Awesome, especially for those with short attention spans (not a lot of reading).
Okay, I’m not totally speechless; this is sick. This in fact, epitomizes bad parenting. From a psychological standpoint, I think it is fair to assume that this is incredibly detrimental to a child’s mental welfare and malleable/influential self-image. These girls are at an age where they are being molded and their most powerful role-models are the presence and teachings of their parents. Not only is this sexualizing little girls-children, and teaching them that worth is based on superficiality and a status quo “beauty,” but it spotlights them for predators and that, is not being a protective and sensible parent.
This is….shit culture at its best. Really…swimsuit competitions, for 6 year-olds? Are these parents so dense that they see nothing wrong with this, or is is mere desperation for their child to be the “prettiest and best,” that complete denial warrants their behaviors?
We are thrilled and delighted to have a new talented, dynamic and awesome contributor! Kate Pittman is an animator and graphic designer who currently resides in Phoenix, AZ. Kate is already an inspiration and powerful voice to a following she has generated via her personal blog: This is Not a Diet
Kate is a Feminist and want’s to do her part in the fight for Women’s Rights, and she is. Kate will be writing primarily about women and women’s issues in current events, media and pop culture (and we know there are a lot!). Kate’s articles may at some times be controversial, but this is why we here at Loose Garments, love her! Kate is unfiltered, true, speaks from her heart and has something substantial to say, all you have to do is read…
More to Life than Thin and Pretty, by Kate Pittman
Let’s get one thing straight: I did not set out to lose weight because I thought it would make my life better to be thinner. Being fat never held me back from living my life.
I never had trouble finding a date in my twenties, despite my weight. In fact, I would say I am quite pleased when I look back at the range of men I dated during my “wild years.” I did have trouble in this area as a teenager, but that quickly passed when I moved out of my small judgmental town and into bigger more diverse cities.
Being fat didn’t stop me from going out on my own at a younger age than normal, supporting myself and finding my independence. It didn’t stop me from making hard choices for myself and looking out for my best interests. It didn’t stop me from escaping a bad family situation, the likes of which most people do not escape from unscathed.
I made my own path. I dropped out of college after the first try because it wasn’t right and I didn’t go back until I was 25. When I did go back, it was on my own terms and it was right. I gave it everything I had and graduated with honors and the coveted Best Portfolio of my class.
I was hired at an excellent and well-paying job before I even graduated and have been working and succeeding beyond anyone’s expectations ever since. I currently make more money than any of my friends who graduated from Ivy League schools several years before me.
I am in a 5 year relationship with a man I love. I would call him my soul mate if I believed in such a concept. We would be married if either of us believed in marriage. I am child-free by choice.
I did all of that while carrying an extra 120 pounds. Being obese doesn’t mean you lay down and die. It doesn’t mean you have no life. It doesn’t mean you can’t find love, have a career, be a success, or be a party animal. It doesn’t make you worthless or invisible. Being obese, for me, was an inconvenience, not a barrier to life.
It bothers me to no end when I hear women say “If I was thin, I would ___” I want to say, “What’s stopping you?!” Or when they say “No man is interested in me because I can’t lose this 5 pounds.” Girl, please. It has nothing to do with your weight. It’s all in the attitude. Personally, I wouldn’t want to be with someone who was only interested in me physically anyway.
Now that I have lost an extreme amount of weight, I understand that of course everyone is going to notice. Everyone will notice that I’m wearing cuter clothes and just generally looking “more attractive” in terms of what is socially ideal. Men who never noticed I existed are suddenly finding reasons to say hello to me. Cute, put-together women all the sudden want to be my friend. This might all sound great to someone, but it is very frustrating to me.
I am so much more than what I look like. There are so many more interesting things about me. If you didn’t want to be my friend or my lover when I was overweight- I am not interested in knowing you now. And if, god forbid, you are the type of person who makes fun of overweight people, please, do not do so in my presence. If you insult them, you insult me. And I’m in shape now. You can run, but I will catch you!
