Communications Question

The notes for each reading will be prefaced by the full citation for the article and include the thesis of the reading (The thesis will appear near the top of the page and be marked as “Thesis:”).

.

http://dnaanthology.com/anvc/dna/plotting-the-data…

   Notes on Hayles Reading (55-79)

https://dms484.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/hayles-…

Fat Studies
An Interdisciplinary Journal of Body Weight and Society
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ufts20
The Corpulence Manifesto
Marcos Gonsalez
To cite this article: Marcos Gonsalez (2020) The Corpulence Manifesto, Fat Studies, 9:3, 234-237,
DOI: 10.1080/21604851.2019.1643227
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/21604851.2019.1643227
Published online: 08 Aug 2019.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 93
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ufts20
FAT STUDIES
2020, VOL. 9, NO. 3, 234–237
https://doi.org/10.1080/21604851.2019.1643227
The Corpulence Manifesto
Marcos Gonsalez
The Graduate Center, CUNY, New York, NY, USA
ABSTRACT
This manifesto seeks to imagine the possibilities for fat esthetic
futurities.
KEYWORDS
Fat studies; esthetics;
manifesto
the white boys in the locker room grab at your fat body –is it really, yours, though?
you who move too effeminately, you with the chichos and the tits and the belly
bouncing in step, you who hear voices of ancestors and oppressors in your head,
you who move with salsa and hip hop and rancheras in your hips
–poking and prodding and pinching.
they do things to your body. These kinds of boys, these kinds of people. All
they know how to do is to violate the body. Violating the bodies of those they
deem aberrant, those they deem disposable, those they deem deliciously
desirable. Violating across space and time, across generations, across bodies
and species.
The body is sexy isn’t it?
Feel this flesh, darling, all this flesh. excess
flesh fleshy fleshing out through flesh
bodies other worlds, other intimacies, other
modes of feeling and thinking and being.
Our fat flesh is why they need to hurt us.
We, who are too much, we, who are excess
and decadence, we, who are corpulence
itself. The fat bodies who are trans and poor
and queer and racialized and disabled and
femme. All of us whose corpulence moves
in these varying axes of difference. Us who
move the big hips dangerously, us who
dance with all this jelly. All your fat
abjection, all of its multitudes, embracing it,
deploying it again and against. they can’t
stand it when you flaunt all that body in
CONTACT Marcos Gonsalez
New York, NY10016, USA
© 2019 Taylor & Francis
marcos.s.gonsalez@gmail.com
The Graduate Center, CUNY, 365 Fifth Avenue,
FAT STUDIES
235
their faces. they can’t stand your pleasuring
in, your luxuriating over, your fatness.
What to do with the fat body? How to bring it to form? What is its
form on the page, on the canvas, in film and photograph?
chicho chichones salchicha salchichón ch
ch
ch
ch
chubster, those white boys in the locker room say, look at all that chub from
all those tacos and rice and beans and McDonalds and greasy foods they like
to eat. they pinch and grab at the belly and the tits and the lovehandles and
the flesh because they see the femme and the racialized and the fat body to be
devoured, to be destroyed. In their blue eyes there is desire, the longing for
the body they want to annihilate.
The fat body is a paradox: it is both despised and loved
queers on dating/hookup apps vilify the fat body. vilify all kinds of bodies “no fats
no femmes no Asians” etc etc. they demand full body pics so as to scrutinize better
the fat body. scrutinizing the way our body curves and sags and stretches and defies
gravity. the fat body is their anti-thesis which lets them be closer to normativity, to
the ideals our culture idealizes, towards being like everyone else. they scrutinize so
they can feel superior, scrutinizing the fat body so they can access privileges they so
so so desperately desire.
