When I first saw the recent Citi commercial in which athletes profess all of the sacrifices they’ve made to get where they are today, it didn’t sit well with me. To put it in perspective, I was at the time, enjoying a bowl of chocolate chip ice cream with hot fudge sauce as a male athlete voice-over proclaimed, “I haven’t ordered desert in two years.”

I cringed in that moment. Not because I felt guilty for my delicious desert (I’ve already made it clear I eat chocolate every day.) but because I thought of all of the vulnerable men, women, boys, and girls who would hear that proclamation and take it as an indication of what should be rather than what one silly advertising company felt might represent sacrifice.

The commercial goes on to feature supposed athletes claiming all of the things that they gave up for their sport – from not reading the latest bestseller (c’mon, they are clearing talking 50 Shades here…) to not participating in many other “typical” joys of life. The picture painted is of the single-minded, tenacious athlete whose greatest sacrifices beget his or her greatest glories.

Blah. Blah.

I don’t know about you, but I’m pretty tired of that cultural standard. I’m not suggesting that the athletes that have made it to the Olympic games have not given up a number of things, and that this hasn’t in part allowed them to succeed. Sure it has. But does one’s life have to be consumed by fourteen hours per day of training with no time for socialization, recreation, or education (or a flippin’ Kit Kat bar) in order to achieve greatness? I don’t think so.

Granted, it may come down to how we define success. If being considered the best in the world at a particular endeavor is your measure of success, then surely your priorities might have to shift a little. But for most of us, and I’ll include myself in that group, success in life means living a well-balanced and well-nourished life. And I don’t believe that a singular pursuit can nourish anyone. Man cannot live on bread alone, the saying goes. Well, he can’t live on Power Bars and time trials alone either.

If you’ve seen the Citi commercial, my wish for you is that you were able to recognize the message as a gross distortion and still enjoy your trashy novel and dessert. If you haven’t seen it, don’t both. Watch this parody instead:

Olympians Have No Lives

For the “What I Wish You Knew” series over on Rage Against the Minivan, a blog I lovelovelovelovelove (in case you wondered), a reader submission addressed the topic of discrimination against thinner women. [Please note, the author makes explicit mention of weight, and the post could be triggering for some. Use your best judgment.]

Megyn shares her personal experience with food allergies that have caused her to be underweight and the subject of others’ critical stares and scathing comments. She makes some excellent points:

There is so much out there about loving your curves and accepting your body if you’re not thin. But what about us thin women? Is it ok to belittle and begrudge us? To make snide remarks and disgusted looks? Speaking badly of someone’s weight seems more socially acceptable of thin women than of heavier women. It’s hard to love my body when everyone else tells me I too should hate it and be disgusted. That I am wrong and not ok.

Megyn’s right. Discrimination against thinner women is not something that’s talked about very often. Society does seem to think that it’s okay to pour it’s commentary on how skinny women should “eat more” or “put on a few pounds” without a second thought. In fact, one of the very first posts on NTS addressed this issue, because I think it’s so important.

We all too often forget that creating a world in which weight stigma doesn’t exist means creating a safe space for people of all shapes and sizes. The truth is skinny women don’t all want to be that way. Some struggle with food allergies. Others with illnesses that have wrecked havoc on their bodies. Others may have been the victims of neglect or malnourishment in youth. And still others do struggle with eating disorders, but are no less deserving of respect. So, I understand Megyn’s frustration, dealing with health issues that not only cause her to have to eat differently, but to then be scrutinized for it.

Perhaps the comments she bears are born out of jealousy, discomfort, or simply our hyper-focus on others’ bodies. Whatever the reason, there’s work we need to do culturally and personally to address weight shaming.

So here’s where I disagree with Megyn:

I want you to know thin women are prejudiced against just as much as heavier women.

Perhaps I’m splitting hairs here, or playing right into the Pain Olympics (Waaa! We have it worse!). But I think that this statement is 100% untrue. To me, it’s like a white person saying, “I want you to know that I am just as prejudiced against as a black person.” I just don’t buy it. [Am I opening myself for a firestorm here?]

Everything that I know from reading countless research studies, following the HAES movement, working with patients across the full weight spectrum, and living as a person in a weight-focused world tells me that fat people have it worse. Period.

Larger folks are shamed at nearly every turn – in the workplace, at the grocery store, on the internet, at restaurants, on the playground, in the voting booths, and in their own families, as a start. While perhaps (and I say that tentatively), the comments are more underground when it comes to people we consider overweight or obese, the effects (in salary, opportunities, respect, etc.) are profound.