Losing a lot of weight brings to the forefront of my attention just how much we are judged by our outward appearances. I know there’s nothing to be done about it. If anything, the focus on appearance only becomes more prevalent as time goes by. Plastic surgery, once shunned as a taboo, is completely normal. It is completely normal to cut yourself open and sew yourself back up in the name of vanity. Doesn’t this bother anyone else?
Some days I feel like I might be the only woman on earth who has decided not to swallow the “Be thin and Be happy, You aren’t good enough the way you are” myth. Some days, I feel like it is unacceptable for me to just say “I am fine the way I am. I do not need to lose any more weight, have perkier breasts, or firmer thighs. Yes, I have cellulite and stretch marks but so what? I’m healthy, and that’s good enough for me.” But I am going to keep saying it anyway.
Because there’s so much more to life than being thin and pretty.
A Rite of Torture for Girls
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF , Published: May 11, 2011 , HARGEISA, Somaliland
Damon Winter/The New York Times (Nicholas D. Kristof)
Original Article NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/12/opinion/12kristof.html?scp=5&sq=Nicholas%20D.%20Kristof%20&st=cse
People usually torture those whom they fear or despise. But one of the most common forms of torture in the modern world, incomparably more widespread than waterboarding or electric shocks, is inflicted by mothers on daughters they love.
It’s female genital mutilation — sometimes called female circumcision — and it is prevalent across a broad swath of Africa and chunks of Asia as well. Mothers take their daughters at about age 10 to cutters like Maryan Hirsi Ibrahim, a middle-aged Somali woman who says she wields her razor blade on up to a dozen girls a day.
“This tradition is for keeping our girls chaste, for lowering the sex drive of our daughters,” Ms. Ibrahim told me. “This is our culture.”
Ms. Ibrahim prefers the most extreme form of genital mutilation, called infibulation or Pharaonic circumcision. And let’s not be dainty or euphemistic. This is a grotesque human rights abuse that doesn’t get much attention because it involves private parts and is awkward to talk about. So pardon the bluntness about what infibulation entails.
The girls’ genitals are carved out, including the clitoris and labia, often with no anesthetic. What’s left of the flesh is sewn together with three to six stitches — wild thorns in rural areas, or needle and thread in the cities. The cutter leaves a tiny opening to permit urination and menstruation. Then the girls’ legs are tied together, and she is kept immobile for 10 days until the flesh fuses together.
When the girl is married and ready for sex, she must be cut open by her husband or by a respected woman in the community.
All this is, of course, excruciating. It also leads to infections and urinary difficulties, and scar tissue can make childbirth more dangerous, increasing maternal mortality and injuries such as fistulas.
This is one of the most pervasive human rights abuses worldwide, with three million girls mutilated each year in Africa alone, according to United Nations estimates. A hospital here in Somaliland found that 96 percent of women it surveyed had undergone infibulation. The challenge is that this is a form of oppression that women themselves embrace and perpetuate.
“A young girl herself will want to be cut,” Ms. Ibrahim told me, vigorously defending the practice. “If a girl is not cut, it would be hard for her to live in the community. She would be stigmatized.”
Kalthoun Hassan, a young mother in an Ethiopian village near Somaliland, told me that she would insist on her daughters being cut and her sons marrying only girls who had been. She added: “It is God’s will for girls to be circumcised.”
For four decades, Westerners have campaigned against genital cutting, without much effect. Indeed, the Western term “female genital mutilation” has antagonized some African women because it assumes that they have been “mutilated.” Aid groups are now moving to add the more neutral term “female genital cutting” to their lexicon.
Is it cultural imperialism for Westerners to oppose genital mutilation? Yes, perhaps, but it’s also justified. Some cultural practices such as genital mutilation — or foot-binding or bride-burning — are too brutish to defer to.
