Fat-admirers/ Chubby-chasers

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by National association of the Advancement of Fat People

HISTORY/EXISTING CONDITION:

At different times throughout history, the fat figure was looked upon as the ideal, desirable figure. For example, at the turn of the century, Lillian Russell -- at a weight of over 200 pounds -- was a reigning sex symbol. Today, the American cultural aesthetic of beauty ranges from the thin supermodel whose figure's proportions are unrepresentative of the naturally occurring shape of the human female, to an emaciated, sunken-eyed look termed "heroin chic."

Historically, men have gained credibility from their accumulated wealth and power, and at different times throughout history, fatness was seen as an indicator of wealth and abundance, and thus viewed as desirable. Today, the American cultural aesthetic of a male's attractiveness ranges from the muscular athletic body type to the "lumberjack" or "teddy bear" type.

These cultural standards of attractiveness are fueled, in large part, by a multi-billion-dollar commercial weight loss industry that sells people on dissatisfaction with their bodies, by ultra-chic actors and actresses portraying love interests in television and movies, and by manufacturers selling products by linking the concept of conventional beauty and the consumer's self-worth.

Based on anecdotal evidence, five to ten percent of the population has a sexual preference for a fat partner. Since fat partners are not considered attractive or desirable by modern American society, there is a high degree of stigmatization associated with such a preference. Due to this societal, peer, and parental pressure, individuals with such a preference see the preference itself as abnormal or shameful. As a result, most individuals who prefer fat partners suffer from self-doubt and often public ridicule. Many decide to stay "in the closet" about their preference because of this opposition. This denial of one's preference may lead to a disruption in personal growth and inadequate development of social and interpersonal skills. It may also lead to unhappy relationships with average-size partners chosen simply to conform to society's norms or to please parents, employers, or friends. As a result of this social stigma, relationships between fat people and their admirers are often unnecessarily difficult, and many people who could form happy, successful relationships never have the opportunity to meet.



NAAFA'S OFFICIAL POSITION:

The National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance believes that a preference for a fat partner is as valid as any other preference based on physical characteristics, such as a particular height, eye color, or hair color. NAAFA also asserts that individuals who are attracted to a fat partner should be able to pursue, date, and make a commitment to a person of their size preference without fear of societal ridicule. Further, NAAFA believes that in a society where at least 55% of the population is considered fat, a preference for a fat partner is normal and should be encouraged rather than discouraged. NAAFA condemns the ridiculing and disqualification of fat people as desirable sexual partners as counterproductive and unfair.



NAAFA ADVOCATES:

That fat admirers organize into a movement to legitimize the preference for a fat partner.

That literature for children, adolescents, and adults includes fat characters who are normal, attractive, and sought after as love interests.

That parents and schools teach that all individuals are worthy of love regardless of their size or the size of their preferred partner.

That the media represent fat people as normal, desirable, and as love interests in movies, television, and print.

That celebrities and public personalities who have or prefer fat partners acknowledge their preference to the public through media interviews.



NAAFA RESOLVES TO:

Support efforts of fat admirers to organize into a movement to legitimize the preference for fat partners.

Support the portrayal of fat men and women as romantic interests in movies, television, magazine articles, books, and other media.

Educate the public and fat admirers to the fact that it is normal to be attracted to a fat partner.

Provide workshops for fat admirers where they can learn to accept their preference and raise their consciousness in respect to fat admiration.


First Issued: 8/13/98

Last Revised: 6/23/98


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Link (http://www.naafa.org/documents/policies/fat_admirers.html)

Alot of fat people can't help their size, in the west people live sedintary lifestyles. These lifestyles are a result of the change in the means of production, not necessarily over-eating, this organization promotes "health for all sizes", and that "diets don't work" and result in a yo-yo effect, or can cause health problems.

As for myself, I'm not overweight, though I do find many types of women attractive, I tend to find myself more attractive to the "rubenesque" "volutptous" "BBW" types. Whenever I say that, people laugh, and it's absurd because 55% is overweight, and very few have the archetype of the perfect body represented in the media.
Or I'm construed as someone who is insecure and favours these body types because it is thought that the partner is less likely to leave to the relationship because of their size. If my partner decided to lose their weight, I wouldn't leave them for doing so, and I would love them still.

From what I understand, the homosexual community parrells the straight community but they are more open about this admiration, probably because they had to come out of the closet with being homosexuals. So in this respect, I think there are more male heterosexuals still in the closet for this admiration.

[RedAnarchist]

Personally, I'm not bothered about the size of a person, although I have to admit I prefer an "average"-sized person to someone who is overweight (although thats based on looks alone).

Many fat people are fat because of health problems, disabilities, genetics etc. Society needs to stop viewing fatter people as greedy, because this stereotype only accounts for a minority of fat people.

[rouchambeau]

National association of the Advancement of Fat People
Oh my god. Another group trying to appropriate the struggles of Black people.

