No bc the funniest thing is this debate isnt some new internet thing, THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR HUNDRETS OF YEARS. (and not just with fatphobia. Its a classism/racism/etc. thing too.)
For a very long time, its been okay to depict nude, conventionally attractive, white women & men, as long as they were "mythical", "divine" or in some other way removed from "dirty" sexuality.
"The birth of [the godess] venus", by Sandro Botticelli, painted in the mid 1480s.
Although the godess is nude, its an iconic rennaisance work that was celebrated for hundreds of years.
Why? Because shes a godess. Hes removed from earthly sins and sexuality, so its okay to look at her because its obviously not dirty porn. Its sophisticated mythological art! (/s)
And this isnt uncommon: despite the church being puritanist as fuck, just think about how many of the paintings found in churches depict nude angels. Because if its a devine being, its obviously different from a nude human body, in their eyes. Divine beings arent seen as objects of lust, so its okay to paint them nude, its even encouraged.
Lets take a look at a different painting of a nude woman, which caused way more drama in the art community.
This is "Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe" (The Luncheon on the Grass) by Édouard Manet, painted 1862/63.
caused a HUGE controversy in the art world. How dare Manet paint a NUDE DIRTY WOMAN PEASANT sitting next to fancy men in suits? A dirty woman who even has the audacity to look the audience in the eyes?
Heres a wikipedia quote to further illustrate my point:
Unlike the divine painting from before, this beautiful artwork caused a stir, because it dares to present a woman the same way rennaisance art would usually depict a godess.
Another example of this from a painter youve probably all heard from:
"Les Demoiselles d'Avignon" by Picasso Pablo, 1907
Another painting of nude women that, unlike the venus, USED to be controversial as fuck before it gained the fame it has today.
This time the women also arent white (although their skin has the color of salmon, their faces are supposedly inspired by various ethnicities:)
(This painting itself feels pretty fucking racist if Picasso really did describe them as "Savages". Imo the primitivism art movement is one of those racist "ohhh 'exotic' people of color!!! Must romantizice, dehumanize and reduce to primitive objects of fascination!" Trends, but thats a discussion for another day.)
As you can see, POC, people of 'lower' classes, fat people, etc., have always been sexualized and dehuminized in art. Its a really fucking stupid trend of viewing certain people (white, skinny, divine, high class, etc.) of being "worthy" of being depicted as art, while others are immedeately reduced to objects of our attraction, called porn or fetish content, too impure to be displayed in a museum. (🙄)
"Art" is just another social construct and its definition changes with time. Picassos or Manets works may have been controversial at the time, but more than half (<-not a statistic just a guess) of what we see in museums nowadays, besides renaissance, roman art, etc. (<-any art that's mythological, l'art pour l'art, and other movements that dont challenge society at all) used to be controversial. The best artworks challenge existing structures, critice the society they exist within, and thus end up getting backlash.
However, i dont say this to try and make a point that every fat woman you draw is political. It shouldnt be. Its just a fucking human body, but for some fucking reason drawing normal, everyday people, without reducing them to stereotypes, sexualizing them, etc. Suddenly becomes "rebellious" when it doesnt fit into whats considered "the proper pure norm"
This is obviously a bad thing, which is why we need to 1. call out these behaviours for being bigotry, like OP did, 2. Keep making art that challenges society. Draw those nude fat women, its more of an artwork than a meaningless painting of a skinny woman will ever be.
This beautiful Figure of a fat lady (Venus of Willendorf) is one of THE most wellknown ancient artworks in vienna and not controversial or sexualized at all. Why? Because it was created 30.000 years ago, when dumbass skinny beauty standards didnt exist yet! So if our ancestors could depict artistic fat ladies ~24.000 bce, WHY THE FUCK CANT WE????
TLDR: the concept/definition of what counts as art has always been influenced by society, and thus influenced by things like fatphobia, racism, etc. Ignore the bigots and keep drawing nude fat women, our ancestors also did that and it was cool as fuck.
(Dont nitpick words im not 100% certain my phrasing is always correct but i think ive made my point well enough. Then again this is the piss on the poor website...)