I think it’s important that we take a cold, hard look at the discrimination happening against larger people. We have to recognize privilege as it exists, or we are doomed to live blind and biased. That’s all.

Now that I’ve stated that fat people have it worse, I recognize that it’s not all that helpful to pit one side against the other, and that’s not what I mean to do. Really. It doesn’t make what’s happening to Megyn better. I just think that making the comparison doesn’t have to be part of her argument.

This actually shouldn’t be a battle of who is more shamed, because the real victims here are women in general. When fat people or thin people are shamed for their weight, we are all hurt. If we grow up fearing being anywhere but in the dead center of the weight spectrum, we perpetuate the stigmatization and we become terrified of letting our bodies find their natural rhythm.

My heart aches for Megyn and her struggle, because no one deserves to be stared down for their size.

What do you think?

[Speaking of not pitting people against one another, one of the best posts I’ve read recently also appeared on Rage Against the Minivan – Where Is the Mommy War for the Motherless Child? Go check it out.]

{credit K; via pinterest}

In the introduction to a several-page spread in a popular women’s magazine recently, the creative director “confesses” that he hates his arms, and how much he can relate to the body-hatred experienced by his female counterparts. While I’m always happy to see men acknowledging honestly their body image concerns, his confession was the introduction to an article on how to solve “dressing dilemmas.”

What to do when your panty hose run three minutes after walking out the door (when you’re running ten minutes late)? How to find trendy heels that won’t cause bunions? How to stop that turtleneck from itching so badly that you rip it off and hurl it across the room… at work?

These are some of the  “dilemmas” that I face, and would have been legitimately interested in learning how to “solve.” But this particular article had other issues in mind – to use their descriptions, turkey neck, spare tires, front butt, pit chub, bat wings, frump butt, and thunder thighs.

If that hasn’t sent you spinning into post-traumatic flashbacks of high school bullying, it’s probably because we’ve been so desensitized to such offensive and deprecating phrases. I was floored that these terms were used to describe any part of the female body. But I guess in the society in which we live, I shouldn’t have been.

A quick glance in the grocery line reveals all sorts of clever little phrases for women’s bodies – chub rub, side boobs, and the list goes on. What’s so frustrating about this, however, is not so much the phraseology, but the fact that the names are intricately tied to an expectation that women have flaws that need to be somehow rectified.

When did our bat wings become a problem? When someone decided it was profitable for them to be a problem. 

Bear with me here, because I realize this might sound like a foreign language.

We are not born with flaws, and we do not die with flaws. Our bodies are exactly how they are meant to be at each moment in time. There is nothing inherently wrong with our bodies. And do you know how I know that? Because they are the way they are, and that is reality.

So we long to be taller, or have bigger breasts, or smaller feet… But what we know, the only thing we know, is that this is we are the person we are supposed to be, inhabiting the body we are supposed to inhabit. Whatever explanation makes sense to you – genetics, God, destiny, a combo of all of them – the fact remains that we are who we are, with all of our uniquenesses in tow. And if that is who we are, it is who we are meant to be.

With that said, it seems that we have it all wrong when it comes to our approach to our “dressing dilemmas.” What if the clothes with which we adorn our bodies are not meant to cover “sins” or hide belly fat, but rather are meant as an expression of our creative self? What if the clothes were an extension of how we see the world? Or, if you don’t want to go that far, a way of simply keeping us comfortable in inclement weather? What if, for once, they weren’t a means of hiding these, apparently, un-namable body issues?

What if it’s the clothes that are wrong? What if it’s the corporation selling the clothes? What if it’s the magazine that advertising the quick fixes to our body blemishes? What if it’s our government for allowing manipulation and sexualization of our physical selves. What if it’s anyone or anything at all rather than our body to blame? What then?

That’s a lot of questions. They’re not meant to be answered. They’re meant to be felt. Sit with them and notice what comes up.

How do you feel? What if your body isn’t wrong?

With the race to the Republican presidential candidate nomination well under way, iPad apps and news broadcasts are blowing up with commentary on where the candidates stand on issues of the economy, national defense, and immigration. What often gets too little airtime are the issues that affect women so intimately.

It’s easy to think that politics can exist outside of our interest and awareness, that it’s the thing over there that lives only when we turn on the news. But the personal and political and inextricably linked. Women’s bodies, our choices, rights, and ability to care for them, are subject to the decisions made hundreds or thousands of miles away in Washington. Scary, huh?

That’s why it’s so crucially important to understand where the candidates stand on issues that matter, or should matter, to us. We have an opportunity now to make our voices heard, and for women to use their collective power to ensure that our interests are being addressed.