[TC]

In principle, I’m sympathetic to ‘fat admirers’ as a sexual minority (although, hardly an oppressed one but one spoiled for choice since fat people greatly outnumber them)...

...but the logic being used here is inconsistent and points to an underlying chauvinism (that ‘fat admirers’ are not merely legitimate but morally superior to the majority who prefer thin people).


This article for instance argues that, on the one hand, there was (supposedly) a time when the media and social consensus was that fat people were beautiful and this is evidence that preference for fat people is good and natural.

On the other hand, it argues that today the media and social consensus is that thin people are beautiful, and this is evidence that a preference for thin people is artificially constructed, unnatural and bad.

Clearly this logic is inconsistent; it applies opposite conclusions to parallel sets of anecdotal data, which points to an unscientific ideological motive: chauvinism.

And while people (chiefly men) are made to feel like perverts for preferring fat partners, something that is clearly a problem, men are also made to feel guilty (often by rad fems) and somehow ‘oppressive’ for preferring thin women, and that should also be recognized as problematic.



At different times throughout history, the fat figure was looked upon as the ideal, desirable figure.

This is clearly untrue, they might want to believe it but its just not the case. If you go to any art gallery and look at pre-20th century art work, you might see a lot of (rich) fat people in commissioned portraits, but the idealized sculpture and paintings of goddesses, gods, nymphs, attractive fictional youths, and so on, are rarely if ever fat...

This is not to say that there haven’t been changes in the range of what’s considered conventionally beautiful, only that those changes have not been from considering fat beautiful to considering thin beautiful: fat was never beautiful to most people.

Additionally I think the types of looks considered beautiful before the 20th century are still seen as beautiful today, the only difference is that several body types which are not depicted in pre-20th century art are depicted in 20th and post-20th century magazines and media.



For example, at the turn of the century, Lillian Russell -- at a weight of over 200 pounds -- was a reigning sex symbol.

Eh, I’m sorry but one anecdote doesn’t prove their claim...and if Lillian Russell really was 200 lbs, from her photos, she must have been very tall because she looks overweight but not obese; but then she also always wore a corset so she was hiding her actual body type anyways. In any case she was never a dominate sex symbol and I don’t think that if she were a 21st century American she would consider herself ‘fat’ given how fat people have gotten.



Today, the American cultural aesthetic of beauty ranges from the thin supermodel whose figure's proportions are unrepresentative of the naturally occurring shape of the human female, to an emaciated, sunken-eyed look termed "heroin chic."

I think the tall, thin, waify female body type used in high fashion only, became popular in the 1960s onwards; given that this coincided with the women’s liberation movement and with the availability of reliable birth control I think one explanation might be that social changes allowed people to decouple female sexiness from female fertility: men don’t just select partners to breed anymore, and height, which is associated with power in either gender, is more commonly a turn on than a turn off post-1960s whereas the reverse was true pre-1960s. I think one of the reason why this body type more then any other is demonized by conservative and radical feminist campaigners (see the ‘size zero model’ “controversy” for reference) is largely due to the social implications of seeing it as beautiful...which is why its politically correct to ridicule it as NAAFP does.

NAAFP’s assertion that this isn’t a “naturally occurring shape of the human female” is simply wrong, its using an appeal to “nature” to make a moral judgment (as with using the term ‘heroin chic’ which was always more popular in the conservative media to evoke shock than in fashion).

Probably though, the most popular (among men) female body type isn’t the tall, thin high fashion model type at all, but the average height, large breasted, curvy but slender swimsuit model body type...and that is also a body type that you never see in pre-20th century artwork. The reason for this is that 20th century dietary changes produce more women who start puberty much earlier and have proportionally larger breasts then at any other time in history; it would be hard to argue that that’s more “natural.”


Historically, men have gained credibility from their accumulated wealth and power, and at different times throughout history, fatness was seen as an indicator of wealth and abundance, and thus viewed as desirable. Today, the American cultural aesthetic of a male's attractiveness ranges from the muscular athletic body type to the "lumberjack" or "teddy bear" type.

This is really quite bullshit, I would offer a different explanation.

Historically, men oppressed women; what women viewed as desirable was irrelevant because their social status entirely depended on how rich their husband was and rich men allowed themselves to get fat because they didn’t care whether or not women found them sexually appealing (remember, before the 19th century there was a general denial of women’s sexual desire as existent, before the 1960s there was a denial of women’s sexual desire as healthy)

Today, due to capitalism bringing women into the work force and putting a segment of women on equal footing with a segment of men, what women view as sexually desirable in a man matters socially. It turns out that most heterosexual women prefer men with an athletic, sculpted but not over built, body type, and now that women can be independent; lots of men realize that they need more than money to attract desirable women, they need to be sexy too.

I see this as social progress; NAAFP apparently doesn’t.



