Unlearning Fat Shame: A New Conversation About Body Size

In this episode of The Culture Hug Podcast we dive into Obesity. Obesity is often misunderstood—and far too often judged. In this episode, we peel back the layers behind weight, exploring how trauma, genetics, epigenetics, and systemic bias all shape the conversation around body size. It's not just about willpower or “calories in, calories out.” We dive into the science of why weight loss isn’t always as simple as hitting the gym or eating less, and how hundreds of genes can play a role in metabolism, appetite, and fat storage. We also challenge harmful narratives in the media and examine the racist roots of BMI and how body size bias intersects with history—including links to slavery. Learn how to recognize and confront fatphobia—in yourself, in others, and in the systems around us—without shame or blame. Finally, we talk about how to approach conversations about weight with compassion, why health exists on a spectrum, and how to become a more informed and empathetic ally to people in larger bodies. This episode is about breaking down bias, building understanding, and promoting dignity at every size.

Sources: 

• American Psychological Association. (n.d.). Bystander intervention tip sheet.
• Association for Size Diversity and Health. (2024). Health at Every Size® principles.
• Ata, R. N., & Thompson, J. K. (2010). Weight bias in the media: A review of recent research. Obesity Facts, 3(1), 41–46. https://doi.org/10.1159/000276547
• Crane, M. (2024, December 13). The racist history of fatphobia and weight stigma. Within Health.
• Doctronic.ai. (2024, December 3). Understanding and overcoming weight stigma: A guide for patients and healthcare providers.
• Fulton, M., Dadana, S., & Srinivasan, V. N. (2023, October 26). Obesity, stigma, and discrimination. StatPearls Publishing.
• Gillette, H. (2024, February 22). Is obesity genetic or environmental? Healthline.
• Harding, R., & Roberts, L. (n.d.). Does repeated trauma exposure increase the risk of obesity? A systematic review. The University of Buckingham.
• Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Center for Health Communication. (n.d.). Unpacking fatphobia, weight discrimination, and their deadly repercussions.
• Kramer, R., Drury, C. R., Forsberg, S., Bruett, L. D., Reilly, E. E., Gorrell, S., Singh, S., Hail, L., Yu, K., Radin, R. M., Keyser, J., Le Grange, D., Accurso, E. C., & Huryk, K. M. (2025). Weight stigma in the development, maintenance, and treatment of eating disorders: A case series informing implications for research and practice. Journal of Eating Disorders, 53(5), 747–760. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-024-01260-3
• Lewis, T., & Yoshimura, S. M. (2017). Politeness strategies in confrontations of prejudice. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 25(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870.2017.1251198
• Oregon.gov, Public Health Division, Center for Prevention and Health Promotion. (n.d.). Is weight something we inherit? and stigma: The human cost of obesity.
• Rodarte, M. M. (2024). The psychological factors of obesity and how to overcome them. Activated Health & Wellness.
• TikTok. (2025). Your ultimate comeback guide: Best responses to body shaming.
• UConn Rudd Center for Food Policy and Health. (n.d.). Having a productive conversation: Weight bias - dispelling myths.
• Wiginton, K. (2024, March 15). Fat phobia, fat shaming, weight bias: How to respond. WebMD.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:01):
In the quiet place.

Speaker 2 (00:03):
We share words on fold like whispers in the air.

Speaker 1 (00:13):
To go who we.

Speaker 2 (00:17):
Start to Welcome to the culture Hook podcast, your space
to learn, unlearn, and grow, one hug and one episode
at a time. Today, we're plunging into a subject that
touches almost everyone, yet is rife with unchallenged assumptions, judgments,
and frankly, a surprising amount of misinformation body size and health. Absolutely,

(00:40):
we're talking about the pervasive judgments people face daily, judgments
that go far beyond aesthetics, deeply impacting health, mental well being,
and even social standing.

Speaker 1 (00:50):
Yeah, it's huge.

Speaker 2 (00:51):
So what if our fundamental understanding of weight and health
is not only flawed, but actively perpetuating harm on a
massive scale.

Speaker 1 (01:00):
That's the critical, often uncomfortable question we're addressing today. Our
mission is really to unpack the complex realities of obesity
and weight. We want to move decisively beyond those simplistic,
often deeply harmful narratives of personal failing.

Speaker 2 (01:14):
Yeah, the blame game exactly.

Speaker 1 (01:16):
We aim to cultivate genuine empathy and understanding, offering you
surprising facts and actionable insights that cut through the prevalent misinformation.
This deep dive is designed to give you a shortcut
to being genuinely well informed on a topic where assumptions
are unfortunately rampant, and where what you think you know
might be dramatically different from the scientific truth.

Speaker 2 (01:38):
And to do that, we've pulled from a really rich
and diverse set of sources. We've got a systematic review
exploring the nuanced and often overlook connection between trauma and obesity,
which is fascinating, really is. Plus powerful toolkits and articles
delving into the cutting edge science of genetics and the
human cost of weight stigma, and some interesting research on
media bias. Plus it's effective communication strategies for confronting prejudice.

Speaker 1 (02:04):
So it's a multifaceted exploration. We're covering the scientific, social, psychological,
and even communicative aspects of how we understand and talk
about weight.

Speaker 2 (02:13):
Okay, so let's truly impact this.

Speaker 1 (02:15):
Here's where it gets really interesting and starts to challenge
some deeply ingrained beliefs. When we talk about weight game
and obesity, the immediate ingrained narrative is often about simple
energy imbalance, calories in calories.

Speaker 2 (02:29):
Out right, the standard line, you eat.

Speaker 1 (02:30):
Too much, you don't move enough, end of story. Right,
This creates a sense that it's all about willpower or
a simple moral failing.

Speaker 2 (02:39):
Yeah, that it's entirely controllable by just trying.

Speaker 1 (02:41):
Harder, But our sources make it abundantly clear that for
most individuals, excess fat accumulation is far far more complex
than just a lack of willpower or plain laziness. It's
just it's not a linear equation.

Speaker 2 (02:54):
That's a huge misconception, and it's deeply rooted in our
societal understanding of health. The idea that treating obesity is
as simple as restricting calories consumed and increasing calories burned
is often ineffective, right.

Speaker 1 (03:07):
Massively ineffective, particularly when those deeper underlying.

Speaker 2 (03:10):
Factors aren't address, Like what kind of factors we're.

Speaker 1 (03:12):
Talking about, things like chronic stress, inconsistent or poor sleep habits,
the presence of certain medical conditions, and even broader social
determinants of health, which will definitely get into Okay, for many,
it's not a moral failing, it's a complex biological and
environmental interplay that no amount of simple dieting can fully
overcome without addressing these foundational issues.

