gotten a lot of great opportunities, great fitness, great coaching,” she said. “I’m doing everything that they ask me to do and being professional about everything.”

Nevertheless, Townsend has to be feeling more than a little gratified over Tuesday’s French Open results. The match had some moments that seemed straight out of a movie script. In the first set of her first match, Taylor got behind 1-5. She then won12 of the following 13 games to win over her U.S. opponent Vania King 7-5, 6-1. Today (Wednesday, May 28) Townsend (ranked 205th) is scheduled to battle top-ranked Frenchwoman Alize Cornet (ranked 21st) at the 10,000-seat Suzanne Lenglen Court. So surely at this point we’re focusing on her playing prowess, right? Right?

Well, today’s New York Times article on Townsend is titled “Questioned About Body, Townsend Rises and Inspires”. Now the article goes on to say that Taylor is playing amazing tennis, and that Wednesday’s matchup promises to be very exciting. The article contains quotes from Taylor’s new coach (Zina Garrison) talking about how Townsend is “fine”, and how she doesn’t wish her young tennis protege to suffer over criticism or worry about her weight. So I’ll offer some slight props to the Times for inserting some body positivity into the article. But let’s not forget that the first three words of the headline are not “Powerful Tennis Star” or “Young Tennis Phenom”. The first three words of this headline are “Questioned About Body”.

I guess it’s not surprising. As I’ve reported before, even winning Wimbledon does not protect you from the need to be attractive to men. The top title in tennis does not forgive you for being less than supermodel gorgeous.

I hope that Taylor kicks some serious butt on the court tomorrow. I hope she plays really well and ultimately triumphs. I have to admit that I don’t hold out a lot of hope however, that Taylor Townsend will ever win victory over a public that is most interested in how she looks in her little tennis skirt.

Le sigh.

Love,

Jeanette (AKA The Fat Chick)

P.S. Want to take a virtual journey to France and work out with your friends? Check out our Fit Fatties Virtual Vacations!

And don’t forget to join my mailing list to get access to cool free stuff!

When the Fat Chick Sings…

9 Replies

Sad, but oh so true.

One thing that a lot of people don’t know about me is that I have a master’s degree in Opera Performance. Yup, at one time, I was a budding opera singer. But after I failed to land one of the 5 paid positions in America for opera performers but did land venture capital for a software company, I decided to put aside my operatic aspirations. Nevertheless, I feel compelled to jump in on the current kerfluffle regarding reviewers commenting on women who dare to sing while fat.

This all came to a head recently as a pile of reviews from a gang of privileged old white guys surfaced in London. The reviewers skewered Irish mezzo Tara Erraught’s performance as Octavian in the Strauss opera Der Rosenkavalier at the Glyndebourne Festival not because of her performing or even her singing, but rather how she looked in a dress–and pants (Octavian is a pants role after all). Any of us who have had any kind of presence online ever might recognize some of this “troll tripe”:

“It’s hard to imagine this Octavian as this willowy woman’s plausible lover.” The Guardian, Andrew Clements

“Unbelievable, and unappealing.” The Times of London, Richard Morrison

“a chubby bundle of puppy fat…” Financial Times, Andrew Clark

These are not troll fodder screen captured in the comments section. These are quotes taken from “professional music reviewers” in arguably respectable publications. While one of the reviews mentions in passing that the role is “gloriously sung” most of them focus exclusively on this performer’s looks. There is a lot of outrage over these reviews, which I share. There is also a fair amount of surprise that this sort of language is being used to describe singers in one of the most glorious art forms on the planet. Unfortunately surprise is something I cannot feel about that.

Irish mezzo soprano, Tara Erraught

As a chubby, budding coloratura soprano, I was told at both the undergraduate and graduate level that I would never have an opera career unless I lost weight. Professors shared their tips for which Weight Watchers meetings I should attend along with my vocal and theater training. Because even twenty years ago, when I was in college, we in the biz knew that fat female opera singers were enduring caricatures but not successful performers. Some of us back then called it Kathleen Battle syndrome. She wasn’t much of a singer. She wasn’t bad, but she certainly was far from the best. Working with her was an absolute nightmare. But she made huge bank back then for two reasons–she knew how to build her fame by building scandal and keeping her name in the press and she looked great in a dress.