Here are some of the top issues that concern women today, and where some of the candidates stand:

[Please note that this is not my attempt to sway anyone in any particular political direction. While my biases are, I’m quite sure, evident, I hope that you will use this information as a starting point for looking deeper into the issues, the candidates, and your own values.]

Reproductive Issues

Contrary to popular belief, reproductive issues do not focus solely on the whether a woman should be legally allowed to have an abortion, which all of the GOP candidates uniformly oppose. While all of the candidates are against giving women the right to choose in all cases, some, like Mitt Romney, would grant women this right in the case of incest, rape, or severe risk to the mother’s life. Others, like Ron Paul, an obstetrician for thirty years, believe that abortion is murder in all cases and has no place in our society.

Apart from abortion, the politicians are also heavy-hitters when it comes to decisions about whether insurance plans cover birth control (which Ron Paul opposes), whether contraception should be discussed in schools (which Rick Santorum opposes), and whether pharmacists should be able to dispense emergency contraception to rape victims (which Mitt Romney opposes). As senator, Santorum voted for measures to financially penalize low-income women for having children and penalize states for children born out of wedlock. Further, the issues of reproduction come up when talking about fertility concerns as well. Newt Gingrich recently stated that he wants to more closely investigate and impose rules on clinics where in-vitro fertilization occurs, seemingly ignoring the fact that these facilities are closely monitored and regulated by state government and various health organizations.

Relationships

The right of individuals to love whom the wish is not a uniquely female issue, but it’s one that certainly touches women deeply. Despite the 2011 Gallup poll that reported 53% of Americans support the legalization of gay marriage, all of the current GOP candidates oppose this and want to narrow the definition of marriage. Some of the candidates, such as Romney, support domestic partnerships for gay couples, but do not support marriage or even civil unions, stating that marriage should be preserved for a union between a man and a woman. Santorum recently stated that even a father who “is in jail and has abandoned” his family is better at raising a child than two gay parents. Gingrich believes this is an issue of “dignity” and also supports marriage being a one man, one woman event.

Relatedly, some of the candidates believe that sexual identity should be a factor in military service, an issue that is particularly relevant to women, in fact. While female service members make up about one in five troops, they make up  almost half of those discharged for their sexual orientation. Romney is against the idea of letting gays and lesbians serve actively in the U.S. Military. And when an openly gay soldier was recently booed at a debate, none of the candidates stood up for the man in uniform.

Further, the idea of fidelity in relationships is an issue that is close to many women’s hearts. While we can never know the intimate details of the candidate’s romantic lives, we do have on record Gingrich’s multiple acts of infidelity during multiple marriages, which he openly acknowledges as mistakes. Some voters, however, feel that these acts indicate a lack of ability to make sound, ethical, and non-impulsive decisions and to respect an institution (marriage) that he proclaims to hold with such, well, dignity.

Jobs & Health Coverage

While the economic recession has hit us all hard, it’s actually hit women a little less hard, in some ways. Women are, in fact, 50 percent more likely to be employed than men, today. There are many women, however, who are working part-time because they cannot find full-time employment. The current GOP candidates are all opposed to stimulus money, though they do support certain big corporate tax breaks. That’s interesting, as almost 100 percent of new (net) jobs created in this country are by small business. Part of Santorum’s solution to fix the economy is to drill for more oil. Okay. If you think that joining the military might be the answer to your financial woes, think again if you’re a woman. Santorum stated that he believes with women in combat, emotions could get in the way. Yes, you read that right.

With the cutbacks in jobs has come the loss of employer-provided health insurance for many Americans. Many women and families cannot afford COBRA or their company has stopped providing coverage because they can’t afford it either. In fact, working women are much less likely to have health benefits than working men, and they are more likely to be working for minimum wage (on which it’s nearly impossible to buy adequate health insurance).  As the surrogate doctors in most American homes, many women are faced with excruciating decisions when it comes to the health of themselves and their families. The GOP candidates all oppose Obama’s health care plan and want to cut both state and federal funds for Medicaid (of which poor women and children are the major recipients).

–

This is certainly not an exhaustive list of issues. Other important ones to consider are things like the candidate’s take on education, social security, and immigration, issues that also tend disproportionately impact women. If you care about women – yourself, your mother, sister, daughter, or friends — educate yourself before going to the polls. This year, the personal is absolutely political.

Note: Lest you think that I believe President Obama does everything right, read this.

What is your take on the GOP candidates positions on these issues? Totally disagree with me? Tell us about it!

{image credit :: bdcoen}