I did a sociology project on thin privilege recently and got an excellent grade! I’m glad to know that a professor, someone with a doctorates and a scholarly perspective has a hard time standing behind the hypocrisy of thin privilege, and agrees with the philosophy that it does not exist at all. I might also add that this professor is a vivaciously plump woman herself.
When I have the time, I’ll publish my research onto this blog for archive. I did some cross-sectional research that I think a lot of people will find interesting, both thin privilege and non-thin privilege advocates.
There are a lot of unanswered questions on this blog and one day I’ll get to them all. I’m terribly sorry, this school term has been particularly hellish for me as I am taking on twice the number of credit hours which is recommended, or normal for a functional human being.
Thanks everyone who is still following, or recently followed! I really appreciate all of the questions and stories.
• 25 November 2013
This is NOT thin privilege turned 1 today!
• 28 July 2013
“BUT WHAT IF I’M JUST NOT ATTRACTED TO FAT PEOPLE? WHY SHOULD I FEEL GUILTY ABOUT THAT? HOW THAT IS THAT THIN PRIVILEGE?”
Thin privilege exists on the societal level. When at people (mainly women) are being seen, in aggregate, as less-worthwhile dating and marriage material than thin people, being rejected for daring to be fat is fat discrimination and hence being seen as better dating material by virtue of being this is thin privilege.
Dating while fat generally puts you at a disadvantage in a fatphobic culture, as if the likelihood of being a good partner has something to do with the amount of adipose tissue on one’s body (of course, it doesn’t).
Not to mention that dating sites usually have you state up front in your profile whether you’re fat or not, and there’s an option for people to select if being fat is a ‘deal-breaker’ in a potential partner, and there’s a whole meme about how fat people, usually women, pretend to be thinner on their profiles in order to ‘ensnare’ poor, fatphobic hot dudes.
This is literally a thing, you guys. This is LITERALLY a thing. If you are not attracted to someone who is fat you are fatphobic and it isn’t right for you to feel this way because society has made you feel this way. Not to mention that TiTP response to the FAQ doesn’t even answer the actual question, but instead goes on babbling about how in someway they felt victimized because of a dating website and a “hot dude”. The depth of their philosophy is just staggering, really.
There are MAJOR psychological and biological factors that contribute to attraction; social influences would not be able to change someones initial attraction. That really is as simple as saying that because on a societal scale homophobia is still widely renowned, homosexuals are going to start becoming homophobic and suddenly lose all attraction to the same sex. Does anyone from TiTP even do their research? I feel so sorry for the people who buy into this crap.
• 22 June 2013
That's Not "Thin Privilege": thisisthinprivilege: Thin privilege is not having almost every add on...
Thin privilege is not having almost every add on every YouTube video you watch start off as a sweet, inspirational message about healthy eating, set to calming music, only to end with the phrase “helping change the shape of Australia”.
Thin privilege is not having…
• 22 June 2013
sheep-heavenly said: I literally cannot believe their post about WiC. As someone who has been on the program, the food they cover and allow for is more than enough for someone to live on. The sense of entitlement emanating off that post, when someone also overweight managed just fine on it, just blew my mind. I realize she has an infant, but seriously. Seven gallons of milk, and thats not enough? Thats almost 2 gallons a week...
I just read it and what upset me is “body policing” being in the tags. How is that body policing? I’m with you in saying that the post seemed really entitled and snobby, and it seriously has nothing to do with fat acceptance whatsoever. That is also more than enough food. Her infant would not even be eating this food, she would be the only consumer considering that they provide formula.
I don’t understand how that isn’t enough for one person or what it has to do with body policing at all. I wonder if TiTP even reads over the posts people submit. That blog is such a whine fest, it literally gives me a headache.
• 21 June 2013
Anonymous said: I'm a girl who is usually in the "high average" part of the BMI. Recently I gained some weight as a result of medication changes and stress, but I'm only slightly overweight and I'll probably be "normal" in a few weeks if I eat better and walk more. But Tumblr has me thinking... Where does one draw the line between "feeling beautiful at any size" and "fat acceptance?" I know I'm overweight and I want to be healthy, but I still want to feel pretty right now. -continued
-continued: Where does Tumblr draw the line between “feeling pretty, no matter what one’s size,” and “saying that obesity isn’t a problem?” I’m torn between feeling embarassed about my weight, and feeling pressured to “accept my disorder.” I don’t want to lose weight to look a certain way- I just want to be a little healthier. I don’t even know what to think anymore.
There’s absolutely nothing wrong with losing weight to be a little healthier. There’s nothing wrong with any of us trying to be healthier! Not many of us are being as healthy as we could be (including myself) and that should never be something one should accept. If you KNOW that your weight gain is from medication changes and stress, then it is clearly not healthy for you. I don’t believe in fat acceptance when it threatens or disregards your health. If someone is overweight and perfectly healthy, then that’s a different story. Where health issues are concerned, a healthier lifestyle in general should be considered. You can do this without it being a “weight” issue, make it simply a health issue for yourself.
And to answer the question about obesity, there is nothing okay about being obese. The very definition of obese suggests that the excess of fat may be a danger to your health, so in no way will that word ever be positive nor should it ever be accepted. That is not fat acceptance. I’m all for being a naturally bigger or fat person when it has no effect on your health, but if you become overweight unnaturally (e.g, overeating, developing a disorder, in your case medication and stress) then it’s common knowledge that this is unhealthy and it isn’t something you should embrace when you very well could be shortening years of your life.