No matter how great your singing voice, fail to look great in a dress and you might get the axe. I certainly remember singing sensation Deborah Voight’s triumphant review in the New York Times for her role in Ariadne auf Naxos by Richard Strauss. I also remember her getting fired by London’s Covent Garden because she “was not appropriate because of the costume that Ariadne was meant to wear in this production.” In other words, Deborah did not look good in the dress that was selected for the role, therefore Covent Garden would need to select another singer. Voight has since had weight loss surgery and is often heard “singing the praises” of this procedure. Naturally since her weight loss, many believe she looks better in a dress. And actually the whole issue of her weight loss has helped to stay in the press–helping her meet both requirements of “Kathleen Battle syndrome”. Naturally, her bookings have skyrocketed.

And the desire for our divas to be thin is hardly new. Histrionic diva Maria Callas is well known for being stick thin. And rumor has it that she resorted to many drastic measures–including swallowing tapeworms to maintain her tiny waist. Gone are the days when a truly great soprano might hope to have a great dessert (Dame Nellie Melba) or a pasta dish (Luisa Tetrazzini) named after her.

Luisa Tetrazzini was the only soprano that Caruso felt could match him in tone and volume. Too bad she’d be fired today for failing to look desirable in a dress.

I think one of the things I find most appalling about the whole thing is the argument by some of these critics that fat, female opera singers just aren’t believable. They imply that somehow we can get audiences to suspend their disbelief to the point that they accept:

A husband won’t recognize his wife at a party if she’s wearing a tiny mask over her eyes. He can hold her hand, flirt with her for hours but not recognize her at all.

Men return from war, disguise themselves with hats and very fake mustaches, call themselves “Albanians” and their girlfriends have no clue it’s them. In fact the girls fall for each other’s boyfriends and nobody is the wiser until the finale.

An angry dwarf steals a ring and the world ends. Ends!

A man turns into a swan.

A man falls in love (for reals) with a mechanical doll.

We can accept all of this? And we can accept that while these folks are doing these things they burst into song SOMETIMES FOR HOURS. But somehow we can’t accept that a plus-sized gal can love or be loved or be sexy? Or…

Are we dealing with an increasingly elitist art form that enforces male privilege and classism? Are we creating spectacle purely to allow rich people to wear designer gowns and reenforce their position as arbiters of culture? Are we proving yet again that even a woman who can sing for four hours in French and belt out high F’s night after night while wearing a corset and dancing in stiletto heels has no value unless she is also considered appropriately F#%$-able by aging frat boys?

I am deeply grateful that I had an opportunity to study and perform opera. I still love singing very much. And I still do, publicly, every week. But thankfully, I no longer have to diet, wear a corset or worry about not being able to pay my heating bill because of how I look in a dress. I am The Fat Chick. And I have sung. Therefore this blog post has come to an end. See you at the curtain call.

Love,

Jeanette DePatie

AKA The Fat Chick

Is Godzilla Yo-Yo Dieting?

2 Replies

Japanese fans are up in arms about the new Americanized Godzilla’s hefty size–citing poor diet as cause for the unwelcome change.

The trailers for the newest Godzilla film have hit American shores and has spawned some significant controversy. It appears that Godzilla has come “under fire” not for his acting (which has been notably wooden in the past) but for his BMI. No we are not talking about the Bad Monster Index–where Godzilla holds the undisputed title of King of the Monsters. We are talking about the Body Mass Index. Many are currently arguing that Godzilla is just sporting too much weight on his 350-foot high frame. Using the current BMI, Godzilla could weigh about 750,000 pounds before he hit the dreaded “Obese” category. Godzilla has not been forthcoming about his weight, but many Japanese fans have calculated that the hapless lizard may have stomped out of the “ideal weight” category.

