Tag: Body Image

You know, I was wondering what the Man vs Food guy said that caused an outbreak of Offendeditis

As Stacy McCain reports, Adam Richman got into an online spat with a fat chick, or, a “body image” activist, or, to be more honest and to the point, Richman offended someone who is perpetually offended anyway, and BAM! She attacked him like he was two dozen Dunkin’ Donuts!

It was fun to watch and the food was always delicious-looking, but inevitably Richman got kind of pudgy from all that eating. Then he went on a diet and lost 70 pounds, becoming sufficiently fit that he was photographed nude for the British edition of Cosmopolitan.

Understandably, Richman was proud of his dieting success, so he posted a photo of himself wearing a pair of pants from his “fat” size, holding out the waist to show how much he had lost. When he posted this photo on Instagram, he used the hashtag #thinspiration.

That hashtag apparently invited a harsh comment from a “body image” activist (as angry fat chicks now call themselves), and Richman did not react wisely: “DILLIGAF?” (Do I Look Like I Give a F–k) was his first comment, and this attracted another “body image” activist who “made a post about Adam’s ‘DILLIGAF’ comment on my personal Instagram, and asked my followers to ‘tell him that eating disorders are not a joke and nothing to take lightly.’ My followers did just that, but I didn’t for one second predict the vitriol that followed.”

The so-called “vitriol” from Richman wasn’t anything particularly shocking to people who are accustomed to online arguments:

“Give me a f–king break. If anyone acts like a c–t I’ll call them one. It’s not misogyny, it’s calling a spade a spade.”
and
“No — I legitimately don’t give a f–k about haters & close minded internet loudmouths like you. . . . Seriously, grab a razor blade and & draw a bath. I doubt anyone will miss you.”

Like I said: Not shocking to people accustomed to such arguments, yet not quite in keeping with the wholesome image of the host of a popular TV series. As a result, Richman’s new show was delayed:

Well, OK Richman said some hurtful things, and so did the activists. Richman mean no harm by his initial post, he is proud of his weight loss. If the “activists” had not jumped all over him, then that would have been the end of it. But, activists cannot let an opportunity to speak “truth to power” and let everyone know what a victim they are. No, Richman should have not been so vociferous in his reply. But, I must say, a part of me says “who cares”.  I think many of us are sick and tired of the constant parade of Offended Americans whining aren’t we? OK, you were offended, big deal, move on. We have become too sensitive, and we have too often allowed whiners to have their way. In short, as McCain notes, we should have told the Thought Police to piss off a long time ago. Instead we gave in and coddle them.

The Feminist Thought Police got him. This controversy wasn’t really about eating disorders and “body image,” except insofar as those issues are a subset of the Feminist Grievance Cluster, along with date rape, the “pay gap,” abortion and Hobby Lobby.

Maybe there are male “body image” activists, but I never heard of one. No, it’s exclusively a fat chick issue, which means it’s also a feminist issue, and one look at Amber Sarah — the fat chick who may have cost Adam Rich his TV show — tells you all you need to know.

Her blog is called “Adipose Activist: One fat girl’s battle against size discrimination,” and I’ve got a terrible fear that fans of Adam Richman may be tempted to say rude things about Amber Sarah. So whatever you do, don’t say anything rude about her.

AS I said before, Richman went a bit over the edge, the “C” word is truly hateful, and that whole suicide thing? I am sure he did not mean that literally, and frankly, if I was in charge of deciding if his new show went forward or not, I would make it clear to Richman that he does not repeat the outburst. But, the show, his show WOULD go on. First because it will be popular, and secondly, to stick it the eyes of the PC crowd who have turned America into the land of the offended. And, hey, if his show is canned, McCain has a solid idea

Anyway, if Travel Channel dumps Adam Richman, I’ve got an idea for his next reality-show series, an idea that would be perfect for Spike TV: Beautiful women compete to prove that they know their way around the kitchen in . . . Make Me a #$@&ing Sandwich.

Brilliant! And, being a giver by nature, I will offer to help select the aforementioned hot women. I am nothing is not selfless.

Non-Shocker of the Day Feminists are still crazy (about Rihannas Breasts)

Rihanna is a beautiful young lady, and as a man I certainly appreciate her figure. But Feminists like #justineharman? As RS McCain reports They REALLY get into Rihanna’s breasts because PATRIARCHY!

The #fem2 hashtag is Twitter’s shorthand for feminism and, while surfing it last night, I came across a column by Justine Harman, an editor for the web site of Elle magazine:

Rihanna’s Boobs Make Me
Feel Better About My Body

OK, then. This is an issue feminists call “body image,” which isn’t really an issue so much as it is an excuse for women to write silly columns about their feelings. Justine Harman is super-silly:

So here’s the deal: I’m kind of known for my boobs. Though I’m 5’3″ (on a good day), my breasts are somewhere between a 34C and a 32D and naturally possess what a high school classmate once called “indomitable turgor pressure.” Translation: My cups, most definitely, runneth over. As a result, I spent all of high school and college wearing low-cut halter tops with little or no support. And I beamed with pride whenever someone suggested my teeming décolletage was fake. “Touch them!” I’d demand of guys and girls alike. But as I’ve gotten older, Father Time hasn’t been so much cruel as he’s been fair to my cleavage.
At 29, I can no longer wear a flimsy tank without also wearing a granny bandeau. . . .

(Gravity is a weapon of the patriarchy!)

