By now you may have seen the pointed on-air response that Jennifer Livingston, a news anchor for WKTB in La Crosse Wisconsin, gave to a viewer who suggested that someone as fat as she is should not really be on TV, lest young girls get the idea that it’s ok to be fat.
Here’s the video. Some thoughts on it below.
Let’s go back, for a moment, to what the guy said in his email. (You can find a transcript of the whole video here.)
Hi Jennifer,
It’s unusual that I see your morning show, but I did so for a very short time today. I was surprised indeed to witness that your physical condition hasn’t improved for many years. Surely you don’t consider yourself a suitable example for this community’s young people, girls in particular. Obesity is one of the worst choices a person can make and one of the most dangerous habits to maintain. I leave you this note hoping that you’ll reconsider your responsibility as a local public personality to present and promote a healthy lifestyle.
While couched as helpful advice from a concerned citizen, the email basically suggests that Jennifer is, in essence, committing a crime against young girls by being fat in public. While Livingston, as a TV anchor, presumably “assaults” thousands of young girls by appearing on TV fat, the letter writer’s logic would presumably apply to every fat woman who posts pictures of herself online, appears in a play, or even just goes outside where others can see her.
Indeed, one woman I know has gotten similar, er, complaints, from people who’ve attacked her for “celebrating obesity” by posting pictures of herself on her blog looking something other than miserable and ashamed of her body.
In addition to the fact that Livingston’s weight is none of this guy’s fucking business, it should also be noted that the he’s simply incorrect in assuming that a person’s weight has much to do with the healthiness of their lifestyle. There are plenty of skinny people living less than healthy lives, including many in the public eye. (Has he ever heard of eating disorders? Or Keith Richard?) And fatness in itself is not a sign of an unhealthy lifestyle, nor does it generally add to health risks. Indeed, as author and fat blogger Kate Harding has noted:
Weight itself is not a health problem, except in the most extreme cases (i.e., being underweight or so fat you’re immobilized). In fact, fat people live longer than thin people and are more likely to survive cardiac events … obesity research is turning up surprising information all the time — much of which goes ignored by the media … Just because you’ve heard over and over and over that fat! kills! doesn’t mean it’s true. It just means that people in this culture really love saying it.
What you eat makes a difference to your health – not how much, or how many of the calories go directly to your waistline.
Meanwhile even those who actually want to lose a lot of weight don’t have many practical options besides gastric surgery, which carries its own health risks. Diets tend to be a mixture of quackery and false hope. They can be unhealthy and even dangerous – and the overwhelming majority of dieters eventually gain back what they lose. For most people, short of gastric surgery, the only way to lose a lot of weight and keep it off is to remain on a diet forever.
But the issue here isn’t really health. It’s body policing. As Livingston herself noted, fat people know that they’re fat. They don’t need it pointed out to them, even if the person pointing it out convinces themselves that they’re doing it for the fat person’s good. And frankly, most of those pointing it out don’t have good intentions. (It’s no coincidence that the favorite insult of the MRAs and other misogynists who hate this blog is to call me fat; I expect some will use this post an excuse for another round of fat-shaming.)
As Livingston noted in her reply to the letter-writer:
The truth is, I am overweight. You could call me fat and yes, even obese, on a doctor’s chart. But to the person who wrote me that letter, do you think I don’t know that? That your cruel words are pointing out something that I don’t see? You don’t know me. You are not a friend of mine. You are not a part of my family and you have admitted that you don’t watch this show so you know nothing about me but what you see on the outside and I am much more than a number on a scale.
And here is where I want all of us to learn something from this. If you didn’t already know, October is National Anti-Bullying Month, and this is a problem that is growing every day in our schools and on the internet. It is a major issue in the lives of young people today and as the mother of three young girls it scares me to death. Now I am a grown women and luckily for me I have a very thick skin, literally, as that email pointed out, and otherwise. And that man’s words mean nothing to me. But what really angers me is there are children who don’t know better. Who get emails, as critical as the one I received or in many cases even worse, each and every day. The internet has become a weapon. Our schools have become a battleground. And this behaviour is learned. It is passed down from people like the man who wrote me that email.
Since Livingston’s video went viral, the letter writer has come forward to double-down on his fat-shaming, saying in a statement that he hopes “she will finally take advantage of a rare and golden opportunity to influence the health and psychological well-being of Coulee Region by transforming herself for all of her viewers to see over the next year.”
I’m not quite sure why the letter writer thinks it’s Livingston’s job to “transform … herself” to meet his desired specifications. But I doubt there’s any point to arguing that with him unless he can first transform himself into something other than the real-world version of an internet “concern troll.”
