I think it is very interesting to read about the actual history and the evolution of the ideal woman body. I had always known that fat used to mean wealth and health, and I thought it was interesting to see what writers were saying about fat being harmless. This makes me look at today's magazines and wonder if they know as little now as the writers back then did and still remained to be published as fact. I thought it was also interesting to read that fat soon became a sign of immorality and almost separating a person from God because the fasting was though to make you pure and Godly. It shocked me that no other culture was known to share our same obsession with weight loss or body image. I think that people should embrace the way they were born and simply respect their bodies by eating healthy and exercising, but starvation or unhealthy diets just seem ridiculous and are now scientifically proven to hurt you and your immune system. I thought his article used good quotes and lots of good historical evidence when proving the point that americans now view anyone overweight as being unhealthy and therefore immoral and the ideal that no woman can be TOO thin. (I also admire women who showed that it can be sexy to be curvy, like Marilyn Monroe, who tried to change the negative stigmas on not being stick thin. )
I found this article to be very interesting, as it gave me a look into the history of women’s bodies and the changes of the perception of a woman’s body through time. It was interesting to see the view point of Woods Hutchinson, a medical professor, of fat become increasingly strained with the progression of time and the fashion industry promoting thinness. Hutchinson was clearly against this new view on fatness and even called this longing for a “slender and boyish figure is becoming a menace” (Hutchinson). Fraser goes on to break down why this change occurred so drastically and points out that “when it became possible for people of modest means to become plump, being fat was no longer a sign of prestige”; unlike in the 1800’s when food was scarce and available to only those who could afford to eat. Those “well to do” people wanted to distinguish themselves physically from others. I also found it interesting that Fraser used Sontag’s writing from Illness as Metaphor to describe how Europeans viewed having tuberculosis as a good thing and those who had it “possessed a delicate, intellectual, and superior nature”. According to Sontag, TB was for snobs and social climbers who wanted to be perceived as delicate and sensitive. Fraser outlines the need for Americans to imitate the Europeans in this area, and shows that for Americans being thing was not only a sign of class but of morality as well. Overall, I found Fraser’s article to be an interesting and accurate depiction of the history and change of how our perception of weight has evolved through time due to social media (like fashion), social classes and science.
I had to read something very similar to this article for another class. Both articles suggest that our bodies hold significant value for defining our social status. Being "plump" in the Victorian Age was something women placed as something of high value because it was a delicacy most could not experience. Now as Laura Fraser discusses - thin is in. The tables have turned completely around, the time where food was indulged on by the wealthy has now turned into a time where the wealthy take pride in having personal trainers and chefs to cook them low carb, 100% natural meals. "Thou shalt be thin," is a statement all women in the US today struggle to balance. Being a woman, I feel there is constant pressure to look good physically because despite what we wish was different, people often judge you on how you look. The part in this article that stood out to me the most was how physicians also followed the diet trend. When science, the media, and the market are all rooting for the same team - it is hard to not become a part of the band wagon and join them.
Before reading this article, I was aware that heavier women were considered more attractive around the time of the Renaissance for the same reasons that Fraser noted. Women of high class were able to eat well, and as a result a full frame was considered desirable. However, I didn’t realize that the case was the same for the United States in the 19th century. I found it particularly interesting how Puritanism had a significant hand in influencing our change in perception of beauty. Franklin’s philosophy that we should “eat for Necessity, not Pleasure, for Lust knows not where Necessity ends” is somewhat alarming (Fraser). By this rule, one should not even enjoy their food, but only consume it to live. This philosophy is far from healthy, and I think its unfortunate that it contributed towards the movement of extreme slenderness as ideal. At the same time, I think it was inevitable that the ideal image for women would change as science and nutrition progressed and discovered what constitutes a healthy individual. Then, the new consumer culture came into play and pushed these ideal appearances in order to capitalize on an “unattainable dream of thinness and beauty to sell more products” (Fraser). The shift in the ideal form for women was inevitable, but I think it is unfortunate how extreme the trend has become. Many models today are undoubtedly far from healthy, which is quickly evident in their sometimes skeletal appearances, and yet somehow, this has become a standard to strive for.