And though I’m learning to adjust to my slightly less-than-Jessica-Rabbit silhouette, it seems that the rest of the world would rather not. The ideal breasts — regardless of the natural, biological progression of the feminine form — are perfectly symmetrical, gravity defying, and Blake Lively-esque. . . .

Well, Miss Touch My Magnificent Melons, I hate to break the news to you, but the “rest of the world” just isn’t that into your boobs. I know, that must stun you, and your over-sized boobs over-sized ego, but the truth can hurt. Frankly, the world, at least from men’s eyes, has a wide variety of taste where boobs are concerned. Some of us are all about size, some about proportion, and some of us are really not “boob” guys. Yes. we like breasts, but other anatomical features are more important in what attracts us to women. Take me for example, give me a small-breasted woman with a great butt, nice legs, and a pretty face over a woman with a huge rack and not much else. The “rest of the world” does not have one standard for breasts, and your issues with your “body image” are your fault, not the rest of the world. But, I think your real issue is that you are PO’d about MEN!

And due to my lack of understanding about how I should feel, I’m still not sure which of the following incidents was more scarring: the time I was busted for stuffing my bra in the eighth grade, or the time a guy I knew in college pulled down my tube top, under which I was most definitely not wearing a bra, after he lost a game of beer pong.
Both situations made me feel embarrassed for something I wasn’t fully aware of yet: my inherent need for approval from men. . . .

Oh of course, the PATRIARCHY! It is always the PATRIARCHY!

But, everything is OK now, because Rihanna’s breasts reached out to #justineharman and spoke to her

Monday night, when Rihanna proudly displayed her lovely, but very real, rack in that dazzling Adam Selman getup at the CFDAs, I breathed a sigh of relief. That’s right: Rihanna’s body makes me feel better about my own. . . .

So when Rihanna, a woman who was very publicly the victim of domestic violence, displays her body with pride, it sends two messages: She refuses to equate being undressed with being vulnerable; she doesn’t give a shit what people think. Her nudity — as opposed to, say, Warrior Sports’ recent Instagram post of Playboy Playmate Jessica Ashley clutching a new hockey stick in ecstasy, her pert nipples just visible through her wife beater — has nothing to do with men. And she clearly doesn’t care that they don’t sit up as if suspended on a highwire or that her nipples aren’t the size of Tic Tacs. When Rihanna bares her perfectly womanly breasts, she’s doing it because Rihanna feels like it. And that makes me feel tremendous.

No Justine, the issue is you. It is not Rihanna’s body, or the body image, or anything but your screwed up priorities. Stacy McCain sums it up

Feminists oscillate between utter confusion and fanatical certainty, and this kind of Rorschach inkblot reaction — “Rihanna’s breasts are sending me messages!” — is further evidence that feminism is less a political movement than it is a psychiatric symptom.

Bingo! Feminists, deep down, DO care what men think, and that pisses them off. But they deny this fact of course, along with many other facts about sex, attraction, and gender roles. All this denial tends to make them cranky, and stupid columns about Rihanna’s breasts ensue. I mean any idiot can see that Rihanna’s dress was not worn to make any statements, it was worn to get attention. It is called publicity! And publicity, in this case, is good! And here is clear evidence of that

Rihanna (1) Rihanna

 

 

And the Nanny State grew, and grew, and…….

Via Just a Conservative Girl comes news of the latest in government sticking its nose where it should not.

Senator Kay Hagan (D-N.C.) and Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis) are pushing a bill to be passed in order to have a healthier image for girls set in the media; The Healthy Media for Youth Act. While I will agree that young girls are bombarded with unhealthy images all the time. We have models that are airbrushed to the point that they don’t even look like the image that is portrayed in the magazine or billboard, they also are sometimes deadly thin. These images alone can push some tweens and teens into the grips of anorexia.

We have sexualized our children in ways that we tell them pretty much anything goes. We lie to them about abortion being nothing more than getting rid of a problem and the unborn child they are carrying is nothing more than a “bunch of cells”. None of this is a healthy way to raise our girls so that they become happy and well-adjusted adults.

The Healthy Media for Youth Act takes a three-pronged approach to promote healthy media messages about girls and women. First, the bill creates a competitive grant program to encourage and support media literacy programs and youth empowerment groups. The bill also facilitates research on how depictions of women and girls in the media affect youth. Finally, it establishes a National Taskforce on Women and Girls in the Media, which will develop voluntary standards that promote healthy, balanced, and positive images of girls and women in the media for the benefit of all youth.

This bill was announced yesterday at press conference with both Hagan and Baldwin. They were joined by CEO of Girl Scouts of America Kathy Cloninger and Actress Geena Davis.

A survey by Girl Scouts of the USA’s (GSUSA) Research Institute, Girls and Body Image, found that 89% of girls say the fashion industry places a lot of pressure on teenage girls to be thin. The American Psychological Association’s (APA) Report on the Sexualization of Girls (2007) found that three of the most common mental health problems among girls—eating disorders, depression or depressed mood, and low self-esteem—are linked to the sexualization of girls and women in media. And according to the Geena Davis Institute of Gender in Media, despite being 50 percent of the U.S. population, in family films and television, male characters outweigh female characters nearly three to one and five to one in background or group scenes, a statistic that has remained the same since 1946. Only 27 percent of the speaking characters are female. (GDIGM)

Good intentions? Maybe, but, again, we all know that those pave the way to Hell don’t we? The government is not meant to stick its nose into every societal ill, or perceived societal ill. It never works, and never will. Want to know one reason we have such national debt? Too many programs, started with good intentions that grow, and grow, and eat more tax dollars, and so on.