they are able to scrutinize because the medical discourse at large gives
us all language like “obese” and “unhealthy” in which to understand,
imagine, and conceptualize the fat body. Get on the scale, the doctor
says, ready to pass the judgment, ready to stigmatize, you are obese. the
doctor makes the diagnosis and we become a problem of the state. the
body must be managed, must be tamed, must be made smaller. fat is fat is
not fat is the disappearance of the too big, too large, too present body. the
doctor now goes on about heart disease and cancer and heart attack and
clogged arteries
and, then, another language against and distinct from and imagining
elsewhere must be formed …
the language of corpulence: girth weighted sag thickness tits round stretchmarked heavy chunks wide rolls large massive ass chichones – putting that
236
M. GONSALEZ
language into an aesthetic, a mode of writing, an ontology and epistemology,
concepts and methods always and ever geared towards
the too much, the excessive and excess and
exceeding, the flaunting and exposing of the fat
body, the purposeful deviance of the corpulent body
that thinks and feels and senses, jiggling and
bouncing and parading in fat refusal and the
refusing to be satiated, and the more and more and
more and more and never not enough and that’s
why they fear us, girl, because we refuse, because
we indulge, because we let our bodies be how they
need to be and want to be and love to be and
pleasure in being
where hands and mouths and organs move across
the chunks of flesh,
the girth of the thighs,
the roundness of the belly,
the sag of the tits,
the sensing of the fat body and the sensorial fullness of being in the fat body –
what might it mean to respond to the fat body? to touch it with care and care for
its touch? to respond to its needs and desires? the fat body as key to understanding and celebrating bodily differences and the intimacies that open up from
loving and fucking and caring for the fat body towards a relation to the body that
does not seek to discipline, to police, to control, to shame, to vilify, to dispose of
sensing anew the fat body the fat body sensing sensorial fatness the sense of being
fat in the world sense the corpulence corpulent sensing towards other worlds other
intimacies other body relations
imagine it …
the what if …
what might be …
if the fat body were not —
if the fat body were —
if the fat body could be —
FAT STUDIES
237
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes on contributor
Marcos Gonsalez is an essayist and PhD candidate in literature living in New York City. My
essay collection about growing up a gay son of an undocumented Mexican immigrant and
a poor Puerto Rican mother in white America, Pedro’s Theory: Essays, is represented by agent
Lauren Abramo and is currently on submission with publishers. My essays can be found or
are forthcoming at Electric Literature, Inside Higher Education, Ploughshares, Catapult, The
New Inquiry, and LitHub, among others.
Fat Studies
An Interdisciplinary Journal of Body Weight and Society
ISSN: 2160-4851 (Print) 2160-486X (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ufts20
Theorizing fat oppression: Intersectional
approaches and methodological innovations
Ariane Prohaska & Jeannine A. Gailey
To cite this article: Ariane Prohaska & Jeannine A. Gailey (2019) Theorizing fat oppression:
Intersectional approaches and methodological innovations, Fat Studies, 8:1, 1-9, DOI:
10.1080/21604851.2019.1534469
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/21604851.2019.1534469
Published online: 25 Oct 2018.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 723
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Citing articles: 3 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ufts20
FAT STUDIES
2019, VOL. 8, NO. 1, 1–9
https://doi.org/10.1080/21604851.2019.1534469
Theorizing fat oppression: Intersectional approaches and
methodological innovations
Ariane Prohaskaa and Jeannine A. Gaileyb
a
Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, USA;
Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, Texas, USA
b
ABSTRACT
KEYWORDS
The oppression of fat people is built into institutions, pervades the
cultural landscape, and affects the relationships and perceptions of
people of size. In this introduction to the special issue on fat
oppression, we examine the concept of oppression and its place
in fat studies before reviewing the extant literature on fat oppression. We also discuss how the articles chosen for this issue contribute to the existing theoretical and empirical understanding of
fat oppression. We conclude by encouraging scholarship that
utilizes diverse theoretical and methodological approaches to
studying the oppression of fat people.
Fat oppression;
intersectionality;
discrimination; fat stigma
We are pleased to present Part 1 of a special double issue on fat oppression for
Fat Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Body Weight and Society. About
fifteen years ago, as PhD students in sociology, we discovered a little-known
practice often referred to as “hogging.” Hogging occurs when some men, usually
college-aged or in the military, seek out fat women as sexual partners for one of
two reasons: (1) they think that fat women are desperate and easy to lure into
sexual favors, or (2) they are trying to win a bet with their friends about who can
“take home” [and have sex with] the largest woman (see Gailey and Prohaska
2006; Prohaska and Gailey 2009, 2010). The phenomenon of hogging is deeply
rooted in both culturally sanctioned misogyny and stereotypes that equate
beauty and sexual attractiveness with thinness.
