Communities of Fat: Cultural Fit

Homosexuals, women, people of colour and now of size (eg. fat people, small people, etc.) have come to appreciate how their vantage point affects their worldview. All groups have radicals and moderates, their fringe and balanced perspectives. Group identity anchored in common characteristics forms the basis of morality, philosophy, aesthetics and rights. For the fat and other visible minorities, there is no monolithic culture but a variety of types all struggling for self-definition.

There are those who define themselves in reference to their antipathy toward fat: the fatophobes. At the other extreme are the fatophiles who evaluate fat and fatness as a unique and desirable state. Finally, there are medical and health care professionals who approach fat from a therapeutic or research point of view. They could be called fatologists.

The first two groups make the absence or presence of fat a culture-defining principle. They derive their morality and values from it. This is most obvious by their use of value-laden language, describing food as either good or bad, that which leads to fatness or thinness - whichever the desired goal. Aesthetics and fashion are determined by the cultural standards that dominate these groups. Here is my understanding of the three contemporary communities of fat:

Fatophobes: Fat is Evil

Dedicated to the curtailment and, if possible, abolition of fat, fatophobes divide into subgroups that might include metabolically advantaged sport enthusiasts, dedicated dieters and (unconscious) crypto-anorexics. The presence or absence of fat on a human body determines moral character within these groups. The fat are slovenly, undisciplined gluttons, whereas the thin are righteous upholders of cultivation, hard work and high self-esteem. Thus the comment, “She’s taking care of herself.” Or conversely, “She’s letting herself go.” There is, however, toleration for the fat person within the context of conversion. Those with fat must admit personal responsibility for their condition and vow to amend their lifestyle through willpower. “At least they are working at it,” they say. Fatophobes, wittingly or not, advocate ineffective and even dangerous weight loss regiments. Through chiding themselves and others, they unintentionally increase guilt, the leading ingredient in weight gain.

Fatophiles: Fat is Beautiful

Fatophiles advocate for social change and acceptance of fat individuals. They are intent on promoting fat culture as a legitimate expression of difference. Fatophiles with an activist proclivity emphasize the legal and social barriers to fat acceptance in society. Equal opportunity, health benefits, insurance policies, size-appropriate accommodation are high priorities for this group. They often align themselves with other victims of “looksism”: the small and the cosmetically unattractive.

As in many reform movements, the politically correct use of language is a prerequisite. Certain words and behaviors are evaluated in reference to a fat acceptance perspective. Aesthetics are “Rubens-esquely” effected: sized individuals demand a place in photography, fashion and even erotica. Fatophiles sometimes develop a reverse discrimination against the thin and culturally beautiful. Desiring acceptance of individuals, fatophiles unwittingly advocate unhealthy nutrition and, in extreme cases, promote weight increase for political reasons.

Fatologists: Fat Just Is

Health providers and obesity researchers are not immune to fatophobia (fear) or fatophilia (love) but they tend to moderate these emotionally charged interpretations. At their best, fatologists emphasize the need for fat people to form health partnerships with informed individuals. Their education-oriented standpoint can correct inaccurate ideas about fat as either the cause of all physical illness or as health neutral. At their worst, fatologists tend to align themselves with scientific and economic communities which complicate their contributions. The multi-million dollar diet industry influences them by insisting on restrictive and unhealthy diets, whereas drug companies promote inadequately tested medication, turning fat people into guinea pigs, exploiting them for financial profit. Even if a chemical panacea for obesity was found, merely substituting chemical therapy for healthy living styles and good nutritional choices would impair health.

Fat’s Fit: How it Functions

So far, we have seen fat’s surface characteristics, explored its subjective aspects, and expressed three community interpretations. Wilber’s fourth quadrant looks at how fat functions beyond our love or hate, observation or research. The final standpoint asks us to observe how fat intermeshes with economic, educational and political structures in society.

Fat and Economics

Fat makes money, lots of it. Put cynically, it is a cash cow for the health and food industry. Whatever your subjective feelings about fat, the meanings and mythologies you bring to it, you are guaranteed a clientele when you set up shop in fat’s auxiliary industries. The bond between fat and economics is complex yet what stands out along with the economic opportunity is the need to adopt morally responsible economic principles.