When I took Art History, I noticed that back in the Renaissance and Classical eras the women were depicted with a more fuller figure, which slowly began to change. Mentioned in the article by Laura Fraser, the extra fat meant that one "stood a better chance of fighting off infectious diseases." But given that technology improved, which influenced the advancement of science and research, the extra fat began to show more health problems. Yes, food was starting to be processed and people were not growing their own foods at home, but a lot of the change in view just came with the change of culture. After reading the article, it reminded me of my personal experiences. I have always been thin and my clothing size hasn't fluctuated that much since junior high. I was wearing a zero in jeans, and then all the sudden i had to change to a 1, which fit just like my zeros and the brand was the same. The sizing in clothing has also changed, and now there is a 00 and maybe even a 000, which is even smaller than the 0 that was added back when I was a teenager. How can people think they are losing weight (if they need to because of a health condition) if the clothing sizes are not standardized? Also stated in the article was from Woods Hutchinson, that "the fat man tends to remain fat, the thin woman to stay thin - and both in perfect health." This describes perfectly my situation and why it makes me angry when people give me dirty looks. I am underweight but healthy, and there isn't a whole lot I can do to not look like I do. I don't like the extremely skinny look that models possess either. The filled out look is really what should be depicted in the models. To be a Victoria Secret model, they have to workout to stay toned. People assume all models don't eat and are just born with perfect bodies, but even the models have to workout to maintain a look. The Victoria Secret models are not like the ones you see on the runway that have all bone showing, but neither of them have plus size models. Lane Bryant does, and they have only been hated for some apparent racy bra ad that wasn't even that bad. I believe America has double standards. They say they don't like extra weight, but they don't like how magazines are "brainwashing" teens to look a certain way. Something has to be wrong somewhere.
I found this article extremely interesting, as it's something that, as college students, we are always conscious of. I think it is so interesting, and extremely important, that back in the 1890s Hutchinson reassured readers that "fat was not only benign, but also attractive, and that if a poll of beautiful women were taken in any city, there would be at least three times as many pump ones as slender ones" (Fraser, 11). In today's society, women are portrayed to be beautiful only if they are only so stick thin that women retreat to extremely harmful "diets" and unhealthy workout routines. The beginning of this article made me think of Dove's Campaign for Real Beauty and how it is so important to portray models as healthy human beings in a world where "advertisers learned early to offer women an unattainable dream of thinness and beauty to sell more products" (Fraser, 13). I found the evolution of weight in America to be extremely interesting, as I had never really thought about it before, but it all makes sense: ample amounts of food in the 1800s led to all social classes being able to indulge which therefore led to a thinner frame being a sign of wealth and class (division of classes that happens throughout history). A quote that really stuck out to me was "It was glamourous to look sickly" because I find this so disgusting and I feel like this is how beauty is portrayed in the 20th century. So many of my friends have fallen in the trap of trying to look thin that they've battled all sorts of eating disorders, which is just awful, and another reason why I fully support Dove's campaign. Lastly, I found it very eye-opening that "no other culture suffers from the same wild anxieties about weight, dieting, and exercise as we do because they do not share our history" (Fraser, 14). This is both saddening and relieving: it is so sad that our culture has put so much emphasis on weight and exercise but it's relieving to know that other cultures don't put this kind of persistent pressure on people to "look sickly thin."
I found Laura Fraser's article to be very intriguing, Some of this information I have already heard before, for example that plump women were seen as sexy or could afford to eat well. The comparison that Woods Hutchinson a medical professor made about fashion and the backing that it gives physicians, food reformers, physical trainers and even insurance companies is very interesting to me that fashion associates with these different areas. I also thought that Hutchinson had a different outlook then most other people because in society today people look at being thin as attractive and being fat as how he put it "an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual disgrace, of laziness, of self- indulgence." I didn't know when the shift was from fat to thin and and that the main reason was the changing economy. When it became possible for people with less money to afford food it was no longer a prestige. Also the point in the reading where they talked about physicians following and encouraging thinness. I have seen this play out in my life with doctors that I have seen because they want to make sure you are in the right percentile with your height, weight, ect to make sure you have an "Ideal" weight.