Speaker 2 (03:35):
That's a really important framing, indeed.

Speaker 1 (03:37):
And a significant, perhaps revolutionary piece of that complex puzzle
is genetics and metabolism. While we often think of weight
as purely a lifestyle choice, something entirely within our control,
genetics actually contribute significantly to body weight variability. Research indicates
that anywhere from forty percent to fifty percent of how

(03:58):
much our body weight varies can be traced by to
our genes.

Speaker 2 (04:00):
Forty to fifty percent.

Speaker 1 (04:02):
Wow, and it gets even more pronounced. For individuals already
living with obesity. This genetic role can increase to as
high as an astonishing eighty percent.

Speaker 2 (04:10):
Eighty percent. That's that's staggering right for many listeners. That
alone completely reframes the conversation. It has to think about it.
Your body's predisposition can be largely written in your DNA.
This isn't just a minor influence. We're talking about a
fundamental blueprint that could account for up to eighty percent
of why someone struggles with obesity exactly. It makes you

(04:32):
wonder if so much is genetically predisposed, then what does
that mean for individual responsibility? It complicates things.

Speaker 1 (04:39):
It really does. And we're not talking about just one
or two genes either. Over five hundred obesity related genes
have been identified five hundred Yeah, and these genes aren't
just sitting there idly. They're actively influencing incredibly intricate biological processes,
like what specifically well they impact metabolic pathways, the compl

(05:00):
neural networks in your brain that dictate hunger and satiety,
your appetite.

Speaker 2 (05:04):
Control sense, so like how hungry you feel right.

Speaker 1 (05:07):
And how your body handles insulin and processes sugar, inflammatory responses,
blood pressure, and even where and how your body stores fat. Okay,
some of these genes can even cause a desire to
consume more energy while simultaneously preventing your body from effectively
using that energy.

Speaker 2 (05:22):
So it's like a double whammie.

Speaker 1 (05:23):
It's like your body's internal thermostat is set differently, making
it harder for some people to maintain a lower weight
even with identical inputs of diet and exercise compared to
someone with a different genetic blueprint.

Speaker 2 (05:35):
To clarify that genetic obci isn't a single uniform condition,
is it. It sounds like there are different pathways involved.

Speaker 1 (05:43):
That's a fantastic point because it really highlights the nuance
our sources differentiate genetic obesity into several types and understanding
these distinctions is crucial.

Speaker 2 (05:53):
Why is that.

Speaker 1 (05:53):
Because it means that for some the pathway to obesity
is fundamentally different, requiring highly specialized medical approaches. You have
monogenic obesity, which is quite rare caused by a mutation
in a single gene.

Speaker 2 (06:07):
Okay, one gene.

Speaker 1 (06:08):
Yeah, The MC four R gene, for instance, is the
most commonly affected in this category. Then there's polygenic obesity,
which is by far the.

Speaker 2 (06:15):
Most common form poly meaning many.

Speaker 1 (06:17):
Exactly where variations in multiple genes contribute in smaller cumulative ways,
each adding a little to the overall predisposition.

Speaker 2 (06:25):
Right, So lots of small effects adding up precisely.

Speaker 1 (06:28):
And finally, there's syndromic obesity, where genetic changes in specific
diseases such as Prater Willy syndrome directly lead to obesity
as part of a broader set of symptoms.

Speaker 2 (06:39):
So it's not necessarily a definitive destiny, then is it.
It's more about predisposition.

Speaker 1 (06:43):
That's the key takeaway. Genetics might make an individual more
prone to weight gain under certain circumstances, rather than simply
determining it. Okay, it's about how your genetic hand interacts
with the car's life buzz you the environment you're in.

Speaker 2 (06:56):
So, for example, a genetic predisposition might make you more
susceptible to gaining weight if you're exposed to, say, highly
processed foods and sedentary lifestyles.

Speaker 1 (07:06):
Precisely, and this leads us perfectly into how hormonal and
endocrine conditions play a significant role. Those genetic predispositions we
just discussed aren't operating in a vacuum.

Speaker 2 (07:16):
They interact, right.

Speaker 1 (07:18):
They can increase the risk for conditions that affect hormones
like Cushing syndrome, which in turn significantly increases obesity risk.

Speaker 2 (07:25):
And cushings involves cortisol right, the stress hormone.

Speaker 1 (07:28):
Yes, exactly. And what's more, there is an increasing concern
about the impact of endocrine disruptors. These are chemicals commonly
used in things like food production, plastic containers, pesticides.

Speaker 2 (07:40):
Stuff we encounter every day.

Speaker 1 (07:41):
Absolutely, they don't just sit there. They actively interfere with
hormone signaling in your body, mimicking or blocking natural hormones.
This can throw your entire system out of whack. How so,
it can lead to imbalances that promote fat storage and
weight gain. They can even alter your intestinal.

Speaker 2 (07:59):
Microbiome, the gut bacteria yep.

Speaker 1 (08:01):
Which then leads to epigenetic changes, changes in gene expression
that promote obesity.

Speaker 2 (08:06):
Okay, epigenetic changes. That's where the environment affects how genes
are expressed, but doesn't change the DNA itself.

Speaker 1 (08:13):
You got it. It's fascinating and a bit worrying.

Speaker 2 (08:16):
This is truly mind boggling when you think about it.
It's not just about what you eat, but what chemicals
your food or food packaging might expose you to. It's
a silent environmental contributor, it really is. But the story
gets even deeper when we consider mental health, emotional eating,
and especially trauma. Our sources strongly argue that trauma survivors

(08:37):
are predisposed to obesity.

Speaker 1 (08:38):
Yeah, the prevalence of obesity among those who have experienced
trauma is now widely acknowledged in research. It indicates a powerful,
often overlooked link.

Speaker 2 (08:47):
What are the mechanisms behind that link?

Speaker 1 (08:49):
They're multifaceted and deeply rooted in how the body and
mind respond to chronic stress. It's often accounted for by
maladaptive coping strategies.

Speaker 2 (08:58):
Like using food to cope.

Speaker 1 (08:59):
Exactly where emotional eating becomes a way to regulate intense
or difficult emotions, almost a form of self medication. There
are also disturbances in the HPA axis.

Speaker 2 (09:08):
Okay, remind us what the HPA axis is.

Speaker 1 (09:10):
That's your body's central stress response system, the hypothalamic pituitary
adrenal axis. When it's chronically activated by trauma or ongoing stress,
it can lead to increased cortical.

Speaker 2 (09:21):
Levels the stress hormone. Again, right, and this.