But it is clear that the most effective efforts against genital mutilation are grass-roots initiatives by local women working for change from within a culture. In Senegal, Ghana, Egypt and other countries, such efforts have made headway.
Here among Somalis, reformers are trying a new tack: Instead of telling women to stop cutting their daughters altogether, they encourage them to turn to a milder form of genital mutilation (often involving just excision of part or all of the clitoris). They say that that would be a step forward and is much easier to achieve.
Although some Christians cut their daughters, it is more common among Muslims, who often assume that the tradition is Islamic. So a crucial step has been to get a growing number of Muslim leaders to denounce the practice as contrary to Islam, for their voices carry particular weight.
At one mosque in the remote town of Baligubadle, I met an imam named Abdelahi Adan, who bluntly denounces infibulation: “From a religious point of view, it is forbidden. It is against Islam.”
Maybe the tide is beginning to turn, ever so slowly, against infibulation, and at least we’re seeing some embarrassment about the practice. In Baligubadle, a traditional cutter named Mariam Ahmed told me that she had stopped cutting girls — apparently because she knows that foreigners disapprove. Then a nurse in the local health clinic told me that she had treated Ms. Ahmed’s own daughter recently for a horrific pelvic infection and urinary blockage after the girl was infibulated by her mother.
I confronted Ms. Ahmed. She grudgingly acknowledged cutting her daughter but quickly added that she had intended only a milder form of circumcision. She added quickly: “It was an accident.”
Women covering war
Female correspondents recall their historic role reporting from Vietnam
Thursday, March 30, 2000
By Cristina Rouvalis and Bill Schackner, Post-Gazette staff writers
In 1967, Jurate Kazickas finagled a spot on the TV game show “Password,” but she wasn’t looking to get rich. She was trying to scrounge up enough money to fly to a place that most men her age desperately wanted to avoid — the jungles of Vietnam.
|“The first time I saw a soldier stop breathing, all filthy dirty, it was the most horrible death I could imagine,” says Jurate Kazickas, who is shown interviewing soldiers in Bien Hoa Army base, outside of Saigon, in 1967.|
Kazickas, a researcher for Look magazine, had been told by her boss that there was no way she would be sent to cover the war in Vietnam. After all, she was 24, totally green and had never published a word. The magazine’s male war correspondent had just been killed in Vietnam. It wasn’t about to send a woman.
But Kazickas was obsessed with getting a piece of the story of the decade. With her $500 “Password” prize money, she bought a one-way plane ticket to Saigon and became part of a gutsy group of women who forever changed the face of war reporting.
Kazickas got incredible access as a free-lancer, slogging through the jungles with U.S. troops. The soldiers liked talking to the 6-foot-tall, exotic-looking reporter, but their higher-ups hated that she was dodging mortar fire and photographing them in bloody battles.
“If I heard it once, I heard it a thousand times, ‘Combat is no place for a woman.’ “
Combat is arguably no place for anyone, male or female. But seven women who risked their lives to chronicle the hell of the Vietnam War will converge Friday, April 7, at West Virginia University for a reunion celebrating their place in journalism history.
The panel at 8 p.m. in the Health Sciences Auditorium will take place three weeks before the 25th anniversary of the fall of Saigon. Christine Martin, interim dean of WVU’s Perley Isaac Reed School of Journalism, tracked down the panelists and is recording their stories in a book and in a documentary with a colleague.
The women war correspondents coming to Morgantown won’t reminisce about hanging out at a hotel bar in Saigon. Many of them covered combat, and Kazickas, now a 57-year-old free-lance writer in New York City, even has faint scars from the bloody siege of Khe Sanh.
It was a quiet day, March 8, 1968, and Kazickas was interviewing a group of Marines in the sunshine. Suddenly she heard a whistling sound and the men shouted, “Incoming!” A rocket exploded 50 feet away. Instead of throwing herself on the ground, she made the mistake of running toward the bunker. Shrapnel tore into her face, arms, legs and rear end.