Like many others, I found this article very interesting. However, the information provided didn't feel like anything too new. We all know that historically, women were viewed beautiful if they were voluptuous because it represented status and wealth. We also know that America is too far obsessed with being thin. What I did find new in this article was the fact that America borrowed this idea of "thinness" being beautiful from the Europeans. It was also intriguing to know that it was Puritanism that drove most of what created this new era of "thin-being-beautiful." I liked that the author very clearly wrote that "economic status symbols, morality, medicine, modernity, changing women's roles, and consumerism" is what caused this transition to slenderness as being desirable (Fraser 13). It made keeping track of the information she provided a lot easier.
Fraser's "The Inner Corset: A Brief Introduction of Fat in the United States" was very interesting. I had already known about how plump women back in the 19th century were the ideal/trend. The thing that surprised me was the reason behind it, "Well-to-do Americans of northern European extraction wanted to be able to distinguish themselves physically and racially, from stockier immigrants." I found this rather sad that people would try to go as far as to alter their body to distinguish themselves as wealthier or better, like they had to have a clear distinction, a mark. This kind of reminded me of tanning, if i remember correctly from my history class, the reason that pale skin was ideal back in day was because it meant that you were wealthier and did not work like poor people, in the sun. It was another class distinguisher. Now, its the opposite, having tan skin is ideal because it means you have a lot of leisure time to soak up the sun/vacation time, rather than be a working class citizen. The roles have changed. I noticed that in the article they talked a lot about the physical outer appearance in both plump and skinny women from plump arms to slender bodies, but nothing about the risks and benefits of being skinny or plump. Then again, the tittle says a 'brief history' so it doesn't go into details. I can relate to Amanda on the whole some people giving you dirty looks because you're skinny and you've been the same size since junior high, so you fall under the "slender and boyish figure" (Hutchinson, 1926), but it also comes with it stereotypes because not all skinny people are healthy just based on looks/physical outer appearances. I've had to deal with anemia and asthma for the past 10 years even though I fall in that height weight chart. I think its kind of nerve wrecking for everyone to have to a chart tell you if you're healthy or not based solely on your height and weight, and not by what's going on inside your body. You don't want to be overweight or underweight. You want to reach that target goal, the medium. I think that everyone is different so we shouldn't be categorized into groups. It reminds me of what Hillis said in his video about how cancer patients are grouped when it comes to treatment, but he says instead we should focus on a plan based on you-an individual. I think as long as you as an individual are healthy and feel healthy, regardless if you are in the target height weight chart, then you should keep on living your life as is and not based on a chart that may change in a couple of years.
I have known for a while because of my involvement as a nutrition peer educator on campus about America and Western influenced industrial and capitalistic cultures being the only ones obsessed with weight, thinness, dieting, and exercising. It is one of the reasons why I chose a diet supplement as my research project topic. It is very ridiculous and upsetting to note that the U.S. diet industry and weight loss market was valued at $60.9 billion dollars in 2011 ("U.S. Weight Loss"), enough to end hunger in several third world countries. What is wrong with your PRIORITIES, AMERICA??!?! What I did not know and something that I enjoyed learning from this article was about how this shift developed starting from the early 20th century, and how it was not just a fashion trend but a series of economical, agricultural, and industrial developments that evolved the culture over time. It was very interesting to read about the yet another mention of how Americans "believed that it was not only a sign of class to be thin, but also a sign of morality" (Fraser 13). I think it is incredibly important that people of all professions, especially those in health care are very aware and careful that they are not pre-judging and stigmatizing their patients that may be deemed overweight or obese.
Fraser’s Brief History of Fat in the United States provides an interesting background in the change of beauty standards and health standards through the history of America and the reasons behind these changes. A part of the introduction that stood out to me was the link between thinness and puritan morality in the United States. Thinness is a sign of self-restraint and self-denial, both of which are important parts of the puritan lifestyle. This subject of morality reminded me of Metzl’s “Why Against Health?” chapter in which he points out that moralism is often disguised under the name of health (Metzl, 4). Metzl gave the example of a non-smoking ad that depicts smokers as bad parents. The immoral implications of being unhealthy or being overweight is one reason why guilt and weight gain often go hand-in-hand in today’s society.
