Health: Having Self- Esteem While Fat

[Aranel]

There's so much that I would like to say about this, but all of it would sound like I'm trying to tell you how to feel about yourself. I don't want to do that. I really hate it when someone tells me how I should feel about my own body.

So instead, I'm just going to offer virtual hugs if you want them, and hope that some of the links from the archived post might make you feel better.

 
I know. And thanks.

I have this along with depression and anxiety, so low self-esteem is something I'm used to. If it wasn't my weight it's something else. Actually, sometimes I find it easier just to focus on hating my weight and how my body looks because those are sort of external things, and I do have the health issues that have contributed to it/make it hard to lose the weight, whereas the rest of the stuff I hate about myself (i.e. the rest of me) is nothing to do with any external factors. It's just my own inadequacies.

[Aranel]

I encountered a similar vein when I first started hanging out around a particular vegan forum. When you've eliminated meat, dairy, and most animal products; the reliance on vegatable oils and fatty nuts/seeds/and fruits gets upped a little bit. But there were some who were all about telling everyone how fattening their guacamole was, or how they shouldn't consume olive oil. As if ALL fat is bad and like veganism is about overall health more than trying to look emaciated.

There was even a thread where the discussion centered around how "fat vegans" shouldn't tell people they are vegan because it gives the wrong impression. You know, because fat= eating processed soy replacement products and junk food. It was, pardon my french, fucking ridiculous.

I hang around some vegetarian forums, I've never ventured onto any vegan forums (mainly because I despise the vegetarian-basing that gets done on them) but I've seen similar discussion in the vegan sections of the forums.

This is where I differ. Online I'm all "I'm a fat vegan. Fuck it and fuck you" to anybody who posts that fat vegans aren't real vegans because all vegans have to be healthy (yeah I know, thin =/= healthy but they refuse to believe that)

In real life, I never tell people I'm vegan because I know they'll look me up and down and burst out laughing because you can't be fat and be a vegan.
 
I also never tell people in real life that I'm pagan because I know they'll laugh at me. I haven't even told my therapist yet (and the topic of religion has come up due to childhood issues) and I've been seeing her for a year.

[Aranel]

I hang around some vegetarian forums, I've never ventured onto any vegan forums (mainly because I despise the vegetarian-basing that gets done on them) but I've seen similar discussion in the vegan sections of the forums.

This is where I differ. Online I'm all "I'm a fat vegan. Fuck it and fuck you" to anybody who posts that fat vegans aren't real vegans because all vegans have to be healthy (yeah I know, thin =/= healthy but they refuse to believe that)

In real life, I never tell people I'm vegan because I know they'll look me up and down and burst out laughing because you can't be fat and be a vegan.
 
I also never tell people in real life that I'm pagan because I know they'll laugh at me. I haven't even told my therapist yet (and the topic of religion has come up due to childhood issues) and I've been seeing her for a year.

Really sorry about the triple post but the edit window ended as I had to sort the dogs out.

Currently, on the vegetarian forum I'm on, there's a big debate going on that unless you are environmentally friendly you cannot be a vegan. Oh and that it's more vegan to eat animal products that would otherwise go to waste (like if a restaurant made you a meat dish instead of a vegan one), then to eat vegan things because more animals would get harmed in producing the brand new vegan product.


I keep thinking that I really want to stop calling myself a vegan and just call myself a herbivore instead because of all the crap and the pathetic "I'm more vegan than you!" or "If you drive a car instead of cycling you can't be a vegan!" antics that happen.

[dionysiandame]

Really sorry about the triple post but the edit window ended as I had to sort the dogs out.

Currently, on the vegetarian forum I'm on, there's a big debate going on that unless you are environmentally friendly you cannot be a vegan. Oh and that it's more vegan to eat animal products that would otherwise go to waste (like if a restaurant made you a meat dish instead of a vegan one), then to eat vegan things because more animals would get harmed in producing the brand new vegan product.


I keep thinking that I really want to stop calling myself a vegan and just call myself a herbivore instead because of all the crap and the pathetic "I'm more vegan than you!" or "If you drive a car instead of cycling you can't be a vegan!" antics that happen.