Word traveled quickly that a female reporter was among those who had been helicoptered to a hospital in Da Nang. The military didn’t send her flowers. One colonel said, “She got what she was looking for.”
An obligation to go
Women were chronicling war before Vietnam, but never in such numbers or with such lasting impact. During World War II, an estimated 127 American women received Army accreditation, and some, such as Marguerite Higgins, made a name as war correspondents.
|Denby Fawcett aboard a jeep in Saigon in 1967. A chance meeting she had with Gen. William C. Westmoreland in a remote Army base in the Central Highlands led Westmoreland to try to ban women reporters from staying overnight in the field. That proposal was contested by women reporters and later rescinded.|
But overall these women, Martin said, occupied a small and precarious niche in journalism. When male journalists who had been drafted as soldiers returned from war, they reclaimed all the good assignments, leaving women out in the cold.
Because Vietnam was an undeclared war, it was paradise for free-lancers. All a reporter needed to secure a press pass was a letter from three news organizations expressing interest in using their work.
A press card let them roam the battlefields cheaply. It entitled them to free military ground and air transportation, interviews with field commanders, use of TELEX, food and shelter and even fatigue pants, combat boots and cushion-soled socks.
“There were flights everyday to Saigon,” said Martin, a native of Jeannette. “A lot more women went.”
All told, 467 women correspondents, including 267 Americans, made the trip.
Many women went over initially as free-lancers or even girlfriends. The only reason Laura Palmer went to Saigon was because she was dating a pediatrician who was stationed there. The romance fizzled, but she stayed in Vietnam to be a stringer for ABC-Radio and to write for Rolling Stone magazine. Years later, she wrote the book “Shrapnel in the Heart,” a chronicle of those who left poems and letters at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.
As the Vietnam War dragged on and the women’s movement took hold, women went to Vietnam as full-time correspondents for news organizations.
In the early 70s, Edith Lederer and Tad Bartimus became Saigon correspondents for The Associated Press and later landed prestigious overseas posts and covered other wars. Bartimus begged and begged to go to Vietnam, and finally went over in 1973, saying she was “too stupid to be scared.”
Others went to Vietnam with some trepidation. UPI reporter Tracy Wood had mixed emotions when she was asked to go to Saigon in 1972.
“I am not a violent person by temperament,” said Wood, now the investigations editor for the Orange County Register in California. “You know you are going to see people get killed. It was not my life’s ambition. But I didn’t want to say ‘no.’ I felt an obligation to the sisterhood. If you turned it down, it would hurt all kinds of women.”
A fight to stay in battle
Even though women in Vietnam easily got press credentials, they were not always welcomed on the front lines of combat, especially early in the war. The biggest threat to their livelihoods came in June 1967, when Denby Fawcett, a 26-year-old woman filing battlefield stories for the Honolulu Advertiser, unwittingly became the focus of a tug-of-war between women and the military.
|The press pass of Laura Palmer.|
Fawcett, who had quit her job on the women’s page of another newspaper, had traveled out to a remote army base in the Central Highlands. Gen. William Westmoreland, commanding officer for U.S. troops, helicoptered into the base on short notice to boost morale of the troops, who had just suffered 64 casualties. As he mingled with the soldiers, Westmoreland did a double-take: there was Fawcett, a woman he recognized from back home. Her mother, Suzanne, played tennis back in Honolulu with Westmoreland’s wife, Kitsy. The general asked Fawcett how long she had been there. Several days, she replied.
Fawcett later learned that the seemingly casual encounter led Westmoreland to decide that women should no longer be allowed to stay overnight in the field. For the women war correspondents, such a directive would have been career death since it often was impossible to get to a battle location for a story and then back to Saigon the same day.
“You couldn’t demand a helicopter to take you out in the evening,” said Fawcett, now a political reporter for KITV-TV in Honolulu.
A group of women successfully lobbied against the directive and kept their battlefield access.