I was not aware of the history of fat in the United States, so by reading this chapter it really stood out to me how "no other culture suffers from the wild anxieties about weight, dieting, and exercise as we do" (Frase 14). If more people were ware of the history of fat, I wonder if the stigma would shift its roll in the United States. Even though I personally think "thick" or plump women are sexy! Even my crazy family says over weigh women are not ugly they are just "big boned" women. Also I noticed this chapter explained the female image like "The Plump Victorian Woman, the athletic but curvaceous Gibson Girl, and the boyishly straight-bodied" but did not specifically say anything about Males. Which I wonder why was anything mentioned about Male bodies? I think is not common to say "plump men" are sexy because do to the fashion image male bodies are muscular men. I agree with Lindsay how she said is both saddening and relieving about our culture emphasis on weight and exercise. With that being said I also wanted to mentioned how there are some people who view fat people as "nasty fat" there are people who make negative judgments about over weigh women and men. Which I think its sad how so many people seek into having a perfect body...
A lot of the concepts in this article were also new to me. I knew that in the past, men who packed on the pounds were considered to healthy and of wealth, but I had no idea that plump women were also desired. It makes sense that we as humans strive to look like that of what is considered "healthy". What was considered healthy in the past is now viewed unhealthy in the present and with that comes changes in our desired physique. However, the thought on “What is healthy” can be changed depending on the country who live in or even what culture you come from. In my experience, when I visit family in Mexico, they see me as unhealthy because they still believe that healthy men "should have a belly". They also ask my parents if we are doing well financially as they feel that I am not being fed. So this idea of wealthy and healthy fat is still alive and well in other parts of the world.
Very easy to follow. Reminded me of my History of Ethical Issues in Physical Culture and Sports class, where we discussed the change of appreciation of muscular women and bodies to that of the leaner form. Similar to this article, but rather than focusing on muscular bodies, the author talks about this plump body that many had. It made a lot of sense to me that society would change its appreciation for the plump body once its meaning changed, that not only are those who are well off able to have plump bodies but those from lower social classes as well. So then it no longer meant anything special.
This was one of my favorite articles we have read this summer. I found it enjoyable to read because the author gave plenty of background information and a complete picture of the history of fat that made it easy for the reader to follow. I thought it was interesting that some of the things she talked about TB related to the article we read last week, "Illness as a Metaphor." The argument was definitely enhanced by the logos appeal with many experts quotes. I found the former American Academy of Medicine president's opinion that it was healthy to be overweight and dangerous to be skinny especially interesting.
It is interesting to read about the history of how the obsession of thinness took over the United States. I never know that so many concepts came together to create the consumer industry we have today that is so fixated on the outer appearance of women. This just shows how the generation we grow up in and the social issues that are prevalent during that period can really affect how we live our life. I completely agree with what Laura Fraser is saying about how because of our unique situation and history, this obsession has more of a grip on our country than compared to other countries. While the role of women has changed over the past decade, our figure has also changed to accommodate that.
I agree with the majority on this article being easy to follow, very informative, and at the same time interesting. Fraser gives the reader great examples throughout history on what bOdy type was the trend and the reasons why Americans thought so. I believe that the concept that "indulging to your body and appetite is a sign of immorality" is still popular in religion.
I found this article very interesting. I knew that it used to be deemed more beautiful to be chubby than skinny, but I didn't know why the circumstance suddenly changed. Especially, women consider themselves more beautiful and healthy when they are slender. For example, in Korea, where I come from, teenage girls and college girls are almost obsessed with their looks. There are so many girls that choose to starve in order to look skinny rather than eating healthy and exercising. And once, it was a very serious social problem. Anyways, it was interesting to see why slenderness became more of a trend than before.
What I like about this reading is where the author brings up the questions that the piece sets out to answer. If you were to omit the paragraph with these questions, the piece still works but having them there really marks a transition in the piece from talking about the trend to talking about how it can be explained. I think implicitly stating these questions makes the piece effective because it prepares the reader of what to expect from the piece.