“He’s so fat I laughed,” was one particularly cutting remark found on Japanese forum 2chan. Others have referred to him as “metabozilla”, “marshmallow Godzilla” and even “pudgy and cute”. Some have speculated that Godzilla’s size is due in part to his American diet and sedentary lifestyle. “That’s what happens when all you do is eat Snickers bars,” said one commenter.

Much of this has led to speculation about Godzilla’s diet. He has never been shown on screen eating (although he has ingested a nuclear reactor and seemed to absorb energy from that). He has been seen in comic books eating raw seafood. Most people guess that he lives largely on radiation and sushi.

It seems pretty likely that Godzilla has to eat quite a bit to sustain is 350 foot high body. An African elephant weighs in at about 7,000 pounds and needs to eat about 500 lbs. of plant matter per day to sustain itself. Using that same ratio, Godzilla would need to eat about 50,000 pounds of plant per day. Now the King of Monsters might be able to absorb some of his energy via nuclear radiation. And naturally protein sources like fish are more dense in calories than say, trees. But I ask you, do we really want a creature that needs to eat 10,000 pounds or more of food per day to turn to a protein diet? So far as we know, Godzilla does not eat people, yet. But I don’t know if I want to encourage him.

But Godzilla hasn’t always been svelte. A quick look at his film debut publicity photos in 1954 show a relatively “fluffy” monster with more of a pear-shaped figure.

There is no question that Godzilla has gotten bigger over the years. Traditionally, the giant lizard has grown larger in proportion to the buildings he stomps around. The Godzilla of 1954 was a mere 50 meters tall. The newest Godzilla is over 100 meters tall and noticeably beefier:

But if you look carefully at the creature’s shape, you might notice something very interesting and somewhat familiar. It’s even clearer if you look at this picture here:

Clearly the great monster’s shape has cycled too. He appeared to have shed some pounds in the the MusoGogi period (1964) beefed up considerably in the BioGogi period (1989-91) gone through some sort of radical weight loss program in the Shodaijira period (1998) and bulked back up for his current appearances. Seem familiar to you? Seemed that way to me too. In fact, I think Godzilla is experiencing the most common outcome of trying to stay slim. I think the King of Monsters is weight cycling–probably from yo-yo dieting.

Now there is no way to know for sure. As my good friend Ragen Chastain says, the only thing you can know about a fat person (or monster) by looking at them is your own prejudices about fat people (or giant lizards). But if our good friend Godzilla is experiencing weight cycling, he would certainly be experiencing the same thing that most people who try to lose weight experience. Most people are able to keep some weight off for a while, but the vast majority of folks (90 percent or more) regain the weight they’ve lost and often a little more.

So this leads us to the question of what should be done about Tokyo’s most famous building-stomper. I think if we are seriously going to spill digital ink regarding the size of a fictitious reptile who bangs buses together for fun, we should use this as a truly teachable moment. Let’s talk about what really works in making creatures of all shapes and sizes happier and healthier. I think the first thing we should do, is to stop trying to shame the poor creature. There is ample evidence after all, that shame doesn’t help anybody lose weight. I’m sure the producers at The Biggest Loser are planning epic monster battles between Godzilla and their “Monster Trainers” as we speak. And even though the King of Monsters’ agent is probably taking calls right now from diet companies seeking his endorsement for the new “Monster Weight Loss Formula”, we should probably discourage him from falling into his old habits of dieting and weight cycling.

I recommend the same thing for Godzilla that I recommend for everybody else. He should eat a varied diet including foods that he loves (but not including people). He should engage in joyful and pleasurable physical activities (not too close to major cities). In fact, I think he should try my DVD. He should sleep well. And he should manage his stress (again, hopefully not too close to major metropolitan areas). At 60 years old, Godzilla is showing no signs of slowing. If he follows these simple recommendations, he’s likely to stay happy and healthy for many years to come. Which is good. Because I freakin’ LOVE this guy.

Love,

Jeanette DePatie (AKA The Fat Chick)

CEO: Every BODY Can Exercise.com

See Fatty Run, Can Fat People Run Safely?

