Comments on: The obligation to be healthy at every size.

By: sannanina

sannanina — Mon, 16 Aug 2010 15:33:19 +0000

Just wanted to say that there are actually situations in which people have to relearn how to pee… In fact, I also think there are situations in which eating according to internal signals does not really work either, but they are rare, and they are usually the sign of an underlying illness.

By: GiniLiz

GiniLiz — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 23:45:40 +0000

As a HAES-oriented fat health educator, I am thrilled to have been introduced to this blog recently. This post, in particular, made me smile. I get a bit ticked when other fatties argue against HAES claiming it, at its core, is healthism. No, HAES lingo may be used for healthist purposes, but that is not its core. I believe it was a member of the showmethedata listserv who once said “HAES is a prescription for doctors, not patients.” I like that! It’s a paradigm, not a program. I told an academic advisor once that HAES is what we’d probably all be doing – without any official description of our actions – if we hadn’t learned and internalized all this “obesity” rhetoric. Just like we usually don’t have to learn “intuitive peeing” or have a “health at every bladdar size” paradigm, we’d simply be eating according to our bodies’ needs, moving according to our bodies’ needs, and being the sizes we are. HAES is a (hopefully only temporararily needed) articulation of an alternative approach to health. In and of itself, it does not say what people – of any size – “should” do or whether people are better people if they follow HAES principles in their own life. It is simply an articulated alternative to a weight-based health paradigm. That is all.

By: anne

anne — Tue, 18 May 2010 05:16:42 +0000

Thank you, very very well put. So glad to have stumbled across this page! I am currently going to great lengths to learn to ignore such invasions of my privacy and live truly.

By: Michelle

Michelle — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 00:49:24 +0000

I know that feeling of obligation very, very well. It’s amazing what unhealthy things we’ll do to ourselves, supposedly in the name of “health.” But it’s obviously not health — so what is it, really? I’m still puzzling that one through. But I think it has something to do with social inclusion — we are primates, after all. Exclusion = death, biologically.

Thank you very much for your support. It means an incredible lot to me right now.

Also: the name of your blog rules.

By: JenniferP

JenniferP — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 00:26:54 +0000

Wild applause.

I’m getting really sickened by the side of the health care debate that talks about “undeserving” people – When people’s arguments sum up as “I have a certain level of care (and privilege) that I’m worried will go away if I have to pay for all the undeserving people.”

Right now my knees are swollen and hurting – I fell a few months ago and injured them and the swelling & bruises still haven’t gone away, but I feel shame about it – shame about an injury that wasn’t my fault – because I am a fat person and sometimes feel an obligation to show how healthy I am.

Love this blog, thank you so much.

By: Papu Morgado

Papu Morgado — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 00:33:40 +0000

Amazing! I’m so happy and relieved to hear something like that. Guess I’ve waited my whole life to hear something like that! Thank you so very much for pointing that out! Your writing has been very helpful, because you’re able to express what I feel and can’t say sometimes.

By: Kath

Kath — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 10:58:57 +0000

A beautifully eloquent blog post. My body is mine, and anyone who wants to tell me what to do with it can sod off!

By: h-jg

h-jg — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 07:59:23 +0000

Enjoyed this post. Ultimately, I think the cost of valuing “zero-risk” life course, and valuing attempts to expand life expectancy off into infinity, are that anyone who decides they really don’t want to live forever are profoundly othered. It is really quite amazing how unintelligible people find me when I say I don’t necessarily want to live out my entire expected life course ( life expectancy in Australia is 83 for women I think). “Zero-risk” situations are also caught up with eugenics, and I think that’s why there is so much focus on biopedogizing family units and policing what women eat during pregnancy, because the myth is that “fat” parents will have “fat” kids, and “fat” kids will have shorter life courses- why?- *because* they are “fat” (no explanation needed). Therefore we have some doctors saying women with a BMI over a certain amount *won’t* be able to get pregnant, in order to eliminate the *possibility* of “fat” children. A bit like the way some women are told having Down Syndrome babies is bad because they *will* have shorter life courses, and we all know this is a *bad* thing.

By: Michelle

Michelle — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 23:04:06 +0000

Thanks, you two. I hope you stick around and help me suss some of this stuff out.

By: Rosesred

Rosesred — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 14:56:03 +0000

I just love how you put things, so succinct. I’ve been thinking about this, how society seems to assume health is totally controlable, and is your own responsibility (both not true anyway),and yet feels justified to police peoples weight and behavior. Appearantly it’s only up to you when you follow society’s rules to the letter.

Very happy to have found your blog, enjoying your posts so far.

By: Ann

Ann — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 13:11:18 +0000

I am deliriously happy to hear someone say this.