I think it is very interesting to read about the actual history and the evolution of the ideal woman body. I had always known that fat used to mean wealth and health, and I thought it was interesting to see what writers were saying about fat being harmless. This makes me look at today's magazines and wonder if they know as little now as the writers back then did and still remained to be published as fact. I thought it was also interesting to read that fat soon became a sign of immorality and almost separating a person from God because the fasting was though to make you pure and Godly. It shocked me that no other culture was known to share our same obsession with weight loss or body image. I think that people should embrace the way they were born and simply respect their bodies by eating healthy and exercising, but starvation or unhealthy diets just seem ridiculous and are now scientifically proven to hurt you and your immune system. I thought his article used good quotes and lots of good historical evidence when proving the point that americans now view anyone overweight as being unhealthy and therefore immoral and the ideal that no woman can be TOO thin. (I also admire women who showed that it can be sexy to be curvy, like Marilyn Monroe, who tried to change the negative stigmas on not being stick thin. )
ReplyDeleteI found this article to be very interesting, as it gave me a look into the history of women’s bodies and the changes of the perception of a woman’s body through time. It was interesting to see the view point of Woods Hutchinson, a medical professor, of fat become increasingly strained with the progression of time and the fashion industry promoting thinness. Hutchinson was clearly against this new view on fatness and even called this longing for a “slender and boyish figure is becoming a menace” (Hutchinson). Fraser goes on to break down why this change occurred so drastically and points out that “when it became possible for people of modest means to become plump, being fat was no longer a sign of prestige”; unlike in the 1800’s when food was scarce and available to only those who could afford to eat. Those “well to do” people wanted to distinguish themselves physically from others. I also found it interesting that Fraser used Sontag’s writing from Illness as Metaphor to describe how Europeans viewed having tuberculosis as a good thing and those who had it “possessed a delicate, intellectual, and superior nature”. According to Sontag, TB was for snobs and social climbers who wanted to be perceived as delicate and sensitive. Fraser outlines the need for Americans to imitate the Europeans in this area, and shows that for Americans being thing was not only a sign of class but of morality as well. Overall, I found Fraser’s article to be an interesting and accurate depiction of the history and change of how our perception of weight has evolved through time due to social media (like fashion), social classes and science.
ReplyDeleteI had to read something very similar to this article for another class. Both articles suggest that our bodies hold significant value for defining our social status. Being "plump" in the Victorian Age was something women placed as something of high value because it was a delicacy most could not experience. Now as Laura Fraser discusses - thin is in. The tables have turned completely around, the time where food was indulged on by the wealthy has now turned into a time where the wealthy take pride in having personal trainers and chefs to cook them low carb, 100% natural meals. "Thou shalt be thin," is a statement all women in the US today struggle to balance. Being a woman, I feel there is constant pressure to look good physically because despite what we wish was different, people often judge you on how you look. The part in this article that stood out to me the most was how physicians also followed the diet trend. When science, the media, and the market are all rooting for the same team - it is hard to not become a part of the band wagon and join them.
ReplyDeleteBefore reading this article, I was aware that heavier women were considered more attractive around the time of the Renaissance for the same reasons that Fraser noted. Women of high class were able to eat well, and as a result a full frame was considered desirable. However, I didn’t realize that the case was the same for the United States in the 19th century. I found it particularly interesting how Puritanism had a significant hand in influencing our change in perception of beauty. Franklin’s philosophy that we should “eat for Necessity, not Pleasure, for Lust knows not where Necessity ends” is somewhat alarming (Fraser). By this rule, one should not even enjoy their food, but only consume it to live. This philosophy is far from healthy, and I think its unfortunate that it contributed towards the movement of extreme slenderness as ideal. At the same time, I think it was inevitable that the ideal image for women would change as science and nutrition progressed and discovered what constitutes a healthy individual. Then, the new consumer culture came into play and pushed these ideal appearances in order to capitalize on an “unattainable dream of thinness and beauty to sell more products” (Fraser). The shift in the ideal form for women was inevitable, but I think it is unfortunate how extreme the trend has become. Many models today are undoubtedly far from healthy, which is quickly evident in their sometimes skeletal appearances, and yet somehow, this has become a standard to strive for.