These cultural standards of attractiveness are fueled, in large part, by a multi-billion-dollar commercial weight loss industry that sells people on dissatisfaction with their bodies,

That’s an interesting interpretation considering that producing obesity itself is vastly larger industry which sells people on instant gratification and compulsive over eating behavior (is weight loss a multi-billion dollar industry? I doubt it. Is fast food? Definitely).

Again, we have inconsistent logic; if one capitalist industry creates obesity and one capitalist industry attempts to eliminate obesity it makes little sense to suggest that the smaller one is what sets the standards...

...more likely people *are* dissatisfied with their bodies because most people are not fat admirers and naturally find them less attractive, and then a capitalist industry merely steps up to meet this demand. Wanting to be sexually desirable when you are not to most people is a legitimate reason to be dissatisfied with your body in of itself; why blame society for what can be more easily explained on the level of individual motivation.


by ultra-chic actors and actresses portraying love interests in television and movies,

People watch films with love interests that they’re sexually interested in, most people aren’t sexually interested in fat people (even by NAAFP’s admission), therefore it follows more obviously that the casting of actors and actresses merely reflects a pre-existing preference it doesn’t create one.


and by manufacturers selling products by linking the concept of conventional beauty and the consumer's self-worth.

Most people don’t need a manufacturer to link their sexual desirability to their social worth because most people see the obvious advantages of being sexually desirable without needing someone to point it out to them...and in act manufacturers selling products don’t point it out to them, they simply show them products to make them look better and people draw their own (consistent) conclusions.

Just because consumerism sells a product doesn’t mean that product isn’t rationally desirable.



Based on anecdotal evidence, five to ten percent of the population has a sexual preference for a fat partner.

LOL

So, based on no evidence at all NAAFP thinks it can get away with claiming that five to ten percent of the population prefer fat partners.

There is absolutely no way that anecdotal “evidence” can even suggest in the vaguest way a percentage of the population in any demographic group. Anecdotes can suggest that something exists, that something is common, but not in what percent of the population its present in. So that was bullshit.

But in any case, even if it were true, that would still mean that the overwhelming majority do not like fat sex partners, which ought to also be recognized as a legitimate sexual preference and not patronizingly attributed to the media or consumer culture. That again, would be to apply a double standard.


Since fat partners are not considered attractive or desirable by modern American society, there is a high degree of stigmatization associated with such a preference. Due to this societal, peer, and parental pressure, individuals with such a preference see the preference itself as abnormal or shameful. As a result, most individuals who prefer fat partners suffer from self-doubt and often public ridicule.

I can definitely believe that, and this should have been the exclusive focus of the article rather than the earlier fat chauvinism.



Further, NAAFA believes that in a society where at least 55% of the population is considered fat, a preference for a fat partner is normal and should be encouraged rather than discouraged.

No sexual preference should be discouraged but likewise no sexual preference should be encouraged because doing so implicitly suggests that theres something less desirable or moral about those with opposite preferences.

Heterosexuality is statistically normal and heterosexuals represent a much larger percentage of the population than fat people do but I think everyone would see the implied homophobia in “encouraging” people to be heterosexual.


NAAFA condemns the ridiculing and disqualification of fat people as desirable sexual partners as counterproductive and unfair.

Sexual desire isn’t fair, its not an area where equality enters into the equation. I wouldn’t hesitate to “disqualify” fat people as sex partners, what would be really unfair is to demand consideration by people who have no sexual interest in them.

Earlier NAAFA states:


It may also lead to unhappy relationships with average-size partners

So apparently its okay to tell fat admirers they’re free to disqualify average sized sex partners, but non-fat admirers need to consider fat people as desirable sexual partners?

Again, the logic in this is totally inconsistent and applies a double standard.




Alot of fat people can't help their size, in the west people live sedintary lifestyles. These lifestyles are a result of the change in the means of production, not necessarily over-eating, this organization promotes "health for all sizes", and that "diets don't work" and result in a yo-yo effect, or can cause health problems.

Sure, you can say that but a study recently established that sized was correlated to the size of your friends and your social network despite taking into account geography and class...so if the social acceptability and apparent social norm affect someone’s weight then clearly size is determined by people’s level of self control and discipline around food.

(you can read about that here:

)

Which, is frankly really ironic given that pro-fat activists claim that society pushes people to be thin, it actually looks like social standards encourage people (with fat friends) to be fat, and that’s why Europeans for instance are thinner than Americans (they have less relaxed standards).



As for myself, I'm not overweight, though I do find many types of women attractive, I tend to find myself more attractive to the "rubenesque" "volutptous" "BBW" types. Whenever I say that, people laugh, and it's absurd because 55% is overweight, and very few have the archetype of the perfect body represented in the media.

It sucks that people laugh at you for that, clearly that’s really wrong...