When we began our research on hogging in 2004, we were unaware of the
emerging field of fat studies. Some fifteen years later, the multidisciplinary
and interdisciplinary field has substantially grown. For example, fat studies
now has its own journal; numerous monographs; and edited collections of
research about the societal treatment of fat and how that impacts the lives of
people of size; and popular sessions at international, national, and regional
scholarly meetings. In our introduction to this special issue on fat oppression,
we discuss the meaning of oppression, both generally and within fat studies,
and review the literature on how cultural definitions of fat affect the
CONTACT Ariane Prohaska
aprohaska@ua.edu
Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice,
Box 870320, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0320.
© 2018 Taylor & Francis
2
A. PROHASKA AND J. A. GAILEY
experiences of people who are fat at multiple levels of analysis. We highlight
how the articles selected for this issue enrich the theoretical and empirical
understanding of fat oppression, giving special attention to research that
highlights how fatness intersects with other social identities, such as race,
gender, sexualities, age, and so forth.
Oppression
From a sociological perspective, oppression refers to the systemic constraints
placed on marginalized and underprivileged groups that are institutionalized
via the values, norms, laws, and institutions in a society (Young 1990).
Systemic oppression results in unequal life chances (opportunities) and social
outcomes for marginalized groups. The most pernicious and overt forms of
oppression are institutional barriers, such as discrimination in education, the
workplace, the media, and health care. Less obvious is symbolic oppression
(Crandall 1994), which occurs when marginalized groups are assumed to lack
values deemed crucial to society. For example, racial oppression in the
United States is exacerbated by commonly held beliefs that people of color
—namely, those who identify as African American or Black—do not ascribe
to the values of hard work, self-reliance, and motivation (Sears 1988).
Similarly, people who are fat are often assumed to be lazy, irresponsible,
and gluttonous (Schwartz et al. 2006).
One of the key aspects of oppression is that it is often “invisible” (Frye
1983), and thus oppressed people are frequently blamed for the discrimination and mistreatment they receive, creating a vicious cycle that reinforces
oppression and can lead to the oppressed group internalizing the dominant
ideologies and even feeling responsible for their own marginalization (Collins
1990). If cultural norms about the group become internalized, members of
the marginalized group are more likely to face negative consequences, particularly with regard to economic and psychological well-being. While oppression based on race, class, gender, sexuality, and age has been studied for a few
decades, the introduction of fat studies to the academy, particularly The Fat
Studies Reader (Rothblum and Solovay 2009) and the journal Fat Studies,
created an intellectual space for theoretical and empirical scholarship on
people who are fat and their status as an oppressed group.
Oppression of fat people
Eller (2014) writes that “Fat people suffer, and they suffer in virtue of being
fat” (220). The oppression of people who are fat is systematic and systemic, as
negative ideologies about fat pervade societal institutions. The classification
of “obesity” as “epidemic” in medicine and as a disease by the American
Medical Association resulted in the labeling of fat as a social problem and
FAT STUDIES
3
pathological condition that needs to be remedied. These characterizations
have led to heightened attention on people who are fat not only from medical
professionals but also from academics, the media, the diet industry, and
myriad other institutions in society (e.g., Boero 2013; Gailey 2014). What
Crandall (1994) terms the symbolic prejudice of fat consists of “beliefs and
values that reflect self-determination and the Puritan work ethic” (883). The
rhetoric surrounding the “obesity epidemic” emphasizes individual responsibility, leading to the supposition that people are fat because they eat too
much, exercise too little, and are resistant to “treatments” for their “problems” (e.g., Lupton 2014). These beliefs result in the shaming and blaming
of fat people, and research has shown that people who are fat are frequently
assumed to be lazy, unmotivated, and socially inferior (Schwartz et al. 2006).
Moreover, this implicit bias against people who are fat is developed early in
life (Skinner et al. 2017).
Gailey (2014) argues that people who are fat, as well as other marginalized
groups, experience “hyper(in)visibility,” which renders their bodies and
behaviors constantly policed, while their oppression as a group is ignored.