The cracks about them continued, though. They were bad luck, a logistical nightmare when it came to considerations like toilets and just plain stupid to come to war, some were told. Otherwise flattering news accounts of them found a way to be condescending. A story in the Army Reporter referred to Kazickas as “a pretty, round-eyed brunette” who was a morale booster for soldiers.
But being female had advantages, too. The soldiers liked talking to the rare female reporter, and standing out in the crowd helped when trying to bum a ride on a helicopter.
“You sure got noticed in a sea of 25 male reporters all scrambling to get on a helicopter. They would say, ‘We will take three of you and her,’ ” Kazickas said.
Women also came off as less threatening when they interviewed the Vietnamese women and children. This enabled them to do the stereotypical “soft” women’s stories, the human angle that became more important as Americans started questioning the wisdom of this war.
“At times, the women were more attuned to the human side of the war and the Vietnamese side of the war while many of us were zeroing in on the American side,” said George Esper, a celebrated war correspondent for The Associated Press.
Bartimus liked writing stories that some men dismissed as the “sob-sister stuff” — the student who played an off-key piano in a public square of a devastated city, the Vietnamese children who walked to school in clean uniforms past dead bodies.
“I wasn’t attracted to the bang-bang. War is not about shooting. It is about destruction,” she said.
Anne Morrissy Merick, an ABC-TV correspondent, also made no apologies for covering the human side of combat.
“The men were over there to cover the war, and I would cover the role of a nurse in Vietnam. They thought I was dumb. I thought they were dumb for just chasing firefights,” said Merick, who sometimes had her softer features cut from the broadcast in favor of the bang-bang of the nation’s first television war.
“It made better television to see people cowering in foxholes with a lot of banging and shooting and rocket fire.”
Still, some female war correspondents, including Kazickas, ran from stereotypical women’s stories. She resented it when commanding officers asked her why she wasn’t writing about orphans and refugees. Even so, it was wrenching to do combat reporting, interviewing an innocent young soldier one day, and seeing him dead the next.
“The first time I saw a soldier stop breathing, all filthy dirty, it was the most horrible death I could imagine.”
She rarely saw other female reporters, and though she would later become an AP correspondent, Kazickas often felt alone and lowly tromping through the swamps of Vietnam.
“It was very, very lonely. I had no girlfriends. No one visited me in the hospital. I was the lowest of the low, a 24-year-old girl bopping around. But I knew I was part of one of the most profound, important events in American history. It was a real privilege. I never took it lightly.”
In the April/May 2011 of POZ Magazine (a magazine that promotes literacy in health, life and HIV), there was an inspiring article dedicated to a gay right’s activist who is risking his life every day for this life-threatening fight. He believes and fights for something so simple as the basic human right to exist for those who are part of the LGBT community in Africa. Many times, if someone is even accused of being gay or lesbian in certain parts of Africa, they are murdered . I’ve scanned the article and click to enlarge below. It’s eye-opening.
One of our Heroines, Terry O’Neill (President of NOW), speaks today in D.C.! She has been an avid and prominent activist for women’s rights, tirelessly fighting for what she believes in, and what she believes in for all women. Her message has always been very inspiring and powerful. Props to Terry!
If you can’t make it or follow up on what she talks about in her statements today, please read her message and what her goals have been and what she fights for, for women every single day! I have personally seen her speak and she is inspiring, moving, powerful, courageous, genuine, brilliant, and will not step down to anyone and she will not take no for an answer!
I am honored and humbled to begin serving you as president of the National Organization for Women with my sister officers, Bonnie Grabenhofer (Executive Vice President), Erin Matson (Action Vice President) and Allendra Letsome (Membership Vice President), on this first day of our term. We take our charge seriously: We are here to serve you, the grassroots arm of the women’s movement.