Speaker 1 (09:24):
Isn't just about feeling stressed. Elevated cortisol can directly impact metabolism,
promote fat storage, especially around the abdomen, and even influence
appetite regulating.

Speaker 2 (09:33):
Hormones, creating a clear biological pathway.

Speaker 1 (09:36):
A very clear biological pathway linking stress to weight gain,
quite separate from diet or exercise in some ways. And importantly,
the use of certain commonly prescribed antipsychotic medications can be
a significant contributing factor to weight gain among trauma survivors
due to their metabolic side effects.

Speaker 2 (09:54):
That's a crucial point about medication side effects. And it's
not just if you experience trauma, what kind of trauma
and its duration that can be relevant, isn't it.

Speaker 1 (10:04):
Absolutely? Research indicates that childhood physical assault, child maltreatment and
sexual abuse are consistently associated with an elevated risk for obesity.

Speaker 2 (10:13):
Okay.

Speaker 1 (10:13):
What's surprising though, is that childhood emotional abuse has in
some studies been associated with underweight BMI.

Speaker 2 (10:19):
Values really underweight.

Speaker 1 (10:21):
Yeah. It shows just how nuanced the body's response to
trauma can be. For example, our sources detail the case
of Megan who experienced chronic emotional abuse as a child
leading to an early onset of anorexia nervosa.

Speaker 2 (10:34):
Wow. So trauma can manifest right across the weight spectrum precisely.

Speaker 1 (10:38):
And for those who've experienced repeated trauma exposure often described
as accumulative or high adverse childhood experiences or acees, there's
a significant elevated risk of obesity.

Speaker 2 (10:50):
Deal the bild up matters.

Speaker 1 (10:51):
It's not just a single event, but the cumulative toll
that profoundly impacts the body. There's even a shown association
between the perceived severe alre of PTSD symptoms and BMI status.

Speaker 2 (11:03):
And is there a link to specific eating patterns.

Speaker 1 (11:06):
Yes. As a mediator in this complex relationship, we often
see eating psychopathology, specifically binge eating disorder or BED. This
means that trauma can lead to BBED as a coping mechanism,
which then mediates the link to obesity.

Speaker 2 (11:20):
The clinical implications here are profound. It underscores the importance
of screening for PTSD and trauma symptoms not just in
individuals with higher BMIs, but across the entire BMI.

Speaker 1 (11:30):
Spectrum, including those who are underweight.

Speaker 2 (11:32):
Right to provide appropriate support and an intervention development. It
really suggests a more holistic, trauma informed approach to help.

Speaker 1 (11:38):
Absolutely critical.

Speaker 2 (11:39):
We've touched on it briefly, but it bears reiterating that
certain medications like those commonly used antipsychotics, are a known
contributing factor to weight gain among trauma survivors.

Speaker 1 (11:50):
Yes, these medications can alter metabolism, increase appetite, and change
how the body stores fat. It's a significant factor for
some individuals.

Speaker 2 (11:59):
As we mentioned earlier, Specific genetic predispositions can increase the
risk for medical conditions such as Cushing syndrome right.

Speaker 1 (12:07):
Where the body produces too much cortisol.

Speaker 2 (12:09):
Directly increasing the risk for obesity due to its impact
on fat distribution and metabolism. So it's not just behavioral.
There are clear biological and pharmaceutical influences. Definitely okay, So
beyond the biological and psychological there are significant socioeconomic barriers
to healthy food and exercise, often referred to as social

(12:29):
determinants of health or Sdoh.

Speaker 1 (12:33):
This isn't just an abstract concept. It refers to a
collective group of environmental factors that profoundly influence obesity, the
actual conditions that make up the environment around you.

Speaker 2 (12:43):
Can you give some examples?

Speaker 1 (12:45):
Sure, these are real world obstacles that disproportionately affect certain communities.
Think about income level. Can a family afford fresh, nutritious
food or are they forced to rely on cheaper calorie
dens and often nutrient poor processed foods. Right, the cost barrier,
consider local prime rates. If you live in a high

(13:05):
crime neighborhood, you might feel less safe going outside for exercise.
Limiting physical activity makes sense. Then there's the accessibility of
quality food. Living in a food desert where fresh produce
is scarce but fast food and convenience stores are abundant.

Speaker 2 (13:19):
Yeah, that's a huge issue in many places.

Speaker 1 (13:21):
Even exposure to discrimination plays a part, creating chronic stress
that can influence weight. These are not minor inconveniences. They
are deeply ingrained, systemic factors that promote lifestyle choices and
circumstances that can directly contribute to obesity.

Speaker 2 (13:36):
It truly highlights the intricate bidirectional relationship between genetics and
environmental factors. It's not one or the other, it's both
constantly interacting exactly.

Speaker 1 (13:46):
Environmental factors can indeed set the stage for lifestyle choices
that promote obesity. For instance, limited access to parks or
healthy food stores can make it harder to make certain choices.

Speaker 2 (13:58):
And then genetics come into play, right, because.

Speaker 1 (14:00):
Your genetics can simultaneously increase your proneness to gaining weight
in those various circumstances. Your body might be genetically wired
to be more efficient at storing fat when high calorie
foods are readily available and physical activity is limited.

Speaker 2 (14:14):
And what's truly fascinating here is that the relationship goes
both ways. Just as genetics can influence the effect of
environmental factors.

Speaker 1 (14:21):
Environmental factors can conversely cause epigenetic changes.

Speaker 2 (14:25):
Right the gene expression changes again.

Speaker 1 (14:27):
Think of your DNA as a cookbook containing all your
body's recipes. Epigenetics doesn't change the recipes themselves, but it
can decide which recipes are opened and used and how
often so. Chronic exposure to certain environmental stressors like a
high intake of fried foods, poor sleep, or consistently sedentary
lifestyle can essentially tell your body's genes to cook up

(14:49):
more fat storage or to process energy less efficiently, promoting
obesity without altering your underlying DNA sequence.

Speaker 2 (14:56):
Even the indegri disruptors we mentioned earlier that those chemicals
that impair hormone signaling, Yes.

Speaker 1 (15:01):
They can alter your intestinal microbiome, which has also been
linked to changes in genetic expression that promote obesity.

Speaker 2 (15:07):
So what does this all mean for you the listener?
He means understanding weight goes far, far beyond the simplistic
calories in, calories out equation or merely blaming personal choices.

Speaker 1 (15:19):
It demands a much more nuanced perspective, acknowledging the complex
interplay of genetics, biology, psychology, socioeconomics, and environment. It's just
much bigger than we often think.