The labeling of “obesity” as a social problem persists despite scholarly
evidence that shows that much of the attention on “obesity” is overstated
and hyperbolic (see, for instance, Flegal et al. 2005, 2013; Gard and Wright
2005; Wright and Harwood 2009). When circulated by the media, this
misinformation can lead to interpersonal and institutional violence against
fat people (see Rothblum 1999; Saguy and Almeling 2008). In this issue,
O’Toole’s analysis of slimming classes in Ireland reveals that the reliance on
the “obesity epidemic” narrative in fitness culture, which focuses on weight
loss rather than health, again problematizes fat bodies. In essence, slimming
classes focus on the problems with fat and the need for individuals to lose
weight, regardless of their health status. The slimming classes that O’Toole
studied comprise the largest for-profit weight loss program in the country.
Her data indicate that these slimming classes are not only popular but also
help shape the public perception that fat is unhealthy and unattractive.
The medical establishment, politicians, and the media have pathologized
“obesity” and labeled it a disease (Kwan and Graves 2013; Saguy and
Almeling 2008). Barned and O’Doherty’s article about the intersection of
race, body size, and health in Jamaica examines the cultural norms surrounding fat in a non-White, non-North American context, offering an account of
health that subverts the oppressive “obesity epidemic” discourse. They argue
that a slim-thick healthy body discourse, which emerged in their study, is one
such discourse that attends to the fat acceptance ideology. Fat acceptance
activists challenge the medical and public health paradigm that fat is
unhealthy or unattractive. According to this alternative framework, fat is
beautiful, healthy, a form of natural bodily diversity, and the basis for civil
rights claims (Saguy 2013). Moreover, fat acceptance advocates challenge the
4
A. PROHASKA AND J. A. GAILEY
dominant frame by embracing the word “fat” as a basis of identity. In other
words, using the word “fat” as an identity marker serves to challenge the
cultural belief that being fat is the “worst quality a person can have.”
On an institutional level, the rhetoric surrounding the “obesity epidemic”
translates into discrimination against fat people. According to National
Association to Advance Fat Acceptance (2014), size discrimination occurs
as frequently as racial discrimination and has increased since the late 1990s.
In the workplace, people who are fat are often denied access to promotions
and higher wages due to their size (Fikkan and Rothblum 2005; Gapinski,
Schwartz, and Brownell 2006). In education, “obesity” paradigms take prevalence in health, medical, and physical education (O’Brien, Hunter, and
Banks 2007; Sykes and McPhail 2008), and professors who are fat frequently
confront discrimination in their classrooms (Escalera 2009).
In television and film, people who are fat are often portrayed negatively
(Himes and Thompson 2007; Hussin, Frazier, and Thompson 2011; Mendoza
2009; Sender and Sullivan 2008). Fat characters are typically the targets of
fatphobic humor, and makeover shows seek to “fix” fat people through
weight loss. For example, the hit television show The Biggest Loser is broadcast in over 90 countries and features contestants who compete to lose the
most weight through drastic diet changes and exercise with the assistance of a
personal trainer. Some of the contestants reportedly have maintained weight
loss, but others have come forward stating that the show promotes unhealthy
weight loss through questionable means.1 In addition to allegedly promoting
unrealistic weight loss, the show perpetuates the larger societal view that
losing a significant amount of weight is achievable through hard work—as if
fat and laziness are interrelated (Gailey 2014).
People of size are also discriminated against in the legal system. In the
courtroom, people who are fat are presumed guilty more than their thin
counterparts (Beety 2012). Crime victims who are fat are classified as
pitiful and helpless because of their size or, at least for women, not
perceived as believable victims of intimate partner violence or sexual
assault because they do not fit the stereotype of a “typical” (thin or
attractive) victim. Relatedly, many public spaces are inaccessible or unaccommodating to fat people, including airplanes (Huff 2009), other forms
of public transportation, restaurants, doctors’ offices, and so forth (Gailey
2014; Owen 2012). Moreover, fat is not a protected class under discrimination laws in most locations in the world (e.g., Jones 2012; Rothblum
2012). In the current issue, Cat Pausé’s article discusses the difficulties she
faced obtaining a permanent work visa in New Zealand because of her
weight. In other words, New Zealand’s immigration department actively
excludes those whose bodies are deemed fat from receiving work visas
because of the assumed burden that fat bodies will place on New Zealand’s
government sponsored health-care system.
