i stumbled upon this firestorm last night and wanted to offer my perspective, being an expert on absolutely none of things pertaining to any of it. The premise of said storm: There's a new rom-com sitcom starring plus-size actors. CNN remarked about how much of the comedy in it was 'fat jokes.' Marie Claire tasked Maura Kelly, their 'Sex & Dating' blogger/columnist (blogumnist? YES. i'm awesome.) to address whether TV viewers were uncomfortable watching large actors act out physical intimacy. The blogumnist promptly fulfilled her assignment and thoroughly revealed herself to truly be vapid, ignorant and cruel. Then she apologized for coming across as vapid, ignorant and cruel.
My purpose in jumping into this fray is not to decry her dumbass opinion that 'fatties are like, totally icky and stuff', because plenty of internetters are already doing so and it's too obvious to state that her position is tragic and mean. No one stops the presses when a duck quacks, so to ring the alarm when a halfwit blathers halfwittedly is pointless. What i'm observing is how mystifyingly un-self-aware Maura Kelly is and how, evidently, Marie Claire magazine employs a writer who doesn't seem to even read over what she's written before posting it.
From her post:
"Yes, I think I'd be grossed out if I had to watch two characters with rolls and rolls of fat kissing each other ... because I'd be grossed out if I had to watch them doing anything. To be brutally honest, even in real life, I find it aesthetically displeasing to watch a very, very fat person simply walk across a room — just like I'd find it distressing if I saw a very drunk person stumbling across a bar or a heroine addict slumping in a chair."
From her apology:
"Believe it or not, I never wanted anyone to feel bullied or ashamed after reading this."
From me:
She didn't see how "Even watching you put one foot in front of the other makes me feel physically ill" was going to make people feel ashamed or picked on?? She may not have wanted to incite those feelings, but she had to anticipate them. She used the words 'brutally honest' and then was surprised that people found her to be savage, cruel, harsh, coarse and/or inhuman? ...all words from the dictionary's definition of brutal, the word SHE chose to describe her opinion.
From her post:
Yes, anorexia is sick, but at least some slim models are simply naturally skinny.
From her apology:
A lot of what I said was unnecessary. It wasn't productive, either.
From me:
Nor was it remotely accurate. People can be naturally skinny but not naturally fat?
From her post:
Now, don't go getting the wrong impression: I have a few friends who could be called plump. I'm not some size-ist jerk.
From her apology:
People have accused me of being a bully in my post. I never intended to be that — it's actually the very last thing I want to be, as a writer or a person. But I know that I came off that way, and I really cannot apologize enough to the people whom I upset.
From me:
She commands us to not get the 'wrong' impression: that she is a 'size-ist jerk', (implying that we would be so unintelligent as to grossly misinterpret her so clearly presented argument). Therefore she must have a shred of awareness that her opinion is unseemly, but then claims such low manners were the 'last thing' she wanted to demonstrate. Hmmm.... methinks a bull has shat nearby because i certainly smell something.
Also, just because she has 'a few friends who could be called plump' (or could be called 'fatties', judging by the title of her post) does not mean she doesn't secretly hate the sight of her friends kissing their beloveds because of all the 'rolls and rolls of fat.' i wonder how many Christmas cards she's getting from her plump friends this year.
She does not admit to or apologize for being a bully (or another b-word i can think of), only that she 'came off that way'. How very big of her! (pun quite intended) The creator of the sitcom in question, which, of course, the blogumnist admits to never having seen, remarked to Entertainment Weekly that in reading the post, he '
pictured a girl sitting in a high school cafeteria saying snotty things to her other snotty friends.'
That's about as accurate as it gets, and this writer never saw that in her work? Astounding.
From her post:
I also know how tough it can be for truly heavy people to psych themselves up for the long process of slimming down. [... ]
But ... I think obesity is something that most people have a ton of control over. It's something they can change, if only they put their minds to it.
From her apology:
A few commenters and one of my friends mentioned that my extreme reaction might have grown out of my own body issues, my history as an anorexic, and my life-long obsession with being thin. [...] I think that's an accurate insight.
From me:
This blogumnist demonstrates what i've noticed in others before: anorexia can be sympathized with, but morbid obesity cannot. Both require dangerous mental, emotional and physical obsessions. The psychoses are different, but to say 'well mine is a psychological condition and yours is pure laziness' is ignorant. If you told an anorexic he or she could change if they 'only put their mind to it' you'd be flogged.
Also, if she's spent a lifetime dealing with body issues and weight obsessions, why did it take commenting strangers and (only one?) friend to point out that maybe, JUST MAYBE, she would have a hard time being objective about the subject of positively-presented plus size tv characters? (i wonder if it was one of her 'few plump friends'...) She never paused to think that the real voice writing this post might be the troubled person she's been battling to quiet her whole life? Gollum, meet Smeagol, Smeagol, meet Gollum.
i'm not saying we all have to love everyone all the time....well, there's THIS.... damn. Let me try that again:
This writer isn't required to share my opinion or yours. She isn't required to even obey generally accepted rules of social conduct. She has the right to free speech and can shout, 'People who don't look/act/think like me are less worthy and should be sterilized!!!!' from the rooftops. BUT- to be employed as a magazine writer, to accept an assignment, and then to ramble thoughtlessly (and not even eloquently, i might add. (She's a rather poor writer in general.)) is irresponsible. To then be surprised at readers' disappointment in her thoughtlessness is demonstrative of a clear lack of maturity on her part and a true lack of professionalism by her and her superiors. Hilariously, she opens her post by calling herself "kind of clueless." Too bad it's in reference to current television shows and not, more accurately, WORDS AND WHAT THEY MEAN.
In sum, she shouldn't have apologized for what she wrote.
She should've read what she wrote in the first place and either accepted it or put it in the trash where it belonged.
Lord, what a dope. Can't wait to buy her novel.