Why we need to “broaden” the Definition of Exercise

10 Replies

If you haven’t seen it already, I am sorry to be the one to bring this to your attention. The news agencies have begun to pick up on a “study” that shows that fat women exercise, on average, for one hour per year. Now naturally, I found this highly suspicious. Nearly every fat person I know exercises more than that. It seemed extremely unlikely to me, so I held my nose and started reading the articles and checking into the study.

Now the articles that are reporting about this study sport headlines like: “Obese Women Get One Hour Vigorous Activity Per Year”. (Warning, link leads to article with obligatory “headless fatty” picture.) But let’s look at a few things here. First of all–the study asked the participants to wear accelerometers for 10 hours per day for 4 days. Based on the findings from the accelerometers they extrapolated how much “vigorous activity” each participant got over the course of a year. There were not a lot of participants in the study, and the participants were not all fat. In fact, nobody in the study got very much exercise based on how they defined exercise. Even those in the thin categories only got about 10 hours of exercise per year–far, FAR below what is recommended for good health.

So what is going on here? Well the main thing that’s happening, is the the study makes the definition of “vigorous activity” extremely narrow and then reports how few people fit their definition of activity. The study uses accelerometers which are known to only measure a very specific type of physical activity. Typically accelerometers are good at recording lower body movements of a certain type (walking, running, climbing stairs) and not really good at recording many activities of daily livings (ADLs). Further more, it appears that the study uses a short period of time to calculate the activity. (4 days is considered the minimum by some standards and below the necessary threshold of measured time by others.)

The main issue here is that while the study’s definition of vigorous activity is really narrow, may of the headlines don’t reflect this. I’ve yet to see a single headline that says “Fat people spend nine hours less per year running and jumping rope than thin people.” But in essence, that’s what we’re talking about here. It just gives the fat people a lot more ammo to throw at people of size.

It also gives people of size more reason to believe that they are both inactive and unhealthy. And believing you are inactive and unhealthy can help make you inactive and unhealthy. A recent study involved two groups of hotel workers who had moderately active jobs. In the study, one group of workers were told that their daily work “counted” as exercise and the other group were told that their daily work “didn’t count” as exercise. Then they took a host of health metrics down the road.

According to the study:

Although actual behavior did not change, 4 weeks after the intervention,the informed group perceived themselves to be getting significantly more exercise than before. As a result, compared with the control group, they showed a decrease in weight, blood pressure, body fat, waist-to-hip ratio, and body mass index.

In other words, if you believed the activity you are doing “counts” as exercise and will help make you healthy, it is more likely to do just that.

In this light, it is difficult to understand what good will come from narrowing people’s definition of what constitutes healthy activities. In my certification process, I was taught that there are three main categories of exercise–cardiovascular training (aerobic exercise), resistance training (strength training) and flexibility training (stretching). I was taught that all three of these are very important to health. But the “fat ladies get one hour of exercise study” only counts a small percentage of one of these categories as exercise. It doesn’t count resistance training or flexibility at all. It doesn’t count cardiovascular activity based in water or that primarily uses the upper body. It doesn’t count many forms of walking, cycling or jumping as vigorous activity despite failing to take body weight or heart rate into account.

In fact, of the 60 activities listed in the Fit Fatties Virtual Decathlon, less than ten of them would be likely to be accurately measured by an accelerometer. And it would be difficult to determine how many of those would be considered “vigorous” enough to count in this study.

But our bodies are smarter than this study. And our bodies love joyful, physical movements of all different types. We know that shame doesn’t work, and we know that believing you are engaged in healthy behavior makes it more likely that you will receive benefits from that healthy behavior. With that in mind, it seems like we should be actively working to expand the definition of what “counts” as exercise and providing as many examples of people of all ages, shapes, sizes and abilities, who are smiling and doing this stuff as is possible.

With that in mind we are going to be inviting you to tweet some of your absolutely gorgeous pictures of healthy, happy, and fabulous activities in an upcoming project. Stay tuned for the details. In the meantime, keep having fun and keep moving your glorious bodies in lots of different and happy ways. It all counts.

Love,

Jeanette (AKA The Fat Chick)

P.S. Want to make sure you are the first to know about fabulous fit fatty projects and get some free stuff? Don’t forget to join my group!

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: