The Judgment of Paris Forum

Go Back   The Judgment of Paris Forum > 2005-2012 > 2011: January - December
User Name
Password
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 24th October 2011   #1
Meredith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2010
Posts: 188
Default Curves aid fertility; thinness an impediment

In another example of medical research overturning diet-starvation propaganda and reaffirming the healthiness of the fuller female figure, an eye-opening new article at the Daily Mail confirms that plus-size women (those who are "over"weight and yes, also those who are supposedly "ob***") are naturally fertile and can produce healthy babies, while underweight women tend towards infertility and starve their own embryos.

Here are some highlights:

Quote:
A study found that skinny women are less likely to become pregnant than those who are "over"weight – including those classed as dangerously ob***.

The researcher, fertility specialist Richard Sherbahn, said that the amount of attention being paid to the [supposed] health risks of being overweight meant that the perils of being underweight are being largely ignored.

The problem is being exacerbated by the ‘size zero’ culture in girls and young women striving to emulate the painfully thin look of models and other celebrities.

The difference in fertility between the plus-size women and the emaciated women is stunning. How ironic that the article still applies the adjective "dangerously" to curvy women, when, as this study shows, it is in fact being THIN that is dangerous to health. Being full-figured is actually healthy and beneficial:

Quote:
Some 50 per cent of those in the normal weight group had babies.

This compared with 45 per cent of those in the ob*** group, which included women classed as "dangerously" ob***, and just 34 per cent of those classed as very thin.

The women classed as very thin had a BMI, or body mass index of 14 to 18.

Dr Sherbahn said that while some other studies had hinted that being skinny may be worse for fertility than being f**, he was ‘surprised’ at the size of the effect.

A devastating study posted on the forum last year showed that being androgynously thin renders women infertile because it kills their estrogen. But shockingly, this new study shows that even if this hormone deficiency is artificially treated, underweight women still tend to be barren, whereas plus-size women are naturally fertile.

Quote:
It is known that being very thin can make it difficult to get pregnant naturally, due to a drop in the female sex hormone oestrogen.

But women undergoing IVF are given hormones, so this couldn’t be the reason for the results.

One possibility is that the embryos found it more difficult to implant in the wombs of the very thin women because they were undernourished.

So not only do women who subject themselves to exercise-torture often starve their own daughters (if they even have children) once those children are born, but, as this study shows, women who diet even starve their own embryos. It's truly horrifying.

The doctor who organized this study comments on the sociological background behind this alarming situation:

Quote:
Dr Sherbahn added that women are likely unaware that it can be more damaging for their fertility to be too thin rather than too f**.

"I am no expert on the sociological side of it but I have a teenage daughter and it seems that girls idolise models who are anorexic-looking.

"It seems that the ideal body structure for young women is this overly-skinny physique and women don’t understand that there is any concern about that."

Once and for all, the media, and the medical field, must stop irresponsibly creating so-called weight "epidemics" out of whole cloth and pretending that being plus-size is unhealthy, when in fact, study after study shows that being full-figured is far healthier for women in every way. Furthermore, it must start reporting on the fact that being thin is the truly unhealthy condition for women, and that diet-starvation is dangerous and even life-threatening.
Meredith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th October 2011   #2
Shelley
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 2010
Posts: 133
Default Re: Curves aid fertility; thinness an impediment

In perusing the above story, I came upon a vital follow-up article at the Daily Mail published just a day after the previous piece. It's by Liz Jones, who has written excellent articles condemning the fashion industry for its pro-anorexia criminality.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...MI-targets.html

In it, the author observes that

Quote:
there is this big myth that being thin doesn't compromise your life in any way
and shows how being thin does, in fact, compromise your life in devastating ways -- your life, and any life that you might bring into this world, if you even can.

She reaffirms the point about self-imposed starvation causing barrenness:

Quote:
Why is it so difficult for underweight women to conceive? When you starve your body, it shuts down all but essential services. Hormone production is one of the first to go. Your body believes you are under assault and that times are hard (for the eating-disorder sufferer both assumptions are correct) and so it doesn't believe bringing another mouth into the world is very wise. Without enough f**, women stop producing oestrogen, which in turn ripens and releases eggs.

The article then turns heartbreaking in that the author tells her own story. She describes how anorexia deprived her of motherhood:

Quote:
These eggs are not viable, of course, merely sort of in aspic, a relic of the life I could have had, if only I'd eaten.

"If only I'd eaten." It would be tragic enough in the case of a woman who had been starved due to poverty. But the idea that women in the West do this to themselves, voluntarily, is maddening and pitiable.

However, in a moment of amazing honesty that all diet-obsessed women should take to heart, the author admits that had she given birth while being in this thin-obsessed state, the consequences for her daughter would have been terrible:

Quote:
If I'd had a child, it is more than likely I would have passed on to her my issues with food and body image.

All too many young girls suffer exactly this fate.

The final passage of the article is an anecdote that is heart-rending, but must be read in full:

Quote:
I was in a hotel on Friday morning having breakfast. A couple of tables away, a gay couple were sat with their daughter, who was about five or six. She was wearing a tracksuit and she was, it has to be said, a little on the chubby side.

She kept getting up and browsing the elaborate, sumptuous buffet (it was the Four Seasons, after all). She came back nursing a tall glass of orange juice. 'Do you know how many calories are in that juice?' asked one of the men. 'Didn't we talk about diluting?'