Speaker 2 (15:28):
Okay, let's shift gears slightly, moving from the science to society.
Let's talk about how deeply ingrained fat phobia.

Speaker 1 (15:35):
Manifests right and fat phobia, just to define it is
an insidious force, a deep seated fear and hatred of
fat bodies. Our sources state very clearly that weight bias
and stigmatization are widespread, widespread, well. Obesity prejudice is often
described as the current most tolerated social bias. Think about that.

(15:55):
It's often accepted in ways other biases are not.

Speaker 2 (15:58):
That's a chilling description. And this isn't just a feeling.
There's data to back it up. The prevalence of weight
discrimination in the United States has increased by a shocking
sixty six percent over the past decade.

Speaker 1 (16:10):
Sixty six percent. That's a massive societal shift.

Speaker 2 (16:13):
It really is, and it's crucial to understand that weight
stigma is not a beneficial public health tool for reducing obesity.

Speaker 1 (16:20):
Absolutely not. On the contrary, it actively threatens health, generates
health disparities, and interferes with effective obesity intervention effort.

Speaker 2 (16:28):
Threatens health how well.

Speaker 1 (16:30):
Weight based discrimination may even shorten life expectancy, potentially even
more than other forms of discrimination, and similar to established
risk factors like smoking, like smoking, yeah, with a sixty
percent increased risk of mortality after accounting for BMI. The
stress and discrimination itself is harmful.

Speaker 2 (16:48):
That's a powerful point, and it flips the common narrative
on its head. The very hyper focus on preventing obesity
within weight centric health practices may itself be contributing to
this weight.

Speaker 1 (16:59):
Stigma, leading to other iatrogenic outcomes, which means harmful effects
stemming directly from medical or psychological treatment.

Speaker 2 (17:06):
So the cure can sometimes be part of the problem.

Speaker 1 (17:09):
In this context. Absolutely, this is not about trying to
help people. It's actively hurting them and hindering their health.

Speaker 2 (17:15):
This harm is evident in the language we use and
the jokes we often hear. Our sources site a startling
example from a two thousand and eight Newsweek article titled
the obese should have to pay more for airline tickets.
I remember that that offhandedly joked about drilling fat people
for fuel.

Speaker 1 (17:31):
Just unbelievable.

Speaker 2 (17:32):
This kind of explicit bias, even in seemingly casual remarks,
normalizes prejudice and dehumanizes individuals based on their body size.

Speaker 1 (17:41):
And it's not just news articles. Fat humor is commonly
directed at overweight and obese characters in media. In sitcoms,
for example, heavier female characters tended to receive more negative
comments than thinner characters, right with audience laughter reinforcing this
derigion as staggering eighty percent of the time.

Speaker 2 (18:00):
Eighty percent so the audience laughs along.

Speaker 1 (18:02):
Yeah, and adult males were found to be the most
frequent perpetrators of fat commentary in TV shows and movies,
and disturbingly, the widespread nature of fat stigmatization videos on
platforms like YouTube, which are widely viewed and often positively rated,
further illustrates how normalized harmful language against larger bodies has become.

Speaker 2 (18:22):
It's almost a form of acceptable online bullying, it really is.
This normalization perpetuates harmful assumptions about someone's health, habits, or
even intelligence based solely on their body size. Media portrayals
are a huge culprit here shaping our perceptions from a
young age. In children's animated cartoons, overweight characters were almost
three times more likely to be classified as physically unattractive

(18:45):
a cree coon than underweight or normal weight characters. They
were also significantly more likely to be depicted as less intelligent,
less loving, and less physically healthy.

Speaker 1 (18:56):
So negative stereotypes right from the start.

Speaker 2 (18:58):
Exactly, there were more commonly unemployed, unhappy, and angry, and
were nine times more likely to be categorized as bad.
Characters who engaged in more violent and aggressive acts than
their better looking counterparts.

Speaker 1 (19:11):
It's baked into the stories we tell our kids. In
children's movies and books, obese characters, both human and animal,
were most often portrayed as possessing negative traits and subsequently
tended to be disliked by others.

Speaker 2 (19:23):
That's so sad.

Speaker 1 (19:23):
Appearing this way in sixty four percent of movies and
twenty percent of books. Contrast that with thin characters, who
are consistently linked to positive traits in seventy two percent
of movies and ten percent of books.

Speaker 2 (19:35):
It creates this subconscious association that thin equals good, fat
equals bad. Pretty much. Yeah, and it doesn't stop with
children's media. Think about weight loss infomercials and advertisements. They
perpetuate the belief that weight is controllable and often show
satisfied customers looking dramatically happier in after images.

Speaker 1 (19:54):
The classic before and after a trope.

Speaker 2 (19:56):
Right, leading viewers to conclude, if you are heavy, you
must unhappy, but losing weight will make you happy. They
even suggest losing weight as easy with phrases like no
diet or exercise.

Speaker 1 (20:08):
Required, which is rarely true exactly.

Speaker 2 (20:11):
And reality TV shows like The biggest loser, further reinforced
stereotypes of obese people as lazy and unmotivated, and that
individuals are solely to blame for.

Speaker 1 (20:21):
Their weight, glorifying extreme weight loss and overlooking all the
complex factors we just discussed.

Speaker 2 (20:26):
This narrative is further cemented by news media framing, which
tends to portray obesity as a problem of personal responsibility.

Speaker 1 (20:34):
They consistently over emphasize individual causes, like onhealthy diet and
lack of physical activity, while downplaying or outright ignoring psychosocial, behavioral, genetic,
and environmental factors.

Speaker 2 (20:45):
So they focus on the individual, not the system exactly.

Speaker 1 (20:48):
This leads to an over emphasis on person level solutions
such as diet and exercise, rather than society level solutions
like changes in school lunches or the regulation of advertise
in the food industry.

Speaker 2 (21:01):
And this lack of comprehensive information.

Speaker 1 (21:03):
As our sources point out, it's directly linked to increased
stigmatizing attitudes in the public. If people only hear one
side of the story, that's what they believe.

Speaker 2 (21:12):
And the discrimination isn't confined to media, It's rampant in
everyday life, particularly in healthcare, workplaces and public spaces. Let's
start with healthcare, which is incredibly disheartening.

Speaker 1 (21:23):
Yeah, this part is tough.

Speaker 2 (21:24):
Our sources reveal that doctors are sadly some of the
most common perpetuators of fat phobia and weight discrimination.

Speaker 1 (21:30):
It's true.

Speaker 2 (21:31):
One study of over six hundred and twenty primary care
physicians found that more than fifty percent viewed obese patients
as awkward, unattractive, ugly, and non compliant. Over half and
the third of them even characterize these patients as weak, willed, sloppy,
and lazy. Physicians often overwhelmingly view obesity as largely a behavioral.