...i would suggest though that you don’t refer to yourself as a “chubby chaser” because it sounds pervy and you don’t use the phrase “BBW” because it sounds pornographic.

Just say that you like larger women and I don’t think people would be assholish about it (especially not women, most of whom, are as you point out, larger :-p).

I don’t really see anyways why people need to make an identity group politic out of being a ‘fat admirer’, it might be misunderstood but its clearly not oppressed in the way that gays were and in some places still are.


Personally, I'm not bothered about the size of a person, although I have to admit I prefer an "average"-sized person to someone who is overweight (although thats based on looks alone).


Meh, I think the politically correct self-esteem-movement-endorsed impulse to pretend that physical appearance and body type don’t or shouldn’t matter in sex partner selection is just anti-sex...

making this into a political issue doesn’t produce progress it just leads to a conspiracy of silence where everyone who has the ability to select sex partners heavily on the basis of physical preference does so, but they don’t admit it openly or they rationalize it.

And, by this I don’t mean of course that looking a certain way is sufficient for partner selection but that it’s necessary for partner selection.

I don’t think this is something that people should be ‘ashamed to admit’ but its understandable why this is the case: liberalism teaches a sort of false equality of opportunity as a moral imperative, and it extends this equality of opportunity to the point of entitlement. Part of the liberal myth is that everyone does (or should have) an equal opportunity to succeed in any area of life, and this ends up including sex and relationships, but that’s just not an area where people can be equal. Pretending otherwise just produces guilt, shame, and subtle forms of coercion.

[LSD]

The National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance believes that a preference for a fat partner is as valid as any other preference based on physical characteristics, such as a particular height, eye color, or hair color.

I don't like the implication that some sexual preferences are "valid" whereas others presumably are "not", but I certainly can't disagree with the premise that being turned on by weight is no more "wrong" than being turned on by any other physical feature.

There's no "morality" to sexuality and discrimination based on what is percieved to be "normal" or "acceptable" is always imherently conservative and intolerably oppressive.


NAAFA also asserts that individuals who are attracted to a fat partner should be able to pursue, date, and make a commitment to a person of their size preference without fear of societal ridicule.

Equally irrefutable. I would expand that to say that anyone attracted to any sort of physical or psychological feature should be able to "pursue, date, and make a commitment" providing of course that they do so with the consent of the target of their affections (and that consent is possible).

I'm not sure that all of this fractionalization helps anyone, though, I just don't see the NAAFP wielding much influence; and it might do its members a lot more good if they thought a little bigger and grouped with all the other groups of socially marginalized sexual proclivities.

After all, there's really only one fight here, that of personal autonomy and freedom against invasive moralism and the doctine of "acceptibility".


Further, NAAFA believes that in a society where at least 55% of the population is considered fat, a preference for a fat partner is normal and should be encouraged rather than discouraged.

And this is where the "NAAFA" steps over the line between making a legitimate calla for tolerance and making one for social control.

55% of the population may well be overweight, but according to their own statistics (and incredibly dubious statistics at that), 90-95% of the population are attracted to thin people.

If any "preference" should be considered "normal" and accordingly "promoted", therefore, it would be most certainly not be the one that "NAAFA" promotes!

Of course the reality is that no sexual attraction or orientation should be promoted for the very same reason taht "NAAFA" condemns the ridicule of and prejudice against "fat admireres", adult human beings have the right to be attracted to whomever they damn please.


NAAFA condemns the ridiculing ... of fat people as desirable sexual partners as counterproductive and unfair.

I'm curious as to what that would mean in practice, but I think we can all agree that as a general rule, ridiculing people over imutable personal characteristics is very low thing to do and should be discouraged as much as possible.


NAAFA condemns the ... disqualification of fat people as desirable sexual partners as counterproductive and unfair.

And again, "NAAFA" crosses that line into the disturbingly moralistic.

It unfortunately would appear that this group is so blinded by its own cause, that it completely misses the abject hypocrisy of its arguments.

If it's wrong, as "NAAFA" contends, to ridicule or otherwise attempt to discourage "fat admirers" from admiring fat, then how can it be any less wrong to attempt to discourage think admirers from admiring thin people?

I don't know what "counterproductive" is supposed to mean in this context, but as to "unfair", I can tell you that anytime anyone is rejected for sex they find it "unfair". I've been rejected plenty of times in my life and I've rejected others as well. I promise, each of those times, one of the parties went away from the encounter thinking that an injustice had been done.

I suppose it's too bad that "NAAFA" wasn't around to "condemn" the "injustice"... :rolleyes:

[Entrails Konfetti]

Let me clear the air here:
I'm not a member of this organization, I just found the piece interesting, and relevant to my thinking. These aren't necessarily my views, and I thought this was an interesting piece for discussion.