FAT STUDIES
5
Interpersonally, fat women are sanctioned and often mistreated in relationships. Research indicates that fat women are less likely than their thin
counterparts to be labeled as desirable relationship or sexual partners (e.g.,
Chen and Brown 2005; Gailey 2012; Gimlin 2002; Swami, Steadman, & Tovee
2009). Within intimate relationships, fat women are just as likely as thinner
women to experience physical, sexual, and emotional abuse (e.g., Fabrizio
2014; Gailey 2014, 2012; Gailey and Prohaska 2006; Prohaska and Gailey
2010, 2009; Royce 2009). And fat children and adolescents are more likely to
be bullied than their thin peers (Weinstock and Krehbiel 2009).
Oppression, discrimination, and mistreatment result in myriad negative
consequences for people who are fat. Despite the fact that the fat acceptance
movement has fostered feelings of fat pride for some (Gailey 2014, 2012), the
impact of stigma can lead to feelings of shame, isolation, lower self-esteem, poor
body image, and an increased risk of other mental health issues and some
medical conditions compared to their thin counterparts (e.g., Carr and
Friedman 2005; Davidson et al. 2008; Miller and Downey 1999; O’Dea 2006).
Indeed, fat shaming under the guise of concern for health does not lead to
weight loss or to an increase in activities associated with losing weight
(Davidson et al. 2008; Gailey 2014; Puhl, Moss-Racusin, and Schwartz 2007;
Schafer and Ferraro 2011; Sutin and Terracciano 2013). In this issue, Anna
Puhakka contributes to this conversation by presenting a content analysis of a
Finnish campaign called the Scale Rebellion that intended to address fatness
through body positivity and fat activism. Puhakka’s results indicate that rather
than providing a uniform message supporting body positivity, the message of
the Scale Rebellion was often mixed and ambiguous in nature. The main figure
of the campaign, Jenny, often discussed her desire to lose weight, contributing
to mixed messages regarding fatness. Puhakka argues that ambivalence present
in the messages is a product of the stigmatized nature of fatness in the culture
rather than a representation that an activist is a sell-out or fake.
The institutional, interpersonal, and internalized oppression that fat people experience intersects with other types of oppression based on race, class,
gender, ability, sexuality, and nation, among other social statuses (for more
on intersectionality, see Cho, Crenshaw, and McCall 2013; Crenshaw 1991;
Collins 1990, Pausé 2014). It is imperative to examine these relationships
because of the qualitatively different ways that women, people of color,
LGBTQ+, the working class and poor, differently abled, and non-Western
and/or non-North American people, among others, experience fatness within
particular legal and cultural contexts, which is why we chose manuscripts for
this special issue that examine the intersections between fat and other social
identity markers.
6
A. PROHASKA AND J. A. GAILEY
Conclusion
We hope that the articles in this issue generate further discussion about the
complexity of fat oppression as a phenomenon and social force that permeates
our interactions institutionally and interpersonally. As we selected manuscripts
for this issue (and the second special issue on fat oppression, forthcoming), we
heeded the advice of Cat Pausé (2014), urging those who are writing, researching, or publishing fat studies work to “create spaces that allow for intersectional
scholarship, and to be willing to sit at a variety of tables” (84). Although the
scholarship that follows cannot account for the experiences of all people of size,
we trust that Fat Studies has created a space at the table for scholars who
employ an intersectional lens in their analysis. In addition, as feminists in the
field of sociology, we are painfully aware that qualitative methodologies are
frequently subordinated, so we thought it was important to select manuscripts
that utilize these underrepresented methodologies for an issue on oppression.
Moreover, given that we were interested in showcasing research that employs
an intersectional approach, qualitative research methods seemed to be the
natural fit. It is our hope that this issue and the second edition will inspire fat
studies scholars to incorporate intersectional approaches and qualitative methods in future work.
Finally, we would like to thank the authors who responded to our call for
abstracts about fat oppression. We are encouraged that so many scholars are
entering the field of fat studies. We are especially thankful to the reviewers
and to Esther Rothblum for her guidance as we navigated editorship for the
first time. Lastly, we want to thank Hannah Taylor for her editorial support.
