OK, just one thing I have to point out (though for the most part I think the article speaks for itself). Do you love how they say that this woman was wider than she was tall? They actually say "wider around", but that phrase doesn't mean anything -- the term is "circumference", but of course saying the woman's circumference was larger than her height would not pack nearly the same "OMG fat" punch, so why not refer to it as width?
You can make anybody sound like a real fatass by talking about measurements that way -- e.g., someone with a 36 inch waist is "three feet wide around". Ew, fat!!!
This blog is about fat and whatever else I feel like. I am a happy, healthy fat person with a little chip on my shoulder about our society's attitude towards fat. I also happen to be a liberal, and I am irritated by liberals who have an irrational hatred of fat people. Being fat does NOT make you a spokesmodel for the megaconsumerist bigger-is-better mentality that liberals love to hate. Surprise -- you can live an active, environmentally conscious life and leave a 'small footprint' even if you have a 'big ass'!
I'm originally from Ohio but now I live in California, where I teach at a liberal arts college. In my spare time I enjoy running, eating, drinking, and bitching.
1 comment:
OK, just one thing I have to point out (though for the most part I think the article speaks for itself). Do you love how they say that this woman was wider than she was tall? They actually say "wider around", but that phrase doesn't mean anything -- the term is "circumference", but of course saying the woman's circumference was larger than her height would not pack nearly the same "OMG fat" punch, so why not refer to it as width?
You can make anybody sound like a real fatass by talking about measurements that way -- e.g., someone with a 36 inch waist is "three feet wide around". Ew, fat!!!
Post a Comment