Tragic Clown

In principle, I’m sympathetic to ‘fat admirers’ as a sexual minority (although, hardly an oppressed one but one spoiled for choice since fat people greatly outnumber them)...
I wouldn't say oppressed either, but I still think the media has narrowed the male point of view on women. Although the media can portray people like Queen Latiffa or Megan Mullally as sexy, they have a small group of admirers, but it's not anything like Angelina Jolie-- not on the same level of representation.

I wouldn't say spolied for choice, most of the large women can't accept the way they look, even if they can't help it, and if you were to tell them that they look great the way they are, you're probably lying. The male can't help the larger women be happy with themself, even if he thinks shes brilliant.


Clearly this logic is inconsistent; it applies opposite conclusions to parallel sets of anecdotal data, which points to an unscientific ideological motive: chauvinism.

Yeah, it's pretty crappy in that respect. But it does point out the narrow representations of attractiveness.


And while people (chiefly men) are made to feel like perverts for preferring fat partners, something that is clearly a problem, men are also made to feel guilty (often by rad fems) and somehow ‘oppressive’ for preferring thin women, and that should also be recognized as problematic.

This attraction to the larger women isn't something grafted on me by radfems. As I said above there is a very narrow depiction of women in the media and it does result in the way females feel about themselves, and the way men view women. The thin female is the hot trophy than all males must compete for, while the larger female is to be the friends of these competitive males, these males can act all rude and stupid around her, and if she ever gets into a relationship its usually because 1) the male was rejected by the thin female 2) The male is trying to make the thin female jealous 3) or the larger female thinks she can do no better and she must settle for this jerk.

There is a pretty particular female archetype of attractiveness in the media, but for males, it's pretty diverse. Theres the built guy, Johnny Depp, Brad Pitt, Vince Vaughn, and even Marilyn Manson. The standards don't measure up. You can't find more representations of Brad Pitt to Marilyn Manson.

Why is there such a narrow archetype for women? Is it cos of the on going influence of the past where the wife must stay sexy for the "returning from work" husband, while the husband looks like a slob? The husband hasn't the time to look the handsome devil, it doesn't concern, and the wife isn't fully independent yet-- maybe this can explain the whole MILF trend-- the older, bleached blond, thin, big breasted, female, wearing tight revealing clothes, Versace shades, and driving a Hummer.


This is clearly untrue, they might want to believe it but its just not the case. If you go to any art gallery and look at pre-20th century art work, you might see a lot of (rich) fat people in commissioned portraits, but the idealized sculpture and paintings of goddesses, gods, nymphs, attractive fictional youths, and so on, are rarely if ever fat...

Marliyn Monroe would be comsidered a tankard today, if she was just getting started today her career would be shot down. The only reason why she is considered a sex-icon is because of who she was back-then, and all the things she did. Venus Di Milo, is pretty chunky, alot of sculptures at that time feature women with wide hips, round bellies, and large thights, and that was considered attractive, today they'd be considered "undesirable".


This is not to say that there haven’t been changes in the range of what’s considered conventionally beautiful, only that those changes have not been from considering fat beautiful to considering thin beautiful: fat was never beautiful to most people.

Then theres the ever changing standard of what fat is-- compare a body mass index in a healthbook from the 1970's to todays.


I think the tall, thin, waify female body type used in high fashion only, became popular in the 1960s onwards; given that this coincided with the women’s liberation movement and with the availability of reliable birth control I think one explanation might be that social changes allowed people to decouple female sexiness from female fertility

If the womens lib movement had the impact of changing the view of sexiness, I'd think there would be a diverse view on female sexiness.


men don’t just select partners to breed anymore, and height, which is associated with power in either gender, is more commonly a turn on than a turn off post-1960s whereas the reverse was true pre-1960s.

Men in the west haven't sellected partners to just breed with for centuries prior to that time. When was the last time you can recall widespread arranged marriages in the west.


Probably though, the most popular (among men) female body type isn’t the tall, thin high fashion model type at all, but the average height, large breasted, curvy but slender swimsuit model body type

I think that bathing suit type, is the thin type I'm talking about, and they were talking about too, from Pamela Anderson to Paris Hilton. Thin people.


Today, due to capitalism bringing women into the work force and putting a segment of women on equal footing with a segment of men, what women view as sexually desirable in a man matters socially. It turns out that most heterosexual women prefer men with an athletic, sculpted but not over built, body type, and now that women can be independent; lots of men realize that they need more than money to attract desirable women, they need to be sexy too.

That is a very simplified statement. There are tons of ugly men with the trophy females. Lets not forget the MILF archetype.



That’s an interesting interpretation considering that producing obesity itself is vastly larger industry which sells people on instant gratification and compulsive over eating behavior (is weight loss a multi-billion dollar industry? I doubt it. Is fast food? Definitely).

