Talk:Fat feminism

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fat feminism article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article was nominated for deletion on 30 October 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Feminism Low‑importance

	Feminism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Discrimination Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): C.bernard23, Nicrlove, Amjfish. Peer reviewers: Jelcohen, Cagrubba, Bwolfson95, Jordynh, Amjfish.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2019 and 5 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cmc883.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 12 August 2020 and 24 November 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kylie Grist.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): MarcusHefner.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:12, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems

This article is more or less entirely copied from other sources - sources that have even been quoted in the external links section. This is a form of copyright theft. Please rewrite using (at the very least) your own words, or I will submit to Articles for Deletion. Ck l o stsw o rd|^queta! 14:41, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

alright. mirageinred 14:48, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

can you specify where? mirageinred 14:49, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The opening section of 'Views' down to the statistics is taken from here. The history section is from the same site. Also, the statement that obesity is genetic is original research - see the WP article on obesity. Ck l o stsw o rd|^queta! 15:19, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thanks. mirageinred 15:49, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But I can't make the history section from scratch. I'm going to need sources to make this page. mirageinred 15:58, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, but you don't need to copy from the sources. You must rewrite any sources - in some cases to make them make more sense as an encyclopaedic entry; in others simply because it is a breach of copyright. Ck l o stsw o rd|^queta! 20:12, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm.. I thought they were all reworded, but I'll try to look for more sources and change it as much as I can. mirageinred 22:00, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Refute

"Fat feminists refute the belief that one cannot be overweight and fit at the same time. Instead, they believe that the figure one would naturally have through consistent exercising, balanced nutrition, and maintaining an active lifestyle is person's ideal figure, which is not limited to one size.[6][7]"

Would "dispute" be a better word? Refute implies that they have actually proved that one can be overweight and fit - but links 6 and 7 certainly do not show that.

Views

I removed, "For example, a black woman might have bigger hips and breasts than a white woman" because ...well, it doesn't have much to do with being fat. And because a white woman might have bigger hips and breasts than a black woman. (Or a green woman, 'smatter of fact. ;-) )

As for "...women who are naturally larger than the norm would be forced into a chicken or egg cycle of poverty and social discrimination." Is it just me, or does the chicken and egg cycle seem to be a faulty parallelism when compared with poverty and social discrimination? I don't know how to fix it, but it'd be nice if someone else could. :D Eirein 03:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it. The chicken and egg metaphor presumably indicates it is impossible to know which came first. I think a women who loses her job due to being fat can be pretty certain that the discrimination came before the poverty. Likewise a women who grew up in poverty, therefore has a bad diet could point out that the poverty came first.Dillypickle (talk) 08:25, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Health

This article has no mention of health, apart from fat feminists saying they don't believe that being fat is a health risk, which it clearly is according to scientific studies. Do none of these feminists discuss this at all? Isn't encouraging women to be fat a bad idea, at least as bad as encouraging them to be unhealthily thin?Dillypickle (talk) 08:25, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fat feminists are pretty much in denial about the healthy risks of obesity. This is probably the result of irrational thinking such as "Nasty people make fun of fat people, therefore being fat can't be bad." Talk about biting off your nose to spite your face. 70.30.139.129 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:28, 16 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Yes I agree, I also disagree with the argument that women naturally gain weight as they get older, because I know many women in their forties, fifties and over who still have slender hourglass figures. Yes, they are all either "health nuts" or in my belly dance school so it proves how effective a form of exercise that you enjoy is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.187.108.110 (talk) 07:05, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The mysterious disappearance of critical information in this article and many alike it is worrying. 79.183.17.241 (talk) 08:47, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

agreed The Umbreon 1.0 (talk) 01:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source

"The Horrifying Merger of Feminism." Return of Kings, 27 Feb. 2014. Web. Ruth. "OPINION: Lindy West’s Pro-fat Feminism Is Identity Politics Gone Wrong." Pro-fat Feminism Is Identity Politics Gone Wrong. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Sept. 2015. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoelGiffin (talk • contribs) 20:19, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See diff here. Another editor wants them, I think they're POV. Thoughts?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:46, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Fat feminism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:02, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The fat feminism article could elaborate more on body positivism and it's connection to fat feminism. The article could also use more detail in illustrating where fat feminism originated and how it has made it's journey to where it is now. Overall, there could be an improvement in the flow of the article from one piece of information to the next. It is very choppy at times and can be all over the place.Amjfish (talk) 17:24, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FAT FEMINISM AND BODY POLITICS IN RELATION TO RACE