After reading all this, I thought I’d take a look at MGTOWforums.com – where the regulars are not exactly shy about expressing their opinions about the appearance of women — to see if the regulars had responded with their customary compassion and respect. By which I mean self-righteousness and fat jokes. I was not disappointed.
Bubbagumpshrimp, while himself fat, decided it was perfectly fair to attack the weight of a fat women who – gasp! – puts herself on TV.
The writer stated the truth without resorting to being mean about it. He didn’t call her fat or anything mean. He just referred to her as what she obviously is…obese. This coming from someone that’s a good sized guy. You can’t go into a career that has you on camera, be her size, and be shocked when people call you on it. You VOLUNTARILY put yourself out there to be judged. If you don’t want to be picked apart on your weight, go be an IT person or something.
The problem in this country is that obese people are viewed as victims of a medical condition. The reality of it is that they are in a self-induced state. They have no one to blame but themselves. Putting someone like that out there to be a whiner when it’s obvious that she partakes in the all you can eat buffet line makes her exactly what the writer said…not a good role model for children.
Stewie displayed his rapier wit:
You shouldn’t be reporting on climate changes when you are so fat you are causing them.
Simple conflict of interest.
I don’t think she should be allowed to talk about earth quakes or talk shit about the gravitational pull of the moon either.
You know, because she’s FAT. (The climate and weather references are there because the MGTOWforum regulars seem to think she’s a weather person.)
DruidV, meanwhile, waxed indignant that a woman who doesn’t appeal to his boner is even allowed on TV:
This kind of shit is exactly why I killed my TV years ago.
Look, bitch, you’re FAT!
Listen, bitch, it’s perfectly a okay for anyone to tell you so publicly or otherwise. You don’t have the right to not be offended.
Let me say it again, bitch, YOU ARE FAT! and also very ugly, so I guess what you really are is FUGLY, bitch!
No, it’s NOT to be celebrated either, you nasty slob! It’s disgusting and pathetic. You should at least be ashamed of yourself, since laying off the buffet and hitting the gym is apparently out of the question, but then you are also female, which means you can’t even shut up about yourself long enough to see what a laughing stock you are. Three strikes and you are out, Bertha.
That said, couldn’t we pony up some $$$ to get this hideous broad (pun intended) replaced by a hot bikini blonde weather slut? It’s bad enough to have to watch our shitty weather play out, but do we really have to look at an indignant fat pig telling us how great and special she and her husband thinks she is at the same time?
Blah!
Blah indeed — because the letter writer’s missive to Livingston was really only a more politely worded, passive-aggressive version of this sort of hateful shit.
@CassandraSays
Ms Hendricks had the idea long before you did!
I know! Which is why I don’t understand why people who get paid to make other people look awesome keep choosing weirdly washed-out colors for her.
Possibly the Christina-Hendricks-IS-Joan-from-Mad-Men idea that seems to go around? Or the idea that once you’re past 30 dressing conservatively’s the only way to go?
I suspect it also has to do with the inability of stylists used to the average Hollywood build to figure out how to dress someone a bit bigger with much bigger boobs. Which still doesn’t explain why anyone would think that pale lavender is a perfect color for a pasty redhead.
(Please note that I am not insulting Ms Hendricks’ looks, I am insulting her stylists.)
Tans to me say “melanoma candidate” as much as anything else.
That pic of Christina Hendricks is gorgeous, though she looks like she’s doing her best to have an Austrian Lip (ie look like a Habsburg)! 😀
A lack of tan says NOTHING about a woman with skin like Hendricks. Very likely she isn’t physically capable of tanning. And some people tan so easily it just happens as part of their day. You really can’t tell a person’s lifestyle from the colour of their skin. Tanning is just as genetic as olive/black skin.
I would like to know how she manages to have no freckles at all though. (We frecklies are not well represented amongst celebrities)
Honestly, I’m not certain how I could be any more clear. “Get over yourself” is a fairly common expression. And I’ve explained – twice now- what it means in the context of this discussion. Maybe you could tell me what is you don’t understand and I can try to explain it. Again.
Yeah, look, we all internalize racism through media messages. Who you think is a criminal, who you think is a bad driver, all of those things. And who you are supposed to be attracted to. If you are only attracted to white people you have probably internalized the racist idealized image of the sexy white woman that is bloody everywhere. That sucks for you, I feel bad and that, but it sucks much worse for racial minorities that are either excluded or made out as ‘exotic’ in the popular media. So, yeah, your sexual preferences are racist. Their perpetuated the same way all racist stereotypes are. And that’s just not ok. Look, bone who you like, I don’t give a shit, but what you’re doing is trying to get a group of people to tell you it’s alright to have racist sexual preferences when, really, you are just being a racist-apologist. Like all forms of racism you have to make a conscious effort to get over them. And perpetuating the idea that your racism is ok is not going to be met with applause. At best become conscious of your racism and work to get over it. At worst, keep your racism to yourself and stop trying to pretend it’s ok.