ReplyDeleteWhen I took Art History, I noticed that back in the Renaissance and Classical eras the women were depicted with a more fuller figure, which slowly began to change. Mentioned in the article by Laura Fraser, the extra fat meant that one "stood a better chance of fighting off infectious diseases." But given that technology improved, which influenced the advancement of science and research, the extra fat began to show more health problems. Yes, food was starting to be processed and people were not growing their own foods at home, but a lot of the change in view just came with the change of culture. After reading the article, it reminded me of my personal experiences. I have always been thin and my clothing size hasn't fluctuated that much since junior high. I was wearing a zero in jeans, and then all the sudden i had to change to a 1, which fit just like my zeros and the brand was the same. The sizing in clothing has also changed, and now there is a 00 and maybe even a 000, which is even smaller than the 0 that was added back when I was a teenager. How can people think they are losing weight (if they need to because of a health condition) if the clothing sizes are not standardized? Also stated in the article was from Woods Hutchinson, that "the fat man tends to remain fat, the thin woman to stay thin - and both in perfect health." This describes perfectly my situation and why it makes me angry when people give me dirty looks. I am underweight but healthy, and there isn't a whole lot I can do to not look like I do. I don't like the extremely skinny look that models possess either. The filled out look is really what should be depicted in the models. To be a Victoria Secret model, they have to workout to stay toned. People assume all models don't eat and are just born with perfect bodies, but even the models have to workout to maintain a look. The Victoria Secret models are not like the ones you see on the runway that have all bone showing, but neither of them have plus size models. Lane Bryant does, and they have only been hated for some apparent racy bra ad that wasn't even that bad. I believe America has double standards. They say they don't like extra weight, but they don't like how magazines are "brainwashing" teens to look a certain way. Something has to be wrong somewhere.
ReplyDeleteI found this article extremely interesting, as it's something that, as college students, we are always conscious of. I think it is so interesting, and extremely important, that back in the 1890s Hutchinson reassured readers that "fat was not only benign, but also attractive, and that if a poll of beautiful women were taken in any city, there would be at least three times as many pump ones as slender ones" (Fraser, 11). In today's society, women are portrayed to be beautiful only if they are only so stick thin that women retreat to extremely harmful "diets" and unhealthy workout routines. The beginning of this article made me think of Dove's Campaign for Real Beauty and how it is so important to portray models as healthy human beings in a world where "advertisers learned early to offer women an unattainable dream of thinness and beauty to sell more products" (Fraser, 13). I found the evolution of weight in America to be extremely interesting, as I had never really thought about it before, but it all makes sense: ample amounts of food in the 1800s led to all social classes being able to indulge which therefore led to a thinner frame being a sign of wealth and class (division of classes that happens throughout history). A quote that really stuck out to me was "It was glamourous to look sickly" because I find this so disgusting and I feel like this is how beauty is portrayed in the 20th century. So many of my friends have fallen in the trap of trying to look thin that they've battled all sorts of eating disorders, which is just awful, and another reason why I fully support Dove's campaign. Lastly, I found it very eye-opening that "no other culture suffers from the same wild anxieties about weight, dieting, and exercise as we do because they do not share our history" (Fraser, 14). This is both saddening and relieving: it is so sad that our culture has put so much emphasis on weight and exercise but it's relieving to know that other cultures don't put this kind of persistent pressure on people to "look sickly thin."
ReplyDeleteI found Laura Fraser's article to be very intriguing, Some of this information I have already heard before, for example that plump women were seen as sexy or could afford to eat well. The comparison that Woods Hutchinson a medical professor made about fashion and the backing that it gives physicians, food reformers, physical trainers and even insurance companies is very interesting to me that fashion associates with these different areas. I also thought that Hutchinson had a different outlook then most other people because in society today people look at being thin as attractive and being fat as how he put it "an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual disgrace, of laziness, of self- indulgence." I didn't know when the shift was from fat to thin and and that the main reason was the changing economy. When it became possible for people with less money to afford food it was no longer a prestige. Also the point in the reading where they talked about physicians following and encouraging thinness. I have seen this play out in my life with doctors that I have seen because they want to make sure you are in the right percentile with your height, weight, ect to make sure you have an "Ideal" weight.