I haven't seen any figures which cite one industry is bigger than the other, futher more you will never see a large women in a fast food commercial. Also, the fast food industries are responding to the obesity problem by offering healthier alternatives in their menus, while at the same time denying responsibilty for obesity. They say its their customers choices, and they also try to cover their asses by saying "well eating junkfood doesn't account for all obesity"-- so yes, the diet market does have an impact on the fast food industry.


...more likely people *are* dissatisfied with their bodies because most people are not fat admirers and naturally find them less attractive, and then a capitalist industry merely steps up to meet this demand.

What's natural is subjective.
How is the narrow achetype that is placed on women natural? How is it un natural that I can find women of many sizes, shapes, and colours attractive?

Theres also online dating sites to meet Big Beautiful Women-- and these don't have the same pornographic connotations. So this market meets the small demands of the people who like larger women.


Wanting to be sexually desirable when you are not to most people is a legitimate reason to be dissatisfied with your body in of itself; why blame society for what can be more easily explained on the level of individual motivation.

Not everyone can meet the standards of the archetype. You haven't shown how every women can be Angelina Jolie, or Paris Hilton. Most males don't even meet the diverse archetypes-- but they can be a bit more realistic for that sex.


People watch films with love interests that they’re sexually interested in, most people aren’t sexually interested in fat people (even by NAAFP’s admission), therefore it follows more obviously that the casting of actors and actresses merely reflects a pre-existing preference it doesn’t create one.

You've already stated that the media's standard of beauty changes. It could very well change to the marketing industry, and who looks best in these outfits. How can you explain it as a pre-existing preference?


Most people don’t need a manufacturer to link their sexual desirability to their social worth because most people see the obvious advantages of being sexually desirable without needing someone to point it out to them...and in act manufacturers selling products don’t point it out to them, they simply show them products to make them look better and people draw their own (consistent) conclusions

The manufacturer says, buy this, and you could be as desireable as this model.
In short, you never look good enough.


I can definitely believe that, and this should have been the exclusive focus of the article rather than the earlier fat chauvinism.
I agree.
But you did the same thing in debunking larger women as attrative, or maybe you were just trying to counter the arguments of the article. You are entitled to your opinion, however you haven't explained how todays standards are natural, and truely representing the perspective of society as whole. I say it doesn't, because if it did, I doubt there would be such general archetypes.



So apparently its okay to tell fat admirers they’re free to disqualify average sized sex partners, but non-fat admirers need to consider fat people as desirable sexual partners?

What is the average sized sex partner, the swimming suit model type that most men find attractive?

But to answer you're question, on my own behalf, I don't think it's okay. But people shouldn't be discouraged as to consider larger women desirable.


I don’t really see anyways why people need to make an identity group politic out of being a ‘fat admirer’, it might be misunderstood but its clearly not oppressed in the way that gays were and in some places still are.

Yeah, the identity politic isn't needed. But I think that most women are under represented. And that it shouldn't be considered unhealthy to find larger women or those who don't meet the Pamela or Paris criteria attractive. So it would be best if they expanded their issues to the way how most people aren't represented in the media.


Originally posted by LSD
but I certainly can't disagree with the premise that being turned on by weight is no more "wrong" than being turned on by any other physical feature.
You mean shape not weight, I've never tried to meet women by hanging out at public scales.


After all, there's really only one fight here, that of personal autonomy and freedom against invasive moralism and the doctine of "acceptibility".
I agree, we shouldn't marginalize ourselves, but find out where the root of the problem lies and organize around it.

[TC]

I'll respond to EK's comments, but first I thought I'd post a section of a book that deals with Fat-Admirers/Chubby-Chasers and the Fat Acceptance Movement: The Hungry Years: Confessions of a food addict, William Leith,


“A fat woman cruises towards me...I look at her, at the eaves of flesh hanging from her sides, and for a moment, a split second, I feel the fat person’s twinge of fear and self pity...the woman is in a much fatter place than me though – if I lost, say, 15 or 20 lbs, my fatness would be mentionable. This woman would need to lose 100. She might not have spoken about her weight for years. Every day, I guess, she lives with this dreadful, lonely secret, that something has gone terribly wrong with her life, and nobody will talk to her about it....
...All I need to do is lose 45 lbs...If I lost 20[lbs], my friends would come up to me and say, ‘Hi, Fatboy.’ That in itself would feel like an achievement. Nobody calls me Fatboy anymore. I’m too fat.”

Fat People are liars...When you’re fat, you lumber around, pretending not to notice. You try to fool other people into thinking you don’t think you’re fat. For you, the subject doesn’t exist. As fat person, you would be upset if somebody else started talking about other fat people. But this doesn’t make sense, of course, because you’re pretending not to know you are fat. A lot of fat people avoid the subject of fat in order to mimic the slim. But it’s a poor imitation: slim people talk about fat all the time. I know. I’ve been slim...
...I am fat. I don’t want to be fat. And I know how to be slim. But these three things don’t add up. Why, then, am I not slim? Somewhere inside my psyche, I am untrustworthy. I am a liar and a self-deciever.