I think this is when the whole thing becomes a matter of veganism as an eating preference or as a form of activism. Yes, I care about animals, but that's not why I stopped eating animal products. I just found that by going vegan I could, naturally, eat a very healthy balanced diet since a lot of things I "can't have" aren't that good for me anyway.

The hubby opened a bag of Doritos in the house and not only did it smell terrible, but the scent literally overtook the living room. It was just foul and I couldn't remember why I used to eat tons of the things.

But, to be honest, I think there are a small portion of vegans who have turned something so simple into an eating disorder. So not only are you only eating rice and salad, but then you're only putting raspberry vinegar and celery in your salad because of the "calories" when calories are the LAST thing you should be thinking about. Seeing the whole "fat vegan" debate really cemented this belief for me.

If it was REALLY about health, the animals, or even doing something green for the planet; then why would the physical appearance or weight of the vegan in question matter?

[Aranel]

If it was REALLY about health, the animals, or even doing something green for the planet; then why would the physical appearance or weight of the vegan in question matter?

 
Because (and I'm paraphrasing them now) all vegans should work on converting people to veganism to save the animals* and to do that you have to show people that being vegan is perfectly healthy so if you look unhealthy (so underweight vegans get the same stick as overweight vegans) then you cannot call yourself a vegan because it counteracts the ideology that veganism is the healthiest lifestyle on the planet.
So if you can use yourself as a walking advert for how healthy veganism is then you have more of an argument for converting people whereas if you are unhealthy then people will think that all vegans are unhealthy so therefore they won't convert.

Yeah, thinking about it, I'm really not sure about calling myself vegan anymore. Some vegans really make the whole lifestyle into a sort of cult and it's bloody scary and I get lumped in with them.
(It's like when people find out I'm an animal rights activist. They assume I go around throwing bombs through people's letter boxes or break into laboratories to free the animals. I don't. I sign petitions, I donate to AR charities (although I check them out to make sure they haven't been connected to any illegal activities). Yeah, it's armchair activism but so what? It's still activism. (I won't go to rallies/protests because the police take note of everybody who goes and I might need a CRB check in the future and I don't want to even have the slightest link to anything like that even though the rallies/protests are completely legal. ) )

* just to clarify, these people don't count dietary vegans as real vegans. Which I can kinda see as the definition of veganism does extend into lifestyle choices (animal-product free toiletries, no wool, leather silk etc etc) as far as is practical and possible (so while most vegans can't avoid using roads that have crushed animal bones in them, they can avoid using animal-tested shampoo that has animal-products in. That's the whole point of the "as far as is practical and possible" bit) . So there is a difference between eating a vegan diet and being a vegan, if that makes sense? But I don't really care about it.

Oh and my personal view? I really don't care what people eat. I really don't. It's a personal choice after all.  


And sorry for taking this so off-topic.

[veggiewolf]

...And doctors just refuse to respect my desire to never have to worry about pregnancy. I'm currently fighting the battle of the IUD against doctors who want to just give me the pill. (I have ADHD. The pill is not a practical option.) And that's because they gave a flat-out "not happening" when I asked about having my tubes tied.

 
I went through this, too.  I was 30 with a 10 year old before anyone would speak to me about a tubal ligation because I might have changed my mind about having more children...

*roll eyes*

[yewberry]

And that's because they gave a flat-out "not happening" when I asked about having my tubes tied.

You know, that should be fucking illegal.  I have a friend who wanted a vasectomy at 18.  It was only suggested that he take a little while to think about it (a week, or thereabouts) before getting the green light.  That double standard just pisses me off.

Brina

[Dark Waters]

You know, that should be fucking illegal.  I have a friend who wanted a vasectomy at 18.  It was only suggested that he take a little while to think about it (a week, or thereabouts) before getting the green light.  That double standard just pisses me off.

Brina

Well, a vasectomy is a lot simpler and quicker than getting tubes tied. It is also far easier to reverse in case the person changes their mind. (In fact sometimes it spontaneously heals enough to allow impregnation) They told me (I got mine after number 3) that even though they cut out a section, cauterize the ends and tie them shut - there were cases where the guy still ended up not shooting blanks.