@timetravellingfool: I don’t think anyone disputes that
a) society is racist (and fat-shaming, and classist etc)
b) this is a bad thing
c) We should try to eliminate prejudice and oppression
d) part of that involves striving to overcome prejudiced thinking in oneself
e) boners are heavily affected by prejudices in society, and
f) because of e, if an individual becomes less prejudiced then this might very well have the effect of making said individual’s boners less discriminate.
I just think it’s pointless to tell people that they should somehow will themselves to become attracted to people they’re not currently attracted to. Attraction doesn’t work that way.
I haven’t seen anyone in the thread claiming that they should have the right to go around SAYING that “black people aren’t sexy” or something like that. I haven’t seen anyone claiming either that they’re mostly attracted to white people and THIS IS A GOOD THING, or even an indifferent thing. Of course it’s sad that some people’s pattern of attraction is shaped by racist prejudices. It’s just that it would be pretty stupid to start dating with or sleeping with black people whom you’re not attracted to out of a sense of moral duty.
We should strive to overcome our prejudices and strive to fight oppression in society, and this could IN TURN affect how our boners work, but focusing directly on our boners or shaming others for their boners is just stupid and pointless.
@ Dvarg- Whether people were being explicit or not there is certainly the expectation there should be some level of acceptance of their racist preferences. Especially since the rather insulting comparison to sexual orientation had been made- we might not know why some people are have the sexual orientation they have, but I think we can agree sexual orientation is not the same as racism. I’m not sure if extending the ‘either get over your racist preferences or keep them to yourself’ point I made to ‘sleep with racial minorities out of a sense of duty’ is particularly rational or useful. And this whole ‘we must work to overcome our prejudices and fight oppression’ blah-dee-blah- well, no duh. That is the least that is expected of you. In fact, quite a lot more is expected of you. Unless you are creating a quiet, out of the way support group for people who have racist sexual preferences, it’s really incredibly alienating and insulting to discuss them as a matter-of-fact in a more or less public forum. And I suspect that comes from a place of relative privilege- you view your racism as normal and ok to discuss publicly. And expect minorities to give you minority-cookies because you acknowledge your racism and think that, maybe, in the future, if you get around to it, you should get over it. Nah, dude- you’re being racist and you got called out. The only appropriate response is to quietly apologize once and privately, not publicly, rethink your behavior and retrain your brain.
Out of curiosity, do gay men “have to make a conscious attempt to get over their sexism” and force themselves to want to sleep with women? Because that seems terrible and stupid, and I’m not sure why the idea that someone must MAKE themselves find thus-and-such-feature-correlated-with-race attractive if they just don’t, provided their personal tastes aren’t affecting how they treat people, is any less stupid. I think we all agree that if you run around saying, “Ew, black people are ugly!” that is unacceptable and racist as shit, but there’s a wide, wide gulf between “Ew, black people are ugly!” and “I generally go for blondes with blue eyes, because that look is really sexy to me,” and an even wider gulf between “I am only attracted to certain people” and “I am incapable of being kind and respectful to people unless I am sexually attracted to them.” If you’re turning people down for jobs or convicting them of crimes or treating them as lesser because you do not personally want to bang them, that is obviously a big problem, but if the only consequence of you not wanting to bang them is…you not banging them, the idea that this is an issue of racism that needs to be addressed is frankly ridiculous to me.
I mean, I’ve got no problem with the idea that someone who’s into blue-eyed blondes should consider whether those preferences were shaped by society – considering whether one’s underlying attitudes are shaped by society is generally interesting! – but there’s a very good chance that at the end of that consideration, that person is still going to think blue-eyed blondes are hot and be less aroused by other human color schemes. And I don’t see any reason anyone should care, because social justice is not about the state of some random person’s boner.
Oh, do you believe racism is as intrinsic to our beings as our sexual orientation, Poliwog? Or that our right to be racist shits ought to be celebrated and defended? I have a higher view of humanity than that- further, my rights end where yours begin ring a bell? Perpetuating a racist ideology isn’t the equivalent of a lifestyle choice, it’s perpetuating hatred. And defending racist dialogue with a false comparison to the struggles of another oppressed group is some seriously dirty pool. As to caring about boners, I actively do not care who is fucking who. Accepting racism when discussing boners is a whole other kettle of fish, and that ain’t gonna fly. Same rules apply- stop being so fucking racist or stop publicly expecting people to accept your racist attitudes. It may be hard at first, recognizing you have to stfu now and again- that’s what letting go of privilege is all about.