This is because I am fat; it is also the reason I got fat in the first place. Deep down, I know I am a liar and a self-deciever, and that is because I am fat, and also why I am fat. But every time I remember this...I put it to the back of my mind instantly. I don’t want to go there.

I like to believe that I am fat, not through my own agency, but through the agency of others. I like to think I’m fat because the world around me is making me fat...I want a quick fix because I don’t want to look into myself too deeply. I am afraid that I might look into myself and despair...

-------------------

...I’d heard about the Fat Acceptance movement. Here were people who were fat, and yet who said they didn’t mind being fat. I was fat, and I was beginning to despair. And these Fat Acceptance people – were they not despairing too? I imagined that, secretly, they were. I imagined they were lying to themselves and others. I imagined they were untrustworthy...of course, I had a reason to be prejudiced. I was fat.

The first person I talked to was Shelley Bovey, probably the most radical campaigner for Fat Acceptance in Britain. She was fat, and she didn’t like being fat. Her campaign was directed at prejudice against fat people, particularly women. So even though, on one level, she did not accept herself as she was, she wanted others to accept her.

Bovey did not fall into line with the Big is Beautiful movement. She wanted fat to be accepted, but not admired. In her book The forbidden Body she writes, ‘Big is Beautiful puts a forced smile on the face of fat without revealing the depths of unhappiness and humiliation that most fat women experience. It is this that needs to be brought out into the open. It has to be recognized. And it has to be stopped.”

‘I actually feel,’ Bovey told me, ‘That prejudice against fat women is the biggest social injustice, bigger than racism, bigger than sexism, bigger than anything else.’ In The Forbidden Body, Bovey describes a fat woman being treated by a slim woman ‘as though she were a different species’.

-------------------

Was there anybody out there who accepted fat people unequivocally...perhaps that somebody was a company called 1647, an outfit that designed clothes for large women. The company is run by two women, the designer Helen Teague...and the actress Dawn French...

French was extremely upbeat about fat women. She said ‘I long for the day of the fatter supermodel.’...she pushed the angle that fat women are actually very sexy. She posed in skimpy gear in Esquire. ‘Big women,’ She said, ‘Are told by the men in our lives that we are lovely and good in bed. We’re delicious, we’re voluptuous. Then everybody else, including the media, tells us that we’re not.’

Teague didn’t look exactly fat; being moderately tall, her minor bulk made her look statuesque. ‘Well,’ she told me, ‘I am a normal-sized woman.’...She was planning the launch party for her new designer range, to be held at Liberty*...

...Then she told me about the state of the market in fat women’s clothes. The market, basically, was there for the taking. If you look at market research,’ said Teague, ‘you’ll see that slim women buy lots more clothes than larger women. A slim woman might have ten skirts. A large woman of the same age will have three. There’s no imagery aimed at big women. The images don’t work for them; they’re not seduced. They can’t buy into it.’

Teague, therefore, wanted to create images which would seduce fat women, images which, as she put it, ‘make it acceptable for older and bigger women to send out sexual signals’. And this of course, is terribly difficult. You have to be subtle. If you want women to buy things, you have to make them feel dissatisfied with what they’ve already got...but you have to be careful with fat women. They’re easy to scare off. You mustn’t remind them that they’re fat.

Then I asked Teague if I could attend the launch party for her new designer range, and bring a photographer with me. ‘You can come,’ she said. ‘But I wouldn’t want you to bring a photographer. It’s a difficult situation. You’re writing about fat issues. And I don’t really want French and Teague to be associated with all that. I want to keep it separate.’

Hold on, I thought. She wants the world to accept fat women without prejudice. She’s designed a range of clothes to make fat women feel glamorous. But she wants to avoid associating her clothes with fatness. So even here, right at the centre of the world of Fat Acceptance, fat is a dirty word...

...Then she said, ‘What we need is beautiful images. To get resources, you need to be appealing.’

I went to the French and Teague fashion show at the department store. It was a big enough attraction to fill one floor of the building with people. Many, but not most, were large-sized women...It was a great thing that, at last, they could have designer clothes...
...
Helen Teague got up on stage and made a speech. Then Dawn French Spoke... She said, ‘big women are not alienated in this store,’...She went on, “I hope that ultra-skinny people will be green with envy.’ Then the models took to the stage in the brown and blue outfits, the fluffy, huge-collared opera coat, the diaphanous slip dress. But these women were not fat at all. They were oversized models – tall, beautiful, shapely. I talked to them afterwards. One of them was almost as tall as me** and weighed 154 lbs. She looked like a fantasy version of Kim Basinger. ‘I’m just more woman than people like Kate Moss,’ She said. If this was Fat acceptance in action, I could see what Shelley Bovey was on about...