Speaker 1 (21:50):
Problem, completely missing the complex interplay of factors at play.
This bias profoundly influences attitudes and decision making in the clinic,
contributing to inappropriate care and poor patient outcomes.

Speaker 2 (22:03):
How does it affect care well?

Speaker 1 (22:05):
Providers who are overly focused on weight or BMI may
actually overlook the true causes of medical symptoms or underlying
disease because they default to just lose weight as the answer.

Speaker 2 (22:17):
For everything, so they might miss something serious.

Speaker 1 (22:19):
It's a real risk. For example, the diagnostic system for
eating disorders even assigns atypical anorexia nervosa to individuals who
present at a higher weight but have all other anorexia nervosa.

Speaker 2 (22:31):
Symptoms atypical because of their weight.

Speaker 1 (22:34):
Exactly, this weight based distinction can reinforce the notion that
these individuals are not as ill, compounding problems with detection
and access to care and leading to longer illness durations
and delayed referrals.

Speaker 2 (22:45):
Simply because their body doesn't fit the expected image of
someone with an eating disorder. It's deeply problematic, and it's
not just healthcare in a workplace. There's a striking absence
of federal laws prohibiting discrimination against obese and overweight people.

Speaker 1 (23:00):
Yeah, that's a major gap.

Speaker 2 (23:02):
Michigan is currently the only state with such an anti
discrimination law on its books, although legislators in Massachusetts, Nevada,
and Oregon did file weight bias bills back in two thousand.

Speaker 1 (23:12):
And nine, so very little legal protection right.

Speaker 2 (23:15):
This legal vacuum leaves millions vulnerable to unfair hiring practice's,
lack of promotions, or even outright dismissal based on their
body size, with no legal recourse and.

Speaker 1 (23:24):
In public perception. Online news stories about obesity consistently show
high rates of stigmatizing photographs at seventy two percent and
videos at sixty five percent for adults and seventy seven
percent for youth. What kind of images they often depict?
Headless bodies, focusing only on the torso, where people engaged
in unflattering activities, reinforcing negative stereotypes, dehumanizing very much so,

(23:47):
And as we noted earlier, YouTube features fat stigmatization videos
that are widely viewed and positively rated, further entrenching these
biases into the digital landscape.

Speaker 2 (23:56):
What's truly foundational and frankly disturbing here is that the
roots of fat phobia aren't just about modern health concerns
or superficial aesthetics. Our sources delve into a deeply troubling history. Yeah,
this is critical context revealing that fat phobia has its
origins in the Transatlantic slave trade. This isn't just an
interesting fact, it's a critical piece of understanding how these

(24:18):
biases were manufactured and continue to impact us.

Speaker 1 (24:21):
Absolutely. During this horrific period, European colonists weren't just exploiting labor.
They were deliberately creating narratives to justify their cruelty and
assert their supposed superiority.

Speaker 2 (24:34):
How did fatness play into that.

Speaker 1 (24:35):
They asserted that black people were inherently prone to gluttony
and sexual excess, explicitly linking their supposed love of food
to being fat. This wasn't a casual observation, It was strategics.
It was a deliberate dehumanizing contrast to their own claimed
moral superiority, where valuing moderation and self control supposedly made
them thin and, by their twisted logic, the superior race.

Speaker 2 (24:58):
So they created this foundation lie that fatness was a
moral failing tied directly to racial inferiority. Exactly, by the
early eighteen hundreds in the US, fatness was firmly considered
a sign of immorality and racial inferiority, solidifying this deeply
problematic link. This historical context is vital for understanding how
deeply embedded and insidious these biases are.

Speaker 1 (25:21):
It also connects directly to the problematic origins of the
body mass index or BMI.

Speaker 2 (25:26):
Ah. Yes, the BMI, this tool.

Speaker 1 (25:28):
Which is still widely used today as a primary measure
of health, was famously devised in the nineteenth century by
Adolf Quetela, based solely on studies of European white cis
gender men.

Speaker 2 (25:40):
Just that one demograph, Yes, that one.

Speaker 1 (25:42):
So, for this and many other medical reasons, its accuracy
in measuring the weight and health of people who fall
outside this specific demographic is inherently.

Speaker 2 (25:50):
Flawed, like who for instance.

Speaker 1 (25:52):
For instance, research explicitly proves that African American women are
often healthier at heavier weights and with larger waste circumferences
than white women, Yet the medical community often doesn't consider
this when advising patients.

Speaker 2 (26:03):
So the tool itself is biased.

Speaker 1 (26:05):
The BMI in essence, carries with it the baggage of
its biased origins, contributing to systemic racism and discrimination in
healthcare today.

Speaker 2 (26:14):
So what does this all mean? It means systemic racism
and weight discrimination can lead to far more health risks
than weight and BMI alone.

Speaker 1 (26:21):
Absolutely, the very tools and narratives we use often have problematic,
discriminatory origins that continue to impact real people's health and
well being.

Speaker 2 (26:31):
Okay, so if we connect this to the bigger picture,
it raises an important question, what can we do about
it when we see or hear this bias?

Speaker 1 (26:40):
Well? Our sources emphasize the vital importance of confrontation. Prejudice,
after all, is often shared and maintained in interpersonal interactions
and challenging. It plays a crucial role encountering intolerance and
fostering change.

Speaker 2 (26:53):
Confrontation isn't necessarily about being aggressive or creating conflict.

Speaker 1 (26:57):
Is it not at all? It simply means verbally or nonverbally,
expressing one's dissatisfaction with prejudicial and discriminatory treatment to the
person who is responsible for the remark or behavior, And
the research is clear confronting prejudiced responses can effectively reduce
the likelihood of future insensitive behavior.

Speaker 2 (27:17):
It sends a message, It tells the person that their
words or actions have an impact. But people worry about
the backlash, don't they?

Speaker 1 (27:26):
They do. What's fascinating here is that the common fear
many of us have about negative interpersonal outcomes from confrontation,
like being disliked, may actually be overstated.

Speaker 2 (27:36):
Really yeah.

Speaker 1 (27:37):
Studies suggest that individuals generally accept confrontations about prejudice and
do not negatively evaluate their confronter, especially in younger educated
populations like college students, who may be more open to
correction and learning.

Speaker 2 (27:50):
So that's good news for people who hesitate to speak
up because they do not want to.

Speaker 1 (27:54):
Be liked less exactly. The data suggests your fear might
be holding you back from a potentially positive outcome.