No? Hence why I’m not talking about racism? Again, there is a big difference between “I don’t want to have sex with you” and “I think you are inferior.” (And if there isn’t a big difference between those things for someone, THAT is a huge problem in its own right.)
Okay, I’m sorry, but what are you even talking about? The examples given so far have been things like “someone thinking Christina Hendricks is the hottest,” “someone not liking body hair,” and “someone being into blondes.” How do any of those things infringe on anyone’s rights? Could you please clarify what you are referring to? Because right now you appear to be having an entirely different argument than anyone else in this thread.
What racist ideology? What racist dialogue? I am seriously confused. Can you give me an example of what you’re actually talking about here, please?
I’m sorry…did you just suggest that people should refuse to accept someone’s lack of sexual interest? Because that is what we were talking about. If someone says, “Sorry, I’m not into [insert racial category here],” how exactly is an [insert racial category here] person meant to go about “not accepting” that? I’m not really coming up with an answer that isn’t somewhere between creepy and horrifying.
Okay? Again, I don’t think anyone is suggesting that people should go around trumpeting their sexual preferences to all and sundry as if they matter. To the best of my knowledge, no one here is a fan of Unsolicited Boner Updates. I’m all in favor of people S-ing TFU about the state of their boner unless it’s actually relevant to conversation. I’m just not clear on what that has to do with the argument that people should make themselves “get over” their sexual preferences, which is what I’m objecting to.
@Timetravelingfool: I don’t know why you start talking about “my racism”. I never said anything about my own sexual preferences. And no, I don’t expect minorities to give me cookies or any shit like that. Everyone has prejudices, me too, everyone should work against them as best they can, me too, and nobody deserves cookies for doing so, me neither. Okay?
The only person in the thread I’ve seen so far who said anything about having some kind of colour-preference is Ozy. Ozy wrote that zie finds more white people than POC attractive, called zir own preferences racist because of that, and asked (maybe rethorically) what one is supposed to do if that’s the case.
Well, I for one have no suggestion for Ozy. From reading zir blog it seems like zie’s as enlightened as the next person here. If zir boners rise less often for POC there are probably causal explanations for that in terms of internalized racism, but there doesn’t seem to be much Ozy can do about it, unless one suggests bizarrely that zie starts dating with and sleeping with people zie doesn’t find attractive out of some weird sense of moral duty. But okay, I understand now that you’re not suggesting anything like that.
So, I guess you think stating that one’s boner is racist is way out of line. But do you also mean that if someone finds zir boner behaving in a racist way, that person really ought to make zir boner behave differently through sheer force of will, or what? What does the “get over it” mean in the context of sexual attraction?
Grumbles: But when a woman looks like an Oompa-Loompa, I don’t merely find her unappealing sexually; I also think that this is the kind of person that I wouldn’t really enjoy having a conversation with.
That’s one the stupidest things I’ve read from you.
I’m not attracted to lots of people; on a sexual level. Maybe they slouch, or have hair I don’t like, or they enjoy wearing makeup in ways I don’t find pleasant.
None of that has fuck all to do with other interactions with them. Some of the most wonderful conversationalists I know score in the, “not interested categories”.
That’s quite apart from the logical leap (i.e. failure) of, “pre-occupied with tanning”, and “looks like an Oompa-Loompa”.
This whole sexual conversation about sexual attraction vs. prejudice has gone straight to hell. I don’t even know where to start untangling it.
I’m with Mollyren …
“This whole sexual conversation…”
Um, I think I put a word somewhere it didn’t belong. XD
MollyRen, maybe you accidentally the whole thing earlier and now it showed up somewhere inconvenient. And I’m with you too.
In regards to tanning and Oompa Loompas, I don’t think it matters how much tanning dye (or whatever it’s called) you put on, it won’t make you three feet tall and have green hair.
