Doctor: I'm sorry, there's nothing we can do to reattach your leg.
Doctor: but on the plus side your BMI is now low enough that we can do that elective life saving surgery you wanted!

seen from Türkiye

seen from United States

seen from France
seen from Germany
seen from Germany
seen from France
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from Türkiye
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from Netherlands
seen from Netherlands

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from India

seen from Malaysia
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
Doctor: I'm sorry, there's nothing we can do to reattach your leg.
Doctor: but on the plus side your BMI is now low enough that we can do that elective life saving surgery you wanted!
theres nothing wrong with thinking fat people and fat body types are hot. it’s no different from being into thinness or muscles or broad shoulders or whatever. but i keep seeing skinny people on serious posts about fatphobia who are all like “dont cry i think youre fuckable :(” and like. Stop that. Read the room.
drew some of the rocketfire explodsion
Very angry about the discourse that's happening around ozempic and other GLP-1 medications. Like, incandescently incensed at the leftist making pithy posts equating the mere existence of these drugs to fascist eugenics. (It turns out that everything slightly politically inconvenient to one's personal world outlook is equivalent to fascist eugenics, as the conversation on the left around first transhumanism and then AI art has also proven).
Is the overwhelming social pressure for fat people to lose weight a deeply damaging form of institutional and cultural stigmatization, and do we need to work as a society to dismantle fatphobia wherever we encounter it? Absolutely.
Is the way to do this to restrict the body autonomy of individual fat people by banning elective medications in the name of preventing some sort of "opt-in eugenics", because said fat people are too stupid to make correct decisions? Because societal pressure means that people who want to lose weight need to be protected from their own choices? Because we're all too stupid to realize that we'd be better off the way you'd prefer us rather than to be the active decision makers in our own lives? No. Also I'm going to punch you in the face.
I see people implying that giving people an "easy option" to lose weight instead of forcing more people to sit in the stigma of fatphobia will entrench fatphobic attitudes. And maybe it will! But you don't get to force individuals to suffer worse discrimination by limiting their autonomy in the hope that it might make your political goals easier to obtain. That's just the worst kind of accelerationism. It's an argument with the same shape as, "well, maybe it'd be good if the fascists started murdering minorities, maybe then people would wise up sooner and revolt". Volunteering other people to be in any sort of firing line is not woke!
And this is not to even speak about the very real and vigorously medically validated benefits that weight loss can have in many (not all! But absolutely many!) cases. Which are constantly dismissed and downplayed, because people are too afraid to make the actual important point of fat liberation - which is a pro-body-autonomy point! - that it is not anybody else's business if somebody is fat, even if that fatness is "unhealthy" to them! But people aren't brave enough to argue on that alone a lot of the time, so people downplay the medical realities of fatness/thinness (which are complicated, but it seems absolutely true that there are negative medical consequences of carrying more weight outside of just the institutional biases of the medical field) for political convenience to their cause, which is another persistent bugbear of mine.
But anyway, the opposite is also true, which is that, 1. in an absolutist sense, people should be able to modify their bodies however they want, 2. including to make themselves thinner, for whatever reason but 3. including to escape social stigma, if they so wish. And if you care about body autonomy you should be willing to go to bat for that, instead of trying to restrict access to therapies because you personally wish they wouldn't, or because the fact that there's a medication that reduces weight complicates your personal liberation narrative.
There are some asterixes I could add to the above, but I hate having to qualify everything I say, so I'll be bullish about it.
Anyway, GLP-1 agonists totally changed my life, in a complicated way but one that was absolutely my choice, and whether you believe that I made a right choice or wrong one it is none of your business either way, and you should be supporting my right to self-determine.
People trying to reduce my access to my medication because it makes them uncomfortable can equally eat shit.
"It's not that being fat is wrong, it's just that you need to care about your health" and then to fit into the standards they set out you have to starve yourself
I know this is like way-old news by internet standards but sorry it really was/is so annoying how so many people were spinning Tumblr adding a reference to "feederism" to its tos on self-harm as "wow can you believe Tumblr thinks fat people are inherently sexual???" bc like. if they did that they would be "banning feedism" on the grounds of it, yknow, being fetish/kink content (which it is, and that's fine and good actually. People have kinks this includes fat people get over it), it would be included under bans on porn/nsfw. But they DIDN'T, they included it under "self-harm" explicitly in the same sentence as eating disorders like anorexia. Tumblr tos does not "think fat people are inherently sexual," it thinks being fat is inherently a form of self-harm. And that's actually worse I think
people are so vehemently against fatness that. i have seen so many instances of muscular characters absolutly shredded full six pack (with no fat protecting them) who have muscular arms that are far too thin. these folks won't even give their characters wider arms??? broad chest yes big arms no?????
and i do not fucking understand it. ridiculous!!!!!! you can't even give characters bigger arms!!!!!
on a similar note, there are all the characters drawn with big big tits, and very wide hips, (which are the attractive fat deposits) and then. the artist makes a point to draw them with little to no stomach at all. because that is the unattractive fat deposit. and apparently, you can't be fat and have big tits (<- says the fat person with big tits in a very sarcastic tone). oh, and these characters also get thin arms.
because unlike the thick thighs, having thicker arms implies your character might actually be fat.
and i want y'all to focus on both of these examples, because they're BOTH about someone's physical preferences having no tolerance for fat folk. one person prefers tits and ass, but can't stand tummy or arm fat, and the other person prefers broad chests and six packs, but can't stand tummy or arm fat
and hey. I'm fat, have big tits, and regularly lift my friends cause I'm a buff fucking bastard. why am *i* not seen as attractive? why do folks never draw people like me, even in their normal day to day characters?
why are fat people never the default in art tutorials or poses, hm?
well. i know why. and i ain't pleased about it.
y’know sometimes someone will say some basic shit like “I love fat people so much” and the response will somehow be “STOP FETISHIZING FAT PEOPLE”
like damn you think any love we could possibly get is fetishized by default? I think that’s more of a you problem than anything