Speaker 2 (28:00):
So that's great news for those of us who want
to speak up, But how do we do it effectively?
This is where politeness theory comes in, offering a framework
for navigating these potentially tricky conversations. Right.

Speaker 1 (28:11):
Confronting prejudice is inherently a face threatening act for the recipient.

Speaker 2 (28:15):
What do you mean by face threatening?

Speaker 1 (28:17):
It impacts their positive face, which is their fundamental desire
to be liked and respected, and their negative face, which
is their desire for autonomy and freedom from imposition, basically
not being told what to do or think.

Speaker 2 (28:31):
Okay, so how do we manage that well?

Speaker 1 (28:34):
Research indicates that the most effective way to help people
understand that their responses are discrepant with their personal standards
is to directly confront them and explain why their responses
are stereotypics.

Speaker 2 (28:44):
So directness and explanation are key.

Speaker 1 (28:47):
Yes, This clarity helps them connect their actions to their
own values, revealing a mismatch they might not have been
aware of. It's not enough to just say that's wrong.
You need to articulate why it's wrong in a way
that resonates, but.

Speaker 2 (29:00):
You can still be direct and polite, which sounds incredibly powerful.

Speaker 1 (29:04):
That's the power of what's called positive politeness. This strategy
aims to mitigate the threat to someone's positive face by
communicating appreciation and affiliation for the person even as you
offer feedback.

Speaker 2 (29:15):
Can you give an example, sure, our.

Speaker 1 (29:17):
Sources provide a great example from a study scenario. I
thought you gave really creative and interesting answers. You were
a great partner to work with. My only feedback is
that I thought some of your answers were kind of cliche.
I know I do that without thinking about it sometimes too,
and that you already know this anyway. I'm sure you
didn't mean to.

Speaker 2 (29:34):
Ah, So you cushion the criticism with positive feedback and
empathy exactly.

Speaker 1 (29:38):
The benefits of this approach are clear. When confronters are
perceived as more polite, they are evaluated more positively, and
positive politeness can help maintain a positive image for the confronter,
making the message more palatable. There's a significant positive correlation
between perceived positive politeness and how positively the partner of value.

(30:00):
While directness with explanation is key, positive politeness can still
instigate self reflection and that self directed negative affect.

Speaker 2 (30:08):
Like shame or guilt about their own comment.

Speaker 1 (30:11):
Right, which are strongly linked to behavioral modification. This is
because minimizing defensiveness makes those negative emotions more likely to
be oriented toward the self and the behavior, rather than
being defensively aimed back at the confronter.

Speaker 2 (30:25):
Interesting, what about the other end of the spectrum, the
less polite way.

Speaker 1 (30:30):
That's the bald on record strategy. This is the least
polite approach, and does an attempt to acknowledge the recipient's
face once at all?

Speaker 2 (30:38):
Was that some like?

Speaker 1 (30:39):
An example from the study was, I thought you typed fast,
but I also thought some of your answers were stereotypical.
The Native American man could work for the government and
the other Native American man could be a casino employee.

Speaker 2 (30:50):
Very direct and no cushioning.

Speaker 1 (30:51):
Right. While this direct approach was found to be effective
in reducing prejudiced responses, it may not foster as positive
an evaluation of the confronter as positive politeness, potentially making
future interactions more strained.

Speaker 2 (31:05):
Okay, are there strategies we should definitely avoid?

Speaker 1 (31:07):
Yes? If your goal is direct effective confrontation, avoid the
off record strategy. This uses vague or ambiguous language, allowing
the target to simply ignore the message.

Speaker 2 (31:20):
Like being really indirect. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (31:22):
An example provided in the source was I wonder if
some people would view some of your answers as warmed over.
This was actually perceived as inappropriate and not effective by participants.
Why not they found it confusing and indirect. It's a
cautionary tale that indirectness might seem gentler, but it can
be confusing and ultimately ineffective in getting the message across clearly.

Speaker 2 (31:42):
And then there's simply avoidance, right.

Speaker 1 (31:44):
Which prevents all face threat by not confronting the prejudice
at all. But this contributes directly to the persistence of prejudice.

Speaker 2 (31:51):
So silence isn't helpful.

Speaker 1 (31:53):
Individuals who value confrontation but don't speak up when given
the chance may evaluate prejudiced behavior just as positive is
those who weren't given the chance to confront it. So
silence in this context is not golden. It actually enables
a prejudice to continue unchallenged.

Speaker 2 (32:09):
Okay, So, based on this research, we have some really
practical tools for interrupting bias in everyday conversations.

Speaker 1 (32:15):
First, be direct and clear, with an explanation. When you
hear a fat shaming comment, explain why it's problematic, connecting
it back to the science we've discussed.

Speaker 2 (32:24):
For example, you could.

Speaker 1 (32:26):
Say that comment relies on a stereotype about people in
larger bodies. Weight is complex and often influenced by genetics,
medical conditions, or socioeconomic factors, not just personal choices.

Speaker 2 (32:38):
Okay. Second tool, leverage positive politeness.

Speaker 1 (32:42):
Yes, frame your intervention with a positive opening if appropriate,
to soften the blow and maintain rapport, like I know
you didn't mean any harm, but that kind of language
can be really hurtful and misrepresents the complexities of health.

Speaker 2 (32:55):
Third, focus on the behavior's impact, not just the person's intent.

Speaker 1 (32:59):
Right. Instead of accusing intent, which can lead to defensiveness,
focus on how their words or actions affect others. This
can help them reflect on their own biases without becoming overly.

Speaker 2 (33:08):
Defensive, activating that self reflection.

Speaker 1 (33:11):
Exactly, which aids in behavioral change. And Finally, educate gently
but firmly. Combine directness with an empathetic, non judgmental tone.
The research suggests this balance is most effective for reducing
prejudice while maintaining positive interpersonal perceptions. It's about informing, not shaming.

Speaker 2 (33:30):
Great tips. Now let's flip the coin and talk about
what not to say and what support of alternatives you
can offer instead.

Speaker 1 (33:37):
Yes, this is crucial because many phrases, often well intentioned,
were stemming from internalized societal biases, unfortunately perpetuate stigma and
demonstrate a deep misunderstanding of obesities.

Speaker 2 (33:49):
Complexity legal kind of phrases.

Speaker 1 (33:51):
For example, imagine hearing you have such a pretty face
if you just lost weight.

Speaker 2 (33:55):
Oof. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (33:56):
This centers someone's worth on their appearance and weight, implying
their current state is insufficient and that their value increases
only with weight loss. It's incredibly damaging to self esteem.

Speaker 2 (34:06):
Or consider are you sure you want to eat that?

