So there was a recent post of some right wingers standing next to a ballot box to intimidate voters. This is clearly bad. They also made questionable aesthetic choices, like wearing dad cargo-shorts and growing goatees. This is also clearly bad.

So, what did Chapeau.Chat focus on? The weight of these men of course!

Let's start with the basics:

--Everyone has a range of weights their body is comfortable at. If you try to go too low or too high in this range, your body will start sending your hunger and satiety signals to keep you within that range. While you can go higher or lower in that range by manipulating Calories-in-calories-out, this range is fairly fixed without medical intervention. In other words, some people are just fat.

--There are other uncontrollable factors that effect weight. In Texas, for example, there are fewer walk-able neighborhoods and more access to fast food than here in Portland where there are more new-seasons than mcDonalds or Manhattan where it's easier to take the train than to drive.

--Socially, weight is co-constructed with fitness and self-control. In the protestant value system (the dominant one in the U.S. even among atheists), self control is one of the most important virtues. Fat implies unfit implies poor self control. Thin implies fit implies good self control.

Protestant morality is, here, at odds with reality. Weight here is co-produced by environment, hormones, eating habits and movement habits. All of those things are only partially under our control, and a Portlander is always going to have an easier time being thin than an Austintonian. Moralizing weight the way this community did celebrates protestant morality over basic reality.

As communists, we are better than that.

Call them fascists, make fun of their ugly beards, offer to shoplift them better shorts, but don't fat-shame them.

    • a_blanqui_slate [none/use name, any]
      ·
      2 years ago

      The fact that I can't legally ship my homemade fruit wines via USPS but it is apparently in fact legal to send actually shit via USPS is simultaneously frustrating and hilarious.

      • sweepy [she/her,he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        Sorry, not going to have a discussion about anything besides the fact that you spend your time on this website advocating violence against animals.

        • a_blanqui_slate [none/use name, any]
          ·
          2 years ago

          I'm not advocating violence against animals, I've just made peace with the fact that I don't have a controlling interest in what other people eat. I lost that power when I stopped cooking for room mates after grad school.

          • sweepy [she/her,he/him]
            ·
            2 years ago

            Calling violence "fine" is advocating it. Not being able to control something doesn't make it fine and it doesn't mean you should spend your time advocating it. I can't control other people's racism, I don't spend my time logging onto hexbear, finding every anti-racist post I can, and saying "racism is fine, you can be racist and a leftist, stop splitting the left against our racist comrades." If I did that I'd be advocating racism.

            • a_blanqui_slate [none/use name, any]
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              I mean the subject of the post is that we're all in agreement that it's inappropriate to step into an individuals personal relationship with weight, food, and their body.

              You wanting to add the carve out "unless you feel morally justified in doing so" kinda deflates the original claim into nothingness given that anyone can morally justify anything to themselves.

              • sweepy [she/her,he/him]
                ·
                2 years ago

                You shouldn't shame people for being fat because being fat isn't wrong, not because putting something in my mouth causes it to enter some sacred inviolate realm of personal autonomy. If I kill and eat you, that's not "my personal relationship with food", that's a relationship of violence with you. If I pay a poor person to kill a chicken so I can eat it, that's not my personal relationship with food, that's a relationship of violence with that chicken.

                • a_blanqui_slate [none/use name, any]
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 years ago

                  If you think that your eating chicken is a relationship of violence that inappropriately abrogates the rights of a chicken then you shouldn't do that.

                  I'm not going to get tangled in others people's relationship with their body and their diets though. Far too fraught. And that holds even if I'm certain I know better than them and would be morally justified in doing so. Because I'm a moron who is wrong all the time.

                  • sweepy [she/her,he/him]
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 years ago

                    Yes you are correct, eating chicken isn't fine. Being a reactionary is not fine and not something we should advocate by calling it fine. Tolerance does not extend to reactionaries. A chicken's body is not your body and not part of your relationship with your body.