Note
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/25/biggest-loser
(accessed April 10, 2010).
contestants_n_370538.html
Notes on contributors
Ariane Prohaska is an Associate Professor of Sociology in the Department of Criminology
and Criminal Justice at the University of Alabama. Her research interests include the social
construction of gender, fat studies, gender victimization, race/gender/class inequality, and
disaster sociology. She has published in Fat Studies, Deviant Behavior, Qualitative Research,
International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, and Journal of Gender Studies. She is
currently examining pageant contestants’ conceptions of beauty, health, and body size in
different types of beauty pageants in the United States.
Jeannine A. Gailey is Associate Professor of Sociology and Chair of the Department of
Women and Gender Studies at Texas Christian University. Her research focuses on the
sociology of the body, fat studies, sexualities, deviance, and organizational wrongdoing. She
is the author of the monograph, The Hyper(in)visible Fat Woman, published by Palgrave
FAT STUDIES
7
Macmillan. Her work has appeared in journals such as Fat Studies, Social Psychology
Quarterly, Deviant Behavior, Qualitative Research, and the Journal of Gender Studies. She is
currently interviewing women sixty years and older about their body image, health, and
conceptions of beauty.
References
Beety, V. 2012. “Criminality and Corpulence: Weight Bias in the Courtroom.” Seattle Journal
for Social Justice 11 (2):523–24.
Boero, N. 2013. “Obesity in the Media: Social Science Weighs In.” Critical Public Health 23
(3):371–80. doi:10.1080/09581596.2013.783686.
Carr, D., and M.A. Friedman. 2005. “Is Obesity Stigmatizing? Body Weight, Perceived
Discrimination, and Psychological Well-Being in the United States.” Journal of Health
and Social Behavior 46 (3):244–59. doi:10.1177/002214650504600303.
Chen, E., and M. Brown. 2005. “Obesity Stigma in Sexual Relationships.” Obesity Research 13
(8):1393–97. doi:10.1038/oby.2005.168.
Cho, S., K. W. Crenshaw, and L. McCall. 2013. “Toward a Field of Intersectionality Studies:
Theory, Applications, and Praxis.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 38
(4):785–810. doi:10.1086/669608.
Collins, P. H. 1990. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of
Empowerment. NY: Routledge.
Crandall, C. 1994. “Prejudice against Fat People: Ideology and Self-Interest.” Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology 66 (5):882–94.
Crenshaw, K. 1991. “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence
against Women of Color.” Stanford Law Review 43 (6):1241–99. doi:10.2307/1229039.
Davidson, K. K., D. L. Schmalz, L. M. Young, and L. L. Birch. 2008. “Overweight Girls Who
Internalize Fat Stereotypes Report Low Psychological Well-Being.” Obesity 16 (S2):30–38.
doi:10.1038/oby.2008.451.
Eller, G.M. 2014. “On Fat Oppression.” Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 24 (3):219–45.
Escalera, E. A. 2009. “Stigma Threat and the Fat Professor: Reducing Student Prejudice in the
Classroom.” In The Fat Studies Reader, Eds. E. Rothblum and S. Solovay, 205–12.
New York, NY: New York University Press.
Fabrizio, M. 2014. “Abundantly Invisible: Fat Oppression as a Framework for Sexual Violence
against Women.” Spaces Between: an Undergraduate Feminist Journal 2:1–14.
Fikkan, J., and E. Rothblum. 2005. “Weight Bias in Employment.” In Weight Bias: Nature,
Consequences, and Remedies, Eds. K. D. Brownell, R. M. Puhl, M. B. Schwartz, and L.
Rudd, 15–28. New York, NY: Guilford Publications.
Flegal, K. M., B. I. Graubard, D. F. Williamson, and M. H. Gail. 2005. “Excess Deaths
Associated with Overweight, Underweight, and Obesity.” JAMA 293:1861–67. doi:
10.1001/jama.293.15.1861.
Flegal, K. M., B. K. Kit, H. Orbana, and B. I. Graubard. 2013. “Association of All-Cause
Mortality with Overweight and Obesity Using Standard Body Mass Index Categories: A
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” JAMA 309:71–82. doi: 10.1001/
jama.2012.113905.