ReplyDeleteLike many others, I found this article very interesting. However, the information provided didn't feel like anything too new. We all know that historically, women were viewed beautiful if they were voluptuous because it represented status and wealth. We also know that America is too far obsessed with being thin. What I did find new in this article was the fact that America borrowed this idea of "thinness" being beautiful from the Europeans. It was also intriguing to know that it was Puritanism that drove most of what created this new era of "thin-being-beautiful." I liked that the author very clearly wrote that "economic status symbols, morality, medicine, modernity, changing women's roles, and consumerism" is what caused this transition to slenderness as being desirable (Fraser 13). It made keeping track of the information she provided a lot easier.
ReplyDeleteFraser's "The Inner Corset: A Brief Introduction of Fat in the United States" was very interesting. I had already known about how plump women back in the 19th century were the ideal/trend. The thing that surprised me was the reason behind it, "Well-to-do Americans of northern European extraction wanted to be able to distinguish themselves physically and racially, from stockier immigrants." I found this rather sad that people would try to go as far as to alter their body to distinguish themselves as wealthier or better, like they had to have a clear distinction, a mark. This kind of reminded me of tanning, if i remember correctly from my history class, the reason that pale skin was ideal back in day was because it meant that you were wealthier and did not work like poor people, in the sun. It was another class distinguisher. Now, its the opposite, having tan skin is ideal because it means you have a lot of leisure time to soak up the sun/vacation time, rather than be a working class citizen. The roles have changed. I noticed that in the article they talked a lot about the physical outer appearance in both plump and skinny women from plump arms to slender bodies, but nothing about the risks and benefits of being skinny or plump. Then again, the tittle says a 'brief history' so it doesn't go into details. I can relate to Amanda on the whole some people giving you dirty looks because you're skinny and you've been the same size since junior high, so you fall under the "slender and boyish figure" (Hutchinson, 1926), but it also comes with it stereotypes because not all skinny people are healthy just based on looks/physical outer appearances. I've had to deal with anemia and asthma for the past 10 years even though I fall in that height weight chart. I think its kind of nerve wrecking for everyone to have to a chart tell you if you're healthy or not based solely on your height and weight, and not by what's going on inside your body. You don't want to be overweight or underweight. You want to reach that target goal, the medium. I think that everyone is different so we shouldn't be categorized into groups. It reminds me of what Hillis said in his video about how cancer patients are grouped when it comes to treatment, but he says instead we should focus on a plan based on you-an individual. I think as long as you as an individual are healthy and feel healthy, regardless if you are in the target height weight chart, then you should keep on living your life as is and not based on a chart that may change in a couple of years.
ReplyDeleteI have known for a while because of my involvement as a nutrition peer educator on campus about America and Western influenced industrial and capitalistic cultures being the only ones obsessed with weight, thinness, dieting, and exercising. It is one of the reasons why I chose a diet supplement as my research project topic. It is very ridiculous and upsetting to note that the U.S. diet industry and weight loss market was valued at $60.9 billion dollars in 2011 ("U.S. Weight Loss"), enough to end hunger in several third world countries. What is wrong with your PRIORITIES, AMERICA??!?! What I did not know and something that I enjoyed learning from this article was about how this shift developed starting from the early 20th century, and how it was not just a fashion trend but a series of economical, agricultural, and industrial developments that evolved the culture over time. It was very interesting to read about the yet another mention of how Americans "believed that it was not only a sign of class to be thin, but also a sign of morality" (Fraser 13). I think it is incredibly important that people of all professions, especially those in health care are very aware and careful that they are not pre-judging and stigmatizing their patients that may be deemed overweight or obese.
ReplyDeleteSources:
Delete"U.S. Weight Loss Market Worth $60.9 Billion." Press Release Distribution. PRWeb, 09 May 2011. Web.
Fraser’s Brief History of Fat in the United States provides an interesting background in the change of beauty standards and health standards through the history of America and the reasons behind these changes. A part of the introduction that stood out to me was the link between thinness and puritan morality in the United States. Thinness is a sign of self-restraint and self-denial, both of which are important parts of the puritan lifestyle. This subject of morality reminded me of Metzl’s “Why Against Health?” chapter in which he points out that moralism is often disguised under the name of health (Metzl, 4). Metzl gave the example of a non-smoking ad that depicts smokers as bad parents. The immoral implications of being unhealthy or being overweight is one reason why guilt and weight gain often go hand-in-hand in today’s society.