...A few days later, Teague mulled over the show’s coverage. She felt piqued. She’d watched a TV clip of the show. The T station, she said, ‘picked the biggest girls they could see, and filmed them. Some of them were size 36 and 40!’...

...And that’s when I realized the answer to my question was no. Nobody accepts fat people. Not even fat people. Particularly not fat people. When you are fat, part of you doesn’t like yourself, and you wear this self-loathing like an outfit, a clown’s suit that tells other people to devalue you.’Above all in our culture,’ writes the Princeton cultural historian Richard Klein, ‘being fat means you get no love, because you deserve no love.’

Klein relates a telli story: a man asked a fat woman out on a date. All very well, you might think. But then she discovered that he was a Fat Admirer – a ‘chubby chaser’. ‘She was angry and frustrated,’ said Klein. “it reinforced her dream o having a man who wants her in spite of her build.’ She didn’t want a man to want her as she was. She was like Groucho Marx, who wouldn’t want to belong to a club that would accept him as a member. After all, when you are only pretending to accept yourself, it is unbearable to be loved for the very thing you cannot love in yourself: your fat.




*Liberty is a large, expensive department store in central London that focuses on designer clothes.
** The author indicated earlier in his book that he is over 6 feet tall, so the model wasn’t especially heavy.



Thoughts? Reactions?

[Terminator X]

I loves me some "thickness". :P

Seriously, I prefer a woman with large breasts and a large behind - too-thin, or even "average" women just aren't a symbol of femininity to me. I'm not sure what that portends, but when I'm with a woman, I want to know I'm with a woman.

[Saint Street Revolution]

I prefer a full formed, curvy woman...not necassarily overweight, but no like muscular. Though I wouldn't be attracted to Anna Nicole Smith, she had the full form I'm talking about:

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z71/randi420_2007/anna_nicole_smith.jpg

I could always like a thin or slender woman, average size, that's all good. Not like anorexic either, though

http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u157/Papabug/anorexic-barbie.jpg

[Rhino Thunder Pants]

wow you often find sexist communist but lucky me i have hit the jackpot.

[Tower of Bebel]

You make some good point TC on NAAFP's article. It's indeed chauvinist and reflects the need for a revolutionary point of view.

[Jazzratt]

Three words.

Big.

Squishy

Tits.

[Entrails Konfetti]

‘Big is Beautiful puts a forced smile on the face of fat without revealing the depths of unhappiness and humiliation that most fat women experience. It is this that needs to be brought out into the open. It has to be recognized. And it has to be stopped.”
"I'm humiliated, but I'm beautiful"-- yeah that does create a false sense of equality.
It also seems pretty sexist, its like telling a women who is mad at you for a legimate reason that "theyre beautiful" with the idea that they'll stop being mad at you, and that their beauty is more important than anything else, because of the whole "women should be seen and not heard" concept; of which isn't really acknowleged, because it is sugar-coated, and denial and scorn of openly using this concept is popular.


But these women were not fat at all. They were oversized models – tall, beautiful, shapely. I talked to them afterwards. One of them was almost as tall as me** and weighed 154 lbs. She looked like a fantasy version of Kim Basinger. ‘I’m just more woman than people like Kate Moss,’ She said. If this was Fat acceptance in action, I could see what Shelley Bovey was on about...

That's true when these fashion companies try to appeal to the larger women, they get models which are "Amazons", and still doesn't account for the many
shapes of large women. These clothes are sold under the lie that large women are all Amazons, and that they can wear these clothes.


‘I actually feel,’ Bovey told me, ‘That prejudice against fat women is the biggest social injustice, bigger than racism, bigger than sexism, bigger than anything else.

Thats Boveys opinion, are you trying to imply something by putting this in bold print? If you are, can you explain?


“it reinforced her dream of having a man who wants her in spite of her build.’ She didn’t want a man to want her as she was. She was like Groucho Marx, who wouldn’t want to belong to a club that would accept him as a member. After all, when you are only pretending to accept yourself, it is unbearable to be loved for the very thing you cannot love in yourself: your fat.

If you've ever seen the movie "Shallow Hal" with Jack Black (Hal), he is hypnotized at looking at the inner beauty of women, he falls inlove with a very large woman, and sees her as thin and tall, but later in the movie when his hypnosis wears off he sees her for who she really is, and he has to learn to love her for who she is inside. Meaning that he ignores aspects of her, which translates to thinking of her as someone else. Society tells fat women to ignore their flaws, ignore what they can't change-- ignore themselves. I wonder if a women would be driven nuts if she were to be in a relationship with someone who loves them for what they aren't?
I bet they'd feel pressured in trying be such a person, only that they can't, and so they'd be very uncomfortable in the relationship.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 04:10 pm
Three words.

Big.

Squishy

Tits.
There are more asthetically pleasing and sensuous aspects than that.