Still it is just an office visit to get it done, and an office visit to get it undone with local anesthesia. Getting tubes tied is a full surgery under general anesthesia and considered permanent.

So there is a practical aspect to the double standard

[yewberry]

Well, a vasectomy is a lot simpler and quicker than getting tubes tied. It is also far easier to reverse in case the person changes their mind.

I'm well aware of what a vasectomy entails.  I watched the entire procedure once, live and in person, on the man I love.  When my husband had his, he was told "This is permanent.  There's a relatively small chance of reversal, and reversal is expensive.  You need to be sure."  The math might not be exactly equivalent, but doctors seem to treat them as similarly permanent.

I don't really care if people change their minds.  If a woman wants it done, there shouldn't be so many damned impediments.  The reasons should be the woman's, not the doctor's.

I understand requiring that a person take their time to decide.  I'm not even against pre-counseling to discuss possible issues.  But "just no" is infuriating and removes a woman's right to control her own body.  Which, as a woman, pisses me off.

Brina

[HeartShadow]

 
I was surprised - and gratified - that I had to sign off on hubby's vasectomy.  I didn't expect that.

It was actually FAIR.

[Owl]

I was surprised - and gratified - that I had to sign off on hubby's vasectomy.  I didn't expect that.

It was actually FAIR.

 I was 29 and headed for my second c-section when I set up to have my tubes tied while I was already opened up.  The doctor started out saying my husband needed to sign.  The narrowing of my eyes and what poured out of my mouth changed his mind - because it was apparently NOT required.  My then husband and I had talked it over, but bottom line it was/is my body and I didn't want to be pregnant again.

[Dark Waters]

I'm well aware of what a vasectomy entails.  I watched the entire procedure once, live and in person, on the man I love.  When my husband had his, he was told "This is permanent.  There's a relatively small chance of reversal, and reversal is expensive.  You need to be sure."  The math might not be exactly equivalent, but doctors seem to treat them as similarly permanent.

Expensive - yes, most medical plans won't cover reversal. But the briefing for mine neither cited small chances nor irreversible. May be a per hospital/doctor thing.

And it isn't just a math thing. Going under general anesthesia and being opened up entails a whole host of other risks and issues regardless of the type of surgery, and that simply isn't present in an out-patient vasectomy.
 

However I do agree that a flat out no is unacceptable. Once considered and risks/other options weighed it should be her choice.

[Owl]

Expensive - yes, most medical plans won't cover reversal. But the briefing for mine neither cited small chances nor irreversible. May be a per hospital/doctor thing.

And it isn't just a math thing. Going under general anesthesia and being opened up entails a whole host of other risks and issues regardless of the type of surgery, and that simply isn't present in an out-patient vasectomy.
 

However I do agree that a flat out no is unacceptable. Once considered and risks/other options weighed it should be her choice.

My tubal was in 1989, and by that time (if you weren't opened up for a c-section) the made 2 small slits in your abdomen and did the procedure with tiny instruments slipped in (I'm sure there's and official tern for this but I don't speak medical).

[HeartShadow]

Expensive - yes, most medical plans won't cover reversal. But the briefing for mine neither cited small chances nor irreversible. May be a per hospital/doctor thing.

And it isn't just a math thing. Going under general anesthesia and being opened up entails a whole host of other risks and issues regardless of the type of surgery, and that simply isn't present in an out-patient vasectomy.
 

However I do agree that a flat out no is unacceptable. Once considered and risks/other options weighed it should be her choice.

 
I had one tube removed - ectopic pregnancy - and I've got three tiny scars each maybe a cm long.

The only danger was the ectopic - not the tube removal.  they coulda easily taken both the same way.

[Dark Waters]

I had one tube removed - ectopic pregnancy - and I've got three tiny scars each maybe a cm long.

The only danger was the ectopic - not the tube removal.  they coulda easily taken both the same way.

 
Hmmm ... the procedure has come quite a ways then. Images I saw a while back showed the woman being opened as much as for a C-section. But they are always making advancements.

Did you still have to go under general anesthesia? That was the big concern for the hospital when I had surgery a while back. Just being put under, you had to sign off on the risk that you might not wake up due to some adverse reactions.