ReplyDeleteI was not aware of the history of fat in the United States, so by reading this chapter it really stood out to me how "no other culture suffers from the wild anxieties about weight, dieting, and exercise as we do" (Frase 14). If more people were ware of the history of fat, I wonder if the stigma would shift its roll in the United States.
ReplyDeleteEven though I personally think "thick" or plump women are sexy! Even my crazy family says over weigh women are not ugly they are just "big boned" women.
Also I noticed this chapter explained the female image like "The Plump Victorian Woman, the athletic but curvaceous Gibson Girl, and the boyishly straight-bodied" but did not specifically say anything about Males. Which I wonder why was anything mentioned about Male bodies? I think is not common to say "plump men" are sexy because do to the fashion image male bodies are muscular men.
I agree with Lindsay how she said is both saddening and relieving about our culture emphasis on weight and exercise.
With that being said I also wanted to mentioned how there are some people who view fat people as "nasty fat" there are people who make negative judgments about over weigh women and men. Which I think its sad how so many people seek into having a perfect body...
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteA lot of the concepts in this article were also new to me. I knew that in the past, men who packed on the pounds were considered to healthy and of wealth, but I had no idea that plump women were also desired. It makes sense that we as humans strive to look like that of what is considered "healthy". What was considered healthy in the past is now viewed unhealthy in the present and with that comes changes in our desired physique. However, the thought on “What is healthy” can be changed depending on the country who live in or even what culture you come from. In my experience, when I visit family in Mexico, they see me as unhealthy because they still believe that healthy men "should have a belly". They also ask my parents if we are doing well financially as they feel that I am not being fed. So this idea of wealthy and healthy fat is still alive and well in other parts of the world.
DeleteVery easy to follow. Reminded me of my History of Ethical Issues in Physical Culture and Sports class, where we discussed the change of appreciation of muscular women and bodies to that of the leaner form. Similar to this article, but rather than focusing on muscular bodies, the author talks about this plump body that many had. It made a lot of sense to me that society would change its appreciation for the plump body once its meaning changed, that not only are those who are well off able to have plump bodies but those from lower social classes as well. So then it no longer meant anything special.
ReplyDeleteThis was one of my favorite articles we have read this summer. I found it enjoyable to read because the author gave plenty of background information and a complete picture of the history of fat that made it easy for the reader to follow. I thought it was interesting that some of the things she talked about TB related to the article we read last week, "Illness as a Metaphor." The argument was definitely enhanced by the logos appeal with many experts quotes. I found the former American Academy of Medicine president's opinion that it was healthy to be overweight and dangerous to be skinny especially interesting.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to read about the history of how the obsession of thinness took over the United States. I never know that so many concepts came together to create the consumer industry we have today that is so fixated on the outer appearance of women. This just shows how the generation we grow up in and the social issues that are prevalent during that period can really affect how we live our life. I completely agree with what Laura Fraser is saying about how because of our unique situation and history, this obsession has more of a grip on our country than compared to other countries. While the role of women has changed over the past decade, our figure has also changed to accommodate that.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the majority on this article being easy to follow, very informative, and at the same time interesting. Fraser gives the reader great examples throughout history on what bOdy type was the trend and the reasons why Americans thought so. I believe that the concept that "indulging to your body and appetite is a sign of immorality" is still popular in religion.
ReplyDeleteI found this article very interesting. I knew that it used to be deemed more beautiful to be chubby than skinny, but I didn't know why the circumstance suddenly changed. Especially, women consider themselves more beautiful and healthy when they are slender. For example, in Korea, where I come from, teenage girls and college girls are almost obsessed with their looks. There are so many girls that choose to starve in order to look skinny rather than eating healthy and exercising. And once, it was a very serious social problem. Anyways, it was interesting to see why slenderness became more of a trend than before.
ReplyDeleteWhat I like about this reading is where the author brings up the questions that the piece sets out to answer. If you were to omit the paragraph with these questions, the piece still works but having them there really marks a transition in the piece from talking about the trend to talking about how it can be explained. I think implicitly stating these questions makes the piece effective because it prepares the reader of what to expect from the piece.
ReplyDelete