Frye, M. 1983. The Politics of Reality. Freedom, CA: Crossing.
Gailey, J. A. 2012. “Fat Shame to Fat Pride: Fat Women’s Sexual and Dating Experiences.” Fat
Studies 1 (1):114–27. doi:10.1080/21604851.2012.631113.
Gailey, J. A. 2014. The Hyper(In)Visible Fat Woman. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
8
A. PROHASKA AND J. A. GAILEY
Gailey, J. A., and A. Prohaska. 2006. “Knocking of a Fat Girl: An Exploration of Deviance,
Male Sexuality, and Neutralizations.” Deviant Behavior 27 (1):31–46. doi:10.1080/
016396290968353.
Gapinski, K. D., M. B. Schwartz, and K. D. Brownell. 2006. “Can Television Change Anti-Fat
Attitudes and Behavior?” Journal of Applied Biobehavioral Research 11 (1):1–28.
doi:10.1111/j.1751-9861.2006.tb00017.x.
Gard, M., and J. Wright. 2005. The Obesity Epidemic: Science, Morality, and Ideology.
New York, NY: Routledge.
Gimlin, D. 2002. Body Work: Beauty and Self-Image in American Culture. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Himes, S. M., and J. K. Thompson. 2007. “Fat Stigmatization in Television Shows and Movies:
A Content Analysis.” Obesity 15 (3):712–18. doi:10.1038/oby.2007.635.
Huff, J. L. 2009. “Access to the Sky: Airplane Seats and Fat Bodies as Contested Spaces.” In
The Fat Studies Reader, Eds. E. Rothblum and S. Solovay, 176–86. New York: New York
University Press.
Hussin, M., S. Frazier, and J. K. Thompson. 2011. “Fat Stigmatization on YouTube: A
Content Analysis.” Body Image 8 (1):90–92. doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2010.10.003.
Jones, L.E. 2012. “The Framing of Fat: Narratives of Health and Disability in Fat
Discrimination Legislation.” New York University Law Review 87 (6):1996–2039.
Kwan, S., and J. Graves. 2013. Framing Fat: Competing Constructions in Contemporary
Culture. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Lupton, D. 2014. “The Pedagogy of Disgust: The Ethical, Moral and Political Implications of
Using Disgust in Public Health Campaigns.” Critical Public Health 25 (1):1–11.
Mendoza, K. 2009. “Seeing through the Layers: Fat Suits and Thin Bodies in the Nutty
Professor and Shallow Hal.” In The Fat Studies Reader, Eds. E. Rothblum and S. Solovay,
280–88. New York, NY: NYU Press.
Miller, C. T., and K. T. Downey. 1999. “A Meta-Analysis of Heavyweight and Self- Esteem.”
Personality and Social Psychology Review 3 (1):68–84. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0301_4.
National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance (2014). Facts on Size Discrimination. https://
www.naafaonline.com/dev2/assets/documents/naafa_FactSheet_v17_screen.pdf. Accessed
July 5, 2018.
O’Brien, K.S., J.A. Hunter, and M. Banks. 2007. “Implicit Anti-Fat Bias in Physical Educators:
Physical Attributes, Ideology and Socialization.” International Journal of Obesity 31
31:308–14. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijo.0803398.
O’Dea, J. A. 2006. “Self-Concept, Self-Esteem and Body Weight in Adolescent Females: A
Three Year Longitudinal Study.” Journal of Health Psychology 11 (4):599–611. doi:10.1177/
1359105306065020.
Owen, L. 2012. “Living Fat in a Thin-Centric World: Effects of Spatial Discrimination on Fat
Bodies and Selves.” Feminism & Psychology 22 (3):290–306. doi:10.1177/
0959353512445360.
Pausé, C. J. 2014. “X-Static Process: Intersectionality within the Field of Fat Studies.” Fat
Studies: an Interdisciplinary Journal of Body Weight and Society 3 (2):80–85. doi:10.1080/
21604851.2014.889487.
Prohaska, A., and J. A. Gailey. 2009. “Fat Women as Easy Targets: Achieving Masculinity
through Hogging.” In The Fat Studies Reader, Eds. E. Rothblum and S. Solovay, 158–66.