Speaker 1 (34:09):
Ugh? The food police.

Speaker 2 (34:10):
Right, This is classic food policing. It implies judgment about
another person's choices, creates anxiety around food, and assumes knowledge
of their health or habits, which you simply don't have.

Speaker 1 (34:20):
And one of the most common and most harmful is
it's just about willpower.

Speaker 2 (34:26):
We hear that one lot, we do.

Speaker 1 (34:27):
And it drastically oversimplifies a complex issue, placing blame solely
on the individual and completely ignoring the significant genetic hormonal, psychological,
and social factors we've discussed. It fosters a narrative of
personal failure.

Speaker 2 (34:42):
Instead of recognizing complex realities exact and the seemingly innocuous
You look so healthy, have you lost weight?

Speaker 1 (34:48):
This one sounds positive, but it unwittingly equates health with thinness,
reinforcing a harmful thin ideal that can be detrimental to
mental health and body image. It implies that being thin
is the only pathway to health, which just isn't true.

Speaker 2 (35:02):
Even comments like you have such a big appetite, or
comparing someone to thinner siblings.

Speaker 1 (35:07):
Even if meant as terms of endearment right.

Speaker 2 (35:09):
They can cause significant distress and contribute to internalized weight
bias and disordered eating behaviors. Our sources highlight the case
of Eva, who developed binge eating disorder and chronic shame
due to persistent family comments about her big appetite compared
to her slimmer sisters. Even when framed playfully, these.

Speaker 1 (35:27):
Types of comments and others reflecting weight bias can lead
to severe psychological consequences stress, poor self esteem, poor body image, depression,
intense shame, and this shame can in turn lead to
disordered eating behaviors, creating a vicious cycle.

Speaker 2 (35:44):
Even advice from medical professionals can be damaging.

Speaker 1 (35:47):
Canon Absolutely our sources point out that simply telling people
to lose weight damages the mental health of individuals living
in larger bodies, particularly when they internalize the message that
their bodies are not perfectly fine the way they are.

Speaker 2 (35:58):
It shifts the focus from holistic wellbeing to a singular,
often unattainable number on a scale. Precisely, so, how do
we shift to dignity centered language and offer truly supportive alternatives?
What should we do instead?

Speaker 1 (36:12):
First, center dignity, not weight in all conversations. Prioritize the
individual's dignity, respect, and overall well being above their body size.
This fundamentally reframes the interaction.

Speaker 2 (36:22):
Okay dignity first.

Speaker 1 (36:24):
Second, focus on behaviors over body size instead of commenting
on weight, Focus on observable health, promoting behaviors without tying
them to appearance.

Speaker 2 (36:31):
So instead of have you lost weight, you could.

Speaker 1 (36:34):
Say maybe I hope you're feeling strong and good today,
or it's great to see you engaged in activities you enjoy.
Focus on the action or feeling, not the outcome on
the scale.

Speaker 2 (36:45):
Third, respect autonomy and avoid unsolicited advice.

Speaker 1 (36:49):
Yes, recognize that an individual's body is their own. Resist
offering unsolicited advice about dieting, exercise, or food choices. For many,
simply saying nothing about their weight or eating is the
most supportive approach.

Speaker 2 (37:02):
Just don't comment often.

Speaker 1 (37:04):
Yes. Fourth, shift from judgment to curiosity and support, but
only when appropriate and invited.

Speaker 2 (37:10):
Key phrase when invited.

Speaker 1 (37:12):
Definitely, Instead of assumptions, approach health conversations with open ended,
non judgmental questions focused on well being and factors they control.
For instance, if a friend expresses struggle, ask how can
I support you, rather than offering weight related solutions or
assumptions about their diet.

Speaker 2 (37:27):
Fifth, acknowledge complexity.

Speaker 1 (37:29):
Right, if you're discussing the topic of weight, use language
that reflects its multifaceted nature. Like weight is influenced by
so many factors genetics, environment, mental health. It's far more
complex than we often assume, and everyone's journey.

Speaker 2 (37:44):
Is unique and crucially challenge. Equating health with thinness.

Speaker 1 (37:48):
Yes, educate yourself and others that health is diverse and
not solely determined by BMI or body size.

Speaker 2 (37:55):
We heard some research on this earlier.

Speaker 1 (37:56):
We did as we learned from research by Catherine Fleegel
of the CEA being overweight can actually be associated with
a lower mortality rate compared to those in the normal
BMI range, especially in older adults. That's counterintuitive to many,
it is, and doctor Tommyama's research at UCLA found that
a significant percentage of US adults who fall into overweight
or obese BMI categories are healthy based on key metabolic

(38:19):
markers like glucose, cholesterol, and blood pressure.

Speaker 2 (38:21):
So you can be medically healthy at a higher weight.

Speaker 1 (38:23):
Absolutely remind others and yourself that individuals can be healthy
at any size and conversely unhealthy at any size. Health
is a spectrum, not a single body type.

Speaker 2 (38:33):
So given all we've discussed, how can we be better
allies in this space, both for others and for ourselves.

Speaker 1 (38:40):
It starts with centering dignity and focusing on behaviors over
body size and all conversations about health. We need to
adopt what's called a weight inclusive approach over a weight
normative approach.

Speaker 2 (38:52):
What does that mean exactly?

Speaker 1 (38:53):
It means prioritizing well being, health, promoting behaviors, and positive
self care over a relentless, singular focus on weight loss
or achieving an arbitrary body size. It's about respecting everybody,
regardless of its shape or size.

Speaker 2 (39:07):
And we most challenge the BMI as a sole health indicator.

Speaker 1 (39:10):
We really must understand and help others recognize that BMI
is a crude marker of obesity and a poor indicator
of individual health. It completely fails to account for critical.

Speaker 2 (39:20):
Factors like age, gender, body compositions.

Speaker 1 (39:22):
Exactly, muscle versus fat, weight, cycling, overall health behaviors, or
cardiometabolic health. And as we discussed, its problematic origins.

Speaker 2 (39:31):
Based on European white cisgender men make.

Speaker 1 (39:34):
Its accuracy inherently flawed for many diverse populations, particularly for
African American women and men, who may be healthier at
heavier weights and larger waste circumferences than white women.

Speaker 2 (39:45):
That focus on weight itself can be harmful. Candidate Yes.

Speaker 1 (39:49):
The hyper focus on preventing obesity within these weight centric
health practices actively contributes to weight stigma and leads to
those iatrogenic outcomes, meaning harmful effects from medical or psychological treatment,
including the encouragement of disordered eating.

Speaker 2 (40:04):
It's important to remember that systemic racism and weight discrimination
can actually lead to far more health risks than weight
or bmile alone.