One area that could use some work is the subsection on the intersection of body politics and race. While I agree that race informs fat feminism and body representation and politics, the subsection in the article as it is now does not provide any information on that intersection. Also, the early timeline section looks decent (could use some more source work), but the 2010 to now section leaves a little to be desired. Might also see how that can be fleshed out some. Nicrlove (talk) 06:02, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Size of article becoming a problem

This article has become too long to read, for the topic... most of the info in it can even be ported over to the links in the article or the see also articles, it started getting larger in 2014 and has gone on from there, no one wants a bloated entry Nathanielfirst 18:34, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

@Nathanielfirst: At 17kb, this article is nowhere even close to the size recommended for splitting; plenty of articles are over ten times as big, and not split. Was this supposed to be some kind of sick joke? If so, it wasn't funny. Mathglot (talk) 09:49, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Add to Associated Theories

There are many ways this article can be improved, however for now, I will just be focusing on adding to the Associated Theories section. There are many feminist conversations which are being had separate from that of fat feminism, so this section could definitely be doubled in length of what is it now. It skims the surface of other feminist theories, like lesbian feminism or fat women of color, but does not engage in depth with these concepts, leaving great amounts of information and connection out. The current information for this section needs to be updated and added to, as well as the section itself needs these accommodations to be made in order to present a thorough and abundant amount of information for a section titled "Theories that can be associated with fat feminism," as that topic alone carries great weight. Another conversation to think about adding to this section is feminist disability theory and its relation to fat feminism, as well as many more.

Jelcohen (talk) 15:52, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This would be a great place to add something about social media, specifically instagram's influence and community creation surrounding the ideas of fat feminism. People like @bodyposipanda and more. Fat feminism has a huge place on the internet and not just in theory. We could talk about the practical applications of fat feminism in a modern context as well as build on its existing academic structure.

Cagrubba (talk) 04:16, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

==Peer Review of Article==″ This article has a lot of interesting information, but little background on the key figures. There are also a lot of missing citations/sources. Why do we care who these people are "Sara Fishman, Dr. Franklin Igway, Judy Freespirit, Aldebaran, and Karen Jones, now known as Karen Stimson." There is no useful information about them except that they helped jump start the fat feminism movement, and there is no citation to prove that they did so. There is also problematic language in the context of Wikipedia style non-biased writing. For example, "very thin" models are mentioned, but the difference between thin and very thin are arbitrary. This article seems dramatic instead of informative and it makes me feel that it is one-sided. The section that has the most room to grow is definitely the "Intersections with other forms of feminism" section. Fat feminism can be expanded to all different types of cross-cultural perspectives. I would trim down on the history or find sources for the history. Without sources for the history of fat feminism, the usefulness of the rest of the article is undermined.

-Mcorningmyers (talk) 13:26, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"The first fat feminist book, Shadow on a Tightrope: Writings by Women on Fat Oppression, by Lisa Schoenfielder and Barb Wieser was published in 1983." - WRONG

Try the very well-known Fat is a Feminist Issue of 1978 by Susie Orbach. Typical of what seems a poor US-only account. Johnbod (talk) 10:36, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. But any special reason you didn't want to just fix it? Mathglot (talk) 11:04, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute on the inclusion of NAAFA

It's well-established that NAAFA, the National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance, was founded not by feminists, but by "chubby chasers," aka "fat admirers," aka men who fetishise fat women. Until the mid-to-late '00s, the group primarily functioned as a dating and "Hookup" social club, which also published soft-core erotica on the side, their conventions through that time were infamous for being little more than a couple of daytime workshops lending a veneer of respectability before the eventual orgy, and one of their founders is even widely regarded as the "Godfather of [Erotic] Feederism."

All of this directly contradicts the principles and goals of any wave of Feminism. While we can all see what the NAAFA official website claims, nowadays, their actual history isn't hard to find out about. This means the NAAFA website isn't a reliable source for their own history, as current leadership would rather whitewash the facts, in the name of respectability. Ruadhan1334 (talk) 21:12, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Intro to Women's, Gender and Sexuality Studies-16

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 February 2023 and 19 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Meowmeow09 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Jackchen314 (talk) 14:15, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]