I share your vision of full equality and justice for all women and girls, and I pledge to modernize the women’s movement by tapping into the energy around the country and bringing more women to the sidewalks, statehouses and in-person and online forums where feminist dreams become reality. I will work tirelessly to strengthen the grassroots, collaborating with you every step of the way.
I will support, empower and amplify the change you’re leading in your own community. I will also lead cutting-edge national action campaigns to demand the equality we deserve. Up immediately on the docket are campaigns to:
- Build the feminist case for single-payer health care, including coverage for the full range of women’s reproductive services, so that every woman and girl, no matter her race or immigration status, has access to the health care that is her human right
- Achieve equal marriage and full lesbian and queer rights nationwide, implementing a state-by-state, community-by-community strategy alongside national efforts to immediately repeal the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA) and “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”
- Pass the Equal Rights Amendment and ratify the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) without the addition of harmful reservations, understandings and declarations (RUDs)
I am committed to not just implementing, but also building, these campaigns with your input, expertise and vision for justice. Soon I will reach out with my team to tap your ideas and solicit your feedback. We are putting together new ways to communicate and connect with you, because we believe in the power of NOW, we believe in the power of you and we know your voice gives feminism the power to achieve full equality for every woman and girl!
President, National Organization for Women
Another disturbing tradition to come out of Africa that puts girls (some as young as 6) and women, in horrendously traumatizing, disgusting, dangerous and reprehensible violations of basic human rights and protection. Please read. (Link below)
The female nude, ahhhhhh, the luxurious, the sexualized, the hyper-sexualized, the vulgar, the dainty, the morally grotesque, abstract, disproportionate, the deliberate shock value, the linear perception and recognition of the female figure’s beauty, etc., etc… Nature has given women beauty in form, no matter the size, flaws or shape; women’s bodies, the feminine figure, is abundantly beautiful. This is subjective and so is art; hence the vast and dominant interpretation of the feminine in art and through out art’s history. Beside the obvious disposition of an aesthetically pleasing subject matter to look at, I wondered, if it goes deeper for male artists; is there more substance to depicting women, beside the conscious appeal for them? I interviewed my friend Maciek Jasik, an artist (photographer) based out of New York, and knew he would be honest with his response to my question. Maciek recently completed and exhibited a personal photo project titled, Bypassing the Rational, where he photographed the female form, as well as male. The photos are marvelous and unconventional. You can view his work at: http://www.maciekjasik.com
Here are his responses…
1) Maciek, in your recent series Bypassing the Rational, you depict the female figure (as well as male) in nontraditional poses. Some forms are in motion, spastic, awkward and mostly wild in nature. What was your intention whilst capturing this, as opposed to the very common depiction of the female form in a flattering and feminine position?
the female form. I’m trying to go beyond that.
Our form is only superficial after all. And what’s inside of us, our
energy, who we are, how we respond to the world around us, won’t be
revealed just by our curves or the symmetry in our face. My project is
about revealing our varied energies and identities through color and
motion, from the grotesque to the ethereal. Within all of us, men and
women, that range is possible. I employ every size and shape of woman
to illustrate this idea.
but a vital element as a mother, sister, daughter. Every gaze of a
woman can be loaded with meaning from any of those sources.
Personally, I am intrigued by the incredible variety of women’s
bodies, which unfortunately in our society is heavily
under-represented in the media, especially in fashion. Women are
beautiful in many different ways.
male-dominated. I think the numbers have gotten much better over the
last twenty years and there are many amazing female artists I greatly
admire, from Sally Mann to Martina Ivanow-Hoogland to Remedios Varo. I
think art can still be a conservative institution and there are many
ways that women can be dissuaded from feeling that art can be an
outlet for them, which is gradually being worn away. Hopefully it will
be.When I shoot, I act as professionally as possible. Unfortunately, many
women who pose nude encounter creeps that make them feel uncomfortable
and preyed upon. This makes them wary of working with new male
photographers because they don’t know if they are in fact serious.
That’s bad for everyone. So if I treat them respectfully, that can
help foster more trust and goodwill.