Speaker 1 (40:11):
Because of the chronic stress, lack of access to care,
and societal burdens they impose. It's a massive factor.

Speaker 2 (40:17):
Therefore, we need to actively shift conversations and personal focus
from weight to tangible behaviors that promote health and well being.

Speaker 1 (40:25):
This includes promoting mindful eating rather than strict dietary rules,
encouraging regular physical activity that is genuinely enjoyable and not compulsive.

Speaker 2 (40:34):
So movement for joy not.

Speaker 1 (40:35):
Punishment exactly, prioritizing adequate sleep, and developing effective stress management
techniques for adolescence. Treatment adaptations for eating disorders, for example,
now include providing psycho education on body diversity and the
impact of weight.

Speaker 2 (40:51):
Stigma, helping them think critically right.

Speaker 1 (40:53):
Helping them engage in critical thinking about the relationship between
weight and health, and challenging automatic negative thoughts reflect doing
implicit weight stigma. Our sources highlight how this approach was
key for Megan in her recovery journey. Also, she learned
to contextualize critical comments she received not as personal failings
but as external weight stigma. That reframing was powerful.

Speaker 2 (41:16):
And please avoid unsolicited advice about dieting or exercise at
all costs.

Speaker 1 (41:21):
Please understanding that well intentioned weight loss efforts in youth
may inadvertently encourage eating disorder behaviors and are a known
predictor of ED development.

Speaker 2 (41:29):
And that applies broadly right, not just to youth.

Speaker 1 (41:31):
Oh, Absolutely, unfolicited advice can be deeply harmful, regardless of intent,
respect autonomy and individual journeys. Practices like blind weighing in
clinical settings.

Speaker 2 (41:41):
Where the patient doesn't see their way.

Speaker 1 (41:42):
Exactly, they've been adopted precisely to mitigate distress and support recovery,
especially for those with body image concerns. This was incredibly
helpful for Eva in her treatment.

Speaker 2 (41:52):
How did it help her?

Speaker 1 (41:53):
It allowed her to focus on healing without the trigger
of the number on the scale. It removed a huge
source of any anxiety.

Speaker 2 (42:00):
We also need to actively support body neutral and body
positive media and advocacy.

Speaker 1 (42:06):
Yes, this means promoting diverse representation in everything we consume.
Actively seek out and support media that portrays a wide
range of body shapes and sizes in a positive, non
stereotypical light. Why is that important because it helps counter
the pervasive idealization of body types that are inconsistent with
being overweight found in most mainstream media. We need to

(42:28):
see different bodies represented positively and.

Speaker 2 (42:30):
Challenge harmful narratives whenever you encounter them.

Speaker 1 (42:32):
Definitely be critical of media portrayals that perpetuate weight bias,
such as the caterpillar to butterfly effect, in diet advertisements
that link appeal and happiness solely to weight loss.

Speaker 2 (42:43):
Implying you can't be happy or attractive unless.

Speaker 1 (42:45):
You're thin, right, or reality TV shows that reinforce stereotypes
of lazy or unmotivated obese individuals. These portrayals are not
only inaccurate, but deeply damaging.

Speaker 2 (42:57):
So what can people do on a larger scale? Advocate
for change?

Speaker 1 (43:01):
Yes, support organizations and movements like Health at Every Size
HAES which prioritize well being, over weight loss, and promote respectful,
inclusive care for all body sizes. Encourage clinical teams and
healthcare providers to recognize and remove our own biases.

Speaker 2 (43:18):
Self reflection piece crucial.

Speaker 1 (43:20):
And to educate their communities about weight stigma, dispelling myths
about the associations between body size, health and eating disorders.

Speaker 2 (43:27):
Consider activistic strategies such as writing letters, sending emails, or
participating in public pressure campaigns like product boycotting to challenge
unacceptable media representations of weight.

Speaker 1 (43:38):
These efforts have been successful against racism and sexism, showing
that collective action can indeed shift public perception and corporate behavior, and.

Speaker 2 (43:45):
Crucially support policy recommendations that advocate for including weight on
the list of categories covering anti discrimination laws at federal, state,
or local levels.

Speaker 1 (43:55):
This includes encouraging healthcare organizations to include language on weight
bias in patient rights policies and requiring weight bias training
for health professionals, as well as protecting children from bullying
in schools by including weight in anti harassment policies.

Speaker 2 (44:10):
Finally, and perhaps most personally, it's essential to challenge internalized bias.

Speaker 1 (44:15):
This is a big one. Recognize that weight stigma is
a unique form of discrimination where the target is often
held personally responsible for their mistreatment rather than society. This
can lead to deep self blame.

Speaker 2 (44:27):
So what helps would that.

Speaker 1 (44:28):
Cultivate self compassion to mitigate internalized weight stigma and increase
self worth and self kindness. Engage in cognitive dissonance exercises
like what like listing ways to resist the thin ideal
or developing counter responses to personal experiences of weight stigma,
to reshape your own thoughts and acknowledge that trauma informed
care is essential for those who have experienced weight based

(44:49):
teasing or bullying, as was.

Speaker 2 (44:51):
A core healing part of eva's adapt To treatment plan
we mentioned exactly so. To recap our deep dive today,
we've explored how incredibly complex they re action of obesity
truly is, far beyond simplistic notions of personal failing m HM.

Speaker 1 (45:05):
We've seen how genetics, hormones, the profound impact of trauma,
environmental factors, and socioeconomic disparities all play significant interacting roles.

Speaker 2 (45:15):
We've uncovered the pervasive and deeply harmful ways fat phobia
manifests in our society, from the subtle biases and language
and media to overt discrimination in healthcare and legal systems.

Speaker 1 (45:25):
Revealing its troubling and discriminatory historical origins.

Speaker 2 (45:29):
And critically, we've armed you with powerful empathetic strategies to
respond to fat phobia, both in others and within yourself.

Speaker 1 (45:36):
Yeah, we've highlighted what not to say and offered dignity
centered alternatives, emphasizing a crucial shift and focus to health
promoting behaviors over body.

Speaker 2 (45:44):
Size understanding these nuances empowers each of us to be
better allies and advocates for a more inclusive, compassionate, and
supportive world for people of all body sizes.

Speaker 1 (45:53):
That's the goal.

Speaker 2 (45:54):
Having absorbed this deeper understanding of obesity and fat phobia,
how can you make your language and actions more inclusive
and supportive regarding body size starting today and inspire others
to do the same.

Speaker 1 (46:08):
Mm hmm.

Speaker 2 (46:14):
To go here, we start to