Do no men realise how amazingly arrogant it is to try and hurt a woman’s feelings by telling her they find her unattractive? I find it hard to get upset when I guy I wouldn’t want to sleep with tells me words to the effect of “I wouldn’t sleep with you”, and it would be arrogant to assume I would. There’s also the fact that in the UK at least “you fat slag” has become such a generic Standard Insult For Women that it’s now hard to take it personally- doubly so when the man saying it is fat himself. I remember one time I was called fat (I’m a UK size 12/US size 8) by a very sweaty, drunk and slovenly man with a massive beer gut hanging over his trousers- he was so fat he could no longer get the waistband around his actual waist but the irony of his choice of insult was lost on him
Men who call women fat, ugly etc seem to think we’re desperate for their approval and would be crushed if we didn’t get it- pretty arrogant don’t you think? Those words might upset me if I heard them in response to asking out a guy I’d really liked and had thought seemed a decent chap, or if they came from a friend who turned out not to be such a good friend after all. From a complete stranger they can’t be taken too personally.
That said, some hurt comes from realising the vicious intent- men using the insult “fat slag” do it because they think this is the ultimate insult for women and with this they’re really saying “I want to hurt you”. It’s still a depressing choice of words, suggesting all women are shallow and vain- personally I’d can think of a thousand jibes more insulting that those two- for example “Tory”, “Republican”, “Daily Mail Reader”… “slag” is a weird one to me- I believe there’s no such thing as a slag or a slut and refuse to believe the men who use these words are really all that big on chastity.
I once got called an “ugly c***” (for trying to get an aggressive minicab tout to take “no” for an answer) and found the shocking thing there was the use of a needlessly harsh swear word- the “ugly” didn’t bother me. Perhaps I’d really prefer men to call me a “c***” rather than a “fat slag”- at least that would be a step towards equality.
Daily Mail Reader? *shudder* I don’t think I’d ever stop weeping if someone called me that.
The problem with “Daily Mail reader” as an insult is that the people it’s aimed at won’t see it as an insult, so if your aim was to upset them then no luck there.
As far as the path this conversation is going down, 3 thoughts.
1. “I’m not attracted to black people” (as in not a single person out of hundreds of millions of people?) – yes, that’s racist. It shouldn’t take any self-examination to realize that – it’s pretty obviously a racist attitude that comes from growing up in a racist society.*
2. “I think Christina Hendricks is the hottest woman ever” – no, that’s not racist in and of itself, though it may be for some people (see below).
3. “While pale skin does indeed appeal to me on a physical level, there’s also the fact that the kind of woman who is proud to be pale is generally going to be different, personality-wise, from a woman who’s preoccupied with tanning.” – You have no idea how tanning, the genetics of why people have the skin tones they have, or women’s personalities work. There’s some class stuff going on here with the attitude towards people who do choose to tan too. It’s fine to be attracted to pasty people, but their paleness is not a sign of…well, anything really, other than that they’re at a higher than average risk of skin cancer.
This thing a lot of men do where they try to explain their physical preferences by attributing favorable personality traits to women who have those physical traits is really weird.
* I know I said this earlier, but to repeat – if you’re categorically declaring everyone who belongs to any given racial group as either totally unhot or super mega hot then that pretty obviously is a product of racism, rather than just a physical preference, given the wide diversity of appearance within any racial group. It’s not the same mental process going on as there is if you’re going “I really dig women with big boobs ” or “I’m really not into men who’re super buffed”. This should be pretty obvious given that nobody ever makes the same sort of sweeping statements about white people.
@ Polliwog- Ah, I see your problem- you don’t see how racist ideology influences your sexual preferences. The formula is pretty simple. Society and the media portrays a certain group in a specific way- black people as criminals, asian people as bad drivers, skinny white girls as sexy, etc. We internalize it. What you do with those messages (try to change it, deny that there is a problem, etc) is your participation in perpetuating a sexist ideology. Not going to lie, I kind of stopped reading after you said you didn’t think your sexual preferences were kinda racist- a bit of a lost cause. But if you’re ever wondering what people are talking about when they refer to privilege, this would be a great example- feeling free to say racist shit and expecting to define it as not racist because you don’t hate minorities, you just wouldn’t ever want to bone one. Yeah, it is that bad.
@ Dvarg- I’m being pretty clear here. When your sexual preferences come from a racist place it is not ok- so either try and change yourself (yay) or stfu about it (eh, better than nothing). And certainly don’t pretend your racism is as fundamental to your being as your sexual orientation. And pretending not being attracted to one specific minority or another isn’t ideologically perpetuated racism is insulting- yeah, you internalized some racism. Own up to it and get over it. And either I mean you specifically or a group of transparently racist people you are defending- I don’t really care, same difference. Further, we can all distinguish between our boners (private) and public discussions about what gives us boners (by definition, not private).
*facepalm*
No, no, no, seriously, people can disagree with you for reasons other than a lack of understanding.
And jumping from “cultural narratives about race influence people’s sexual preferences” to calling Ozy “transparently racist?” You are really jumping the shark here.