• 21 June 2013
Anonymous said: you know what pisses me off the most about titp? it's not even that they compare the ~oppression~ of fat people to the oppression black people have gone through, but that they straight-up are a danger. for example, they advised veup NOT TO BELIEVE her DOCTOR who said she needed to lose weight because of sleep apnea, and a few months later, after weight loss, she felt a lot better. titp is actually dangerous - they're not doctors, they simply use bullshit, biased studies.
I’ve mentioned this before. They don’t hold factual debates but rather opinion based debates which just doesn’t cut it when you’re trying to denounce a whole entire weight class while doing so. If you’re going to stand up for something so extreme, at least use more of a foundation to go off of than forever21 not having your size, or being made fun of (who hasn’t been). There is nothing in that that suggests someone is not socially privileged.
When someone is overweight and deemed unhealthy by a doctor it’s discrimination. People of every size are told they are unhealthy every single day, and yes this is largely affected by a persons diet, no matter their size. We have a terrible food industry that is essentially killing us all slowly—TiTP should do their research before they go advertising that their followers stuff their faces as some kind of liberation.
On that same note, people are also DENIED healthcare every single day because most healthcare systems only care about money, and that issue is completely grand scale. All of their “factual” reasoning for thin privilege to exist are not fat specific at all. I really could go on and on because it infuriates me too.
• 21 June 2013
Anonymous said: Hello, I don't really troll very often and don't quite know how to go about it (not trying to be a wise ass) so I guess I just wanna say that I disagree with you and find your arguments simplistic and largely devoid of cultural perspective. I understand where you're coming from, as someone who weighs 120 pounds and also once had an eating disorder and therefore a skewed outlook, but I very strongly believe that you are wrong. That's all, thanks!
Civil disagreements are most welcome, but why bring up trolling? I’m confused as to whether or not you meant this to be offensive.
• 21 June 2013
oldmanjenkem said: In response to a recent TiTP post about redefining the word gluttony--what they hell else is it supposed to mean? You can't just change the definition of a word just because you don't like what it originally means. Gluttony consists if having enough money to feed yourself more than you actually need, thus resulting in a person becoming overweight. This is why most Americans and Europeans are so unhealthy because they have the money that other countries do not have to feed themselves excessively.
I didn’t see this post until now and I understand what you mean. I don’t like when people try to “redefine” something with a standard definition and not just a connotation in society. Gluttony has always been portrayed as such, and the seven deadly sins have been stagnant since the beginning of Christian mysticism. Is this supposed to change because as of modern times—quite the opposite of times during that period where a fat person typically was an overly capacious person—the majority of First World citizens are overweight? If someone develops a time machine maybe we can go back and change social standards of the 300’s?
TiTP has a knack for throwing logic right out of the window.
• 5 June 2013
I’ve never really gotten the chance to address why, originally, TITP plagued me with despondence. I do remember taking a lot of time to analyze the issue from every angle. I’m not one to jump to a conclusion solely based off of my own emotional discord, but from the beginning it struck me the wrong way.
After reading this part of their FAQ, I began to gain more perspective as to why. It was this passage specifically that stood out to me.
The first is that being told to go eat a sandwich or being forced to take in a baggy pair of pants is not oppression. Privilege is institutional; it doesn’t always resolve to the individual level. Privileged people have problems. They might even experience some of the same problems oppressed people have. But in no way do they experience the oppression of the underprivileged.
The word institutional perfectly describes body oppression (note that I said body oppression and not singularly fat body oppression). It has been stated on this blog several times that I feel the media and government contributes to body oppression. We can all 100% agree on this, I’m sure.
The only division here that keeps all of us from jumping up, clapping, shouting “YEAH!” with our chests out and fist in the air, is the last sentence.
But in no way do they experience the oppression of the underprivileged.
Okay, yeah that is fair when talking about other oppressions, but it doesn’t apply to “thin privilege”. This is the part where I got kind of angry and wanted to stop reading so badly because I knew what was to come next, but I continued forward.
Secondly, thin shaming is in no way comparable to what fat people go through.
And this is the sentence, that stopped me from jumping onto the thin privilege wagon. I’m sorry, but to be frank, what the fuck? The word “thin shaming” aside, what about body shaming in general? For the life of me, I still can’t understand this backwards philosophy.
They mention that oppression is INSTITUTIONAL, therefore stating that condemning less than ideal body types is an INSTITUTIONAL issue. That means diet media and government superfluous on health and body type is INSTITUTIONAL.
I’m not going to repeat myself a thousand times on this blog, but I’ve stated before and graphed out the percentage of people who are naturally thin and it’s staggeringly low (like, you’d be shocked right of your hair follicles, that’s how low it is.)
You cannot look at a thin person and snidely think “That person is privileged, look how thin they are!” when behind closed doors they could very well be starving themselves and spending over 8 hours a day working out because of INSTITUTIONAL body shaming. It’s nearly impossible with our food industry for most people to not experience excessive weight gain (strongly encourage those of TITP to do some research on the dangers of mainstream food) being that most people are not naturally thin.
I’m not saying that gaining weight is the end of the world either, but it seems that this fear is bread due to our media, government, and fat shaming. That means that more than half of the populace is killing themselves everyday to meet this “ideal” standard of beauty that seems to fluctuate and change every decade.
Normally I wouldn’t butt into the business of what one oppressed group does over another, but I feel like “thin privilege” not only has a negative effect on thin people, but it negatively affects fat people as well and all of what’s in between. “Thin privilege” glorifies being thin just like the media does, but in such a horrible way that people honestly believe it’s helping their self image.
TITP should take their own advice. Privilege is in fact institutional, and it is not resolved to an individual.
• 7 April 2013