It’s not hard to shoot nudes now, even if a woman is very attractive,
because I’m there to do one thing, produce amazing work. And I’m
focused on that. You get over having naked people in your studio and
it becomes no big deal.
Buy your tickets now!! More information here.
Angela Davis is a political activist with a wide range of interests to fight for. Her issues have included racism, the prison-industrial complex, sexism and gay rights. She is from Birmingham Alabama, holds a Ph.D. in philosophy, and was involved with the Black Panther Party and the Civil Rights Movement. Angela is also a professor (UCLA, UC Santa Cruz) and author (Abolition Democracy: Beyond Prisons, Torture, and Empire, Seven Stories Press, 2005).
This will be a wonderful talk and Loose Garments will be there (and blogging about it soon).
Please go to http://www.fora.tv for the full interview. Bronwyn is brilliant and has such interesting perspectives on this matter.
A detailed account of the Texas cheerleader who has been blamed for her rape: http://www.politicususa.com/en/texas-cheerleader-rape
“In evaluating the details, I have determined that the Silsbee Independent School District, the criminal justice system and the Silsbee community have failed this victim massively, disgracefully and irredeemably.”
“At about 2:40a.m., October 19, 2008, police were called to a Silsbee home where a party had been held. Police found her under a pool table, half naked and sobbing. H.S., then 16, alleged that three Silsbee High football players had cornered her in the room, locked the door and raped her. She started screaming for help. “Stop! Seriously, stop it. No!” When other people began pounding at the door, the football players jumped out a window. At least one had left his clothing behind. Witnesses from that night say that outside, a bare naked suspect, Rahkeem Bolton, was verbally abusive, yelling blood-curdling insults about the victim and threatening harm to the house owner if she refused to give him his clothes.”
“At the school, fellow students would yell “Slut!” and “Bitch!” at her, but nobody would report them to school administration. She was repeatedly harassed in the school cafeteria — but instead of disciplining those who were retaliating against her, the school administration told her to stay away from the cafeteria. For good measure, they told her not to attend homecoming. (She had apparently received threats saying that if she attended the homecoming, she would be shot with a gun). This is to say, the school administration itself retaliated against her but was never held legally accountable, despite that previous statement from David Sheffield, the prize-winning District Attorney who didn’t bother to get an expedited rape kit result. “
Thank you, Scott Rose, for writing such a good article!
This study, and this one… oh, and this one too, all show that there is a causal relationship between food restriction (or dieting) and weight gain. A direct link! Not only that – the more you diet, the more weight you gain. The reason this happens is because your brain freaks out when you don’t eat even though you are hungry. Your brain panics because it thinks you are starving. Luckily, your neural connections were built to protect you from things like starvation, so your pre-frontal cortex responds by increasing your feelings of pleasure and happiness when you do finally eat. Your frontal lobe actually changes its chemical responses to trick you into eating more, and this change can be pretty permanent depending on how severely and for how long you starve yourself.
Research actually shows that you don’t just gain a little bit of weight from dieting, but you are significantly more likely to become overweight or obese. This means that most people, who are at a healthy body weight throughout their lives, are more likely to have never dieted.
As extremes are never healthy, the increased chance of overweight and obesity go hand-in-hand with some other negative health consequences. Immunology research shows that your immune system responds to overabundant fat cells the same way it reacts to invading foreign cells. This means that obesity is experienced by the body like a chronic illness. Your immune system then constantly sends out protein messages from overabundant fat tissue to recruit killer cells to attack the fat cells (the T cells never win). With time, the constant elevated inflammatory proteins in your blood stream leads to stiffened blood vessels and ultimately contributes to high blood pressure, diabetes, and possibly even brain damage. Both extremes of weight loss and gain seem to be pretty bad for your body… and research shows that one can cause the other.
So what is the take-home message? Moderation. Focus on your health instead of your weight, and eat when you are hungry.