New York: NY: NYU Press.
Prohaska, A., and J. A. Gailey. 2010. “Achieving Masculinity through Sexual Predation: The
Case of Hogging.” Journal of Gender Studies 19 (1):13–25. doi:10.1080/
09589230903525411.
FAT STUDIES
9
Puhl, R. M., C. A. Moss-Racusin, and M. B. Schwartz. 2007. “Internalization of Weight Bias:
Implications for Binge Eating and Emotional Well-Being.” Obesity 15 (1):19–23.
doi:10.1038/oby.2007.521.
Rothblum, E. D. 1999. “Contradictions and Confounds in Coverage of Obesity: Psychology
Textbooks, Journals, and the Media.” Journal of Social Issues 55:355–69. doi: 10.1111/00224537.00120.
Rothblum, E. D. 2012. “Why a Journal on Fat Studies?” Fat Studies 1:3–5. doi: 10.1080/
21604851.2012.633469.
Rothblum, E. D., and S. Solovay. 2009. The Fat Studies Reader. New York, NY: NYU Press.
Royce, T. 2009. “The Shape of Abuse: Fat Oppression as a Form of Violence against Women.”
In The Fat Studies Reader, Eds. E. Rothblum and S. Solovay, 151–57. New York: New York
University Press.
Saguy, A.C. 2013. What’s Wrong With Fat? New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Saguy, A.C., and R. Almeling. 2008. “Fat in the Fire? Science, the News Media, and the
“Obesity Epidemic.” Sociological Forum 23:53–83. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2004.00399.
x-i1.
Schafer, M.H., and K.F. Ferraro. 2011. “The Stigma of Obesity: Does Perceived Weight
Discrimination Affect Identity and Physical Health?” Social Psychology Quarterly 74
(1):76–97. doi:10.1177/0190272511398197.
Schwartz, M. B., L. R. Vartanian, B. A. Nosek, and K. D. Brownell. 2006. “The Influence of
One’s Own Body Weight on Implicit and Explicit Anti-Fat Bias.” Obesity 14 (3):440–47.
doi:10.1038/oby.2006.58.
Sears, D. O. 1988. “Symbolic Racism.” In Eliminating Racism: Profiles in Controversy, Eds. P.
Katz and D. Taylor, 53–84. New York: Plenum Press.
Sender, K., and M. Sullivan. 2008. “Epidemics of Will, Failures of Self-Esteem: Responding to
Fat Bodies in the Biggest Loser and What Not to Wear.” Continuum 22 (4):573–84.
doi:10.1080/10304310802190046.
Skinner, A. C., K. Payne, A. J. Perrin, A. T. Panter, J. B. Howard, A. Bardone-Cone, and E. M.
Perrin. 2017. “Implicit Weight Bias in Children Age 9 to 11 Years.” Pediatrics 140 (1):1–6.
doi:10.1542/peds.2016-3936.
Sutin, A. R., and A. Terracciano. 2013. “Perceived Weight Discrimination and Obesity.” PloS
one 8 (7):1–8. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0070048.
Swami, V., L. Steadman, and M. J. Tovée. 2009. “A Comparison of Body Size Ideals, Body
Dissatisfaction, and Media Influence between Female Track Athletes, Martial Artists, and
Non-Athletes.” Psychology of Sport and Exercise 10 (6):609–14. doi:10.1016/j.
psychsport.2009.03.003.
Sykes, H., and D. McPhail. 2008. “Unbearable Lessons: Contesting Fat Phobia in Physical
Education.” Sociology of Sport 25:66–96. doi: 10.1123/ssj.25.1.66.
Weinstock, J., and M. Krehbiel. 2009. “Fat Youth as Common Targets for Bullying.” In The
Fat Studies Reader, Eds. E. Rothblum and S. Solovay, 120–26. New York: New York
University Press.
Wright, J., and V. Harwood. 2009. Biopolitics and the “Obesity Epidemic”: Governing Bodies.
New York, NY: Routledge.
Young, I.M. 1990. “Five Faces of Oppression.” In Justice and the Politics of Difference, Ed. I.M.
Young, 39–63. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.