And I saw her future mapped out for her. Never again will food just be something enjoyable; it will come with a figure: the number of calories, as well as her own. Which should shrink at all costs. Food will occupy her thoughts as she goes to sleep and when she wakes up. She will know, in fine detail, what she ate yesterday. She will plan what she will eat tomorrow.

Most often, she will fail to hit her target. But if she is the steely, self-disciplined type, she might succeed, and so have a lifetime of denial to look forward to. And loneliness. Until she shrivels like a prune, desiccated and defeated.

Forget the Government's BMI targets. Forget too Jamie Oliver's bid to get kids eating more healthily. Kids need calories. Don't make food an issue. Make it an irrelevance. And if you can't, then don't make kids.

I almost cried when I read about this poor young girl, whose "chubbiness" is undoubtedly natural and normal. Not only is she deprived of the food that she obviously craves (clearly she's already being starved by her "parents"), but she is even being stigmatized for drinking orange juice. And the fact that she is being brought up by two men with a hardwired antipathy to the female form lends the situation a particular horror, because we all know how such men treat the adolescent fashion models whom they employ -- forcing these young girls to starve away any trace of femininity. The prospect of having this pair subjecting this young girl, ostensibly their daughter, to such starvation, even when she is merely a child, is grotesque.

Every single thing about that picture is wrong. The circumstance that Liz Jones describes should never exist, and no young girl should ever be in such an unnatural, corrosive situation.
Shelley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st December 2011   #3
HSG
Administrator
 
Join Date: July 2005
Posts: 1,784
Default Re: Curves aid fertility; thinness an impediment


There is so much sadness in this thread that is breaks the heart. But it relays important information that everyone should apprehend.

The idea that any parents could put their own daughters on diets, depriving them of the food that their growing bodies require, is monstrous and unnatural. The most basic responsibility of motherhood is to nourish their young, something that they should do gladly and with joy. In Old World cultures, wives and mothers are happiest when they provide bountiful food for their families, the tables groaning with provender. But modern society has severed this traditional impulse of motherhood, brainwashing women into hating their naturally full-figured appearance, resenting their innately generous appetites, and sentencing themselves to a starvation regimen. For women to abuse themselves this way is bad enough, but to pass on such a self-destructive body hatred to their own daughters is sheer cruelty. It is like passing on a genetic disorder. Mothers should protect their daughters from the curve-o-phobic pressures of modern society, not betray their young to the agenda of diet corporations.

But to learn that when women willingly malnourish themselves (simply to conform to the fashion industry's emaciated standard), they starve their own embryos, thus harming their future offspring in the womb, when they are most helpless and vulnerable, represents a new degree of horror.

Who knows what damage this wilful starvation does to the embryos? Who knows what the consequences of such needless malnourishment might be? Does it diminish brain capacity? Does it hobble the future physical condition of the body? In starving herself to conform to the media's toxic standards, a woman might well be endangering her children's lives, even while they're still in the womb, putting her offspring at physical or mental risk, potentially burdening them with lifelong physiological disadvantages.

The most savage irony in this is that the rationalization that parents who inflict body-shame on their daughters commonly use to justify their pitiless actions is that they are trying to "improve their lives," because being plus-size is supposedly burthensome. (How absurd, even malicious.) But consider, according to such a rationale, how much worse the consequences of malnourishing the embryos in the womb might be, for the long-term health and well-being of a woman's offspring. She could first, while pregnant, be circumscribing her daughter's future mental capacities or physical condition, and then, once she is born, inflict psychological punishment on her daughter by stigmatizing her about her weight.

It is a long, tragic litany of horror, and it all begins with a woman's inability to appreciate the beauty of the fuller female figure. And such warped thinking is a direct consequence of the toxic visual culture that the fashion industry and the mass media are allowed to inflict on society.

With such a grim array of consequences, there is no way that any organ of the media should be allowed to valorize a look of cadaverous emaciation, an inhuman standard that literally ruins the lives of women of every age, from generation to generation.

* * *

In the article that Shelley linked, the young girl's fate is truly pitiable, a misfortune compounded by the fact that she being brought up in an environment that is inimical to begin with. As Shelley points out:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shelley
Not only is she deprived of the food that she obviously craves (clearly she's already being starved by her "parents"), but she is even being stigmatized for drinking orange juice. And the fact that she is being brought up by two men with a hardwired antipathy to the female form lends the situation a particular horror, because we all know how such men treat the adolescent fashion models whom they employ -- forcing these young girls to starve away any trace of femininity. The prospect of having this pair subjecting this young girl, ostensibly their daughter, to such starvation, even when she is merely a child, is grotesque.

Such considerations of essential aesthetic attitudes should be taken into account at the adoption stage. Just think: the girl might have grown up in a normal environment with a caring mother and father, who raised her self-esteem instead of undermining it, who allowed her to eat whatever she liked and thus develop a comfortable relationship with food, instead of saddling her with an eating disorder in the making.

A common thread linking the most gorgeous and popular plus-size models (Sophie Sheppard, Kelsey Olson, Katherine Roll, etc.) is that they all grew up in traditional, loving, supportive family environments, with parents who taught them to adore their curves and never expressed negativity about their full-figured appearance.

Hopefully, the images that these goddesses create can help foster a world in which all girls and young women grow up in similarly favourable circumstances, with mothers who have realized that plus-size beauty is true beauty, and who pass along this body love to their daughters.

Gorgeous plus-size model Katherine Roll (size 18) epitomizing curve-adoration, for Pink Shoppe:

Click to enlarge

- More of Katherine . . .

HSG is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 18:57.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.