Short Cuts: You wanna be on top? edition

By | May 5, 2011

A very fat woman straddles a slender man, both in silhouetted profile.

Photo by Sam Vide, from the Village Voice article discussed below.

Let’s start at the bottom, and work our way up.

The Daily Mail, true to its usual levels of fail, has published an article whose sole purpose is to showcase a paranoid theory that wearing leggings will make you fatter.

Physiotherapist Sammy Margo said: ‘Leggings… hold in and support the quadriceps (thigh muscles), buttocks and core muscles in your tummy, and do the job the muscles are supposed to do.

‘As a result, the muscles are allowed to relax and switch off, so when we reveal our bodies for the first time as summer approaches, they are not as svelte or firm as they otherwise would be.’

THE OBESITY EPIDEMIC [sic] HAS BEEN SOLVED. Scientists can go home now! All we need to do is get a bill before Congress outlawing the sale and consumption of leggings and legging-related products. MSNBC isn’t much better, because they’ve actually bothered to respond to the above with a “fact check” featuring experts of their own. It’s an EXPERT THROWDOWN.

“That’s ridiculous,” says Dr. Jana Klauer, a weight loss expert in private practice in New York City. “There’s nothing in leggings that would cause any change to occur within the muscle or the fat of the leg,” she says.


While she admits that a too-tight legging on a chunky person can emphasize the wrong things and a fuller figure might look better in a semi-fitted, more relaxed pant, the clothes themselves “can’t make you fat or skinny.”

WHEW. Thanks MSNBC! No, wait, that’s not what I meant to say. What I meant to say was “fuck all y’all, and your stupid body-loathing crap!”

Elsewhere, earlier this week the New York Times ran an article about a new study, the first of its kind, which tracked the long-term efficacy of fat removal by liposuction. What’d these intrepid researchers discover? Surprisingly, it turns out the suctioned fat doesn’t stay away for long.

The result, published in the latest issue of Obesity, was that fat came back after it was suctioned out. It took a year, but it all returned. But it did not reappear in the women’s thighs. Instead, Dr. Eckel said, “it was redistributed upstairs,” mostly in the upper abdomen, but also around the shoulders and triceps of the arms.


…[O]besity researchers say they are not surprised that the women’s fat came back. The body, they say, “defends” its fat. If you lose weight, even by dieting, it comes back. And, the study showed, if you suck out the fat with liposuction, even if it’s only a pound, as it was for subjects in the study, it still comes back.

“It’s another chapter in the ‘You can’t fool Mother Nature’ story,’ ” said Dr. Rudolph Leibel, an obesity researcher at Columbia University.

The women in the study were “nonobese”, as recipients of liposuction tend to be—laboring as we all do under the yoke of our biology, liposuction cannot remove more than a pound or so of fat before the patient goes into shock, at which point her life is at stake. Thus, liposuction is really for folks with tiny cosmetic concerns, and not for substantial weight loss. As much as we’re told that our fat tissue is a horrible poison, pervading our bodies and slowly killing us all, it seems our bodies have a different take on the matter, and don’t cotton to big dramatic weight changes. Which is, uh, probably why it’s so difficult, if not impossible, for many people to permanently lose weight.

The fact that even liposuctioned fat regenerates elsewhere further underscores what lots of folks have argued anecdotally (and scientifically) for years: the human body usually responds to weight loss as a survival crisis, and works hard to replace the lost fat. Even obesity researchers are picking this up, y’all. Can we stop assuming that fatness is just a result of lazy overindulgence now?

Finally, the Village Voice has published a lengthy article on fat admirers. Really. Oh, it’s not perfect: there are comments from some of the interviewed FAs rife with ugly classism, some straight-up co-opting of GLBT activism, and a few beauty-fascist observations you’d expect from your standard cisgendered hetero dude. There is also a fair amount of emphasis on the suffering of fat-lady-admiring guys:

Keith Ferguson, a 24-year-old FA from Westchester (“We had two African-American kids in our schools and one fat girl”), wonders if he would have been treated better if he’d been gay. “The immediate reception from my friends was, ‘You’re a fetishistic freak, and I can’t believe I hang out with you.’ ” He confided in a friend, who then spilled it to their freshman class. “It’s almost like the same level of stigma that a homosexual would deal with. But in high school, there were two ‘out’ gay kids before I turned 16. People were like, ‘Ah-hahaha, you’re gay.’ They were maybe on the outskirts of the socially accepted circle, at the end of the day, but enough people liked them that it didn’t really matter. For me, I was actually ostracized.”

This article would have been improved if it’d taken a moment or two to actually identify the tension between these guys’ overall state of privilege and the way the women they find attractive are marginalized. It also would have been a stronger piece if it had offered more than a cursory glance at deconstructing cultural obesity stigma on the last page. As it is, most folks reading are unlikely to rethink their initial circus-sideshow interest. That said, I found it a fair effort at normalizing an attraction to a particular body type, something that is, after all, considered totally appropriate so long as the body type in question matches cultural beauty standards.

Got any interesting links I missed? Drop ’em in comments.


kbryna on May 5, 2011 at 11:35 am.

That *Obesity* study is verrrry interesting. I am particularly struck by: “If you lose weight, even by dieting, it comes back.”

I read that Village Voice article, and it made me feel uncomfortable, though I didn’t examine that too closely, because I have other shit to do. But I think you – as usual – nail it in your brief discussion of why the article fails. I was also a little creeped out by the way, still, even, as always, the Fat women are reduced to their bodies by a lot of the interviewees. It’s just more fetishizing the body, though admittedly different bodies.

I was also kind of annoyed that one of the two Fat women interviewed was interviewed at junior’s cheesecake, where the writer describes not just what she ate, but how much of it (she had some of her meal wrapped to go), and then describes her eating a piece of cheesecake. Christ, who CARES what people eat when they get interviewed, whether they’re skinny-minnies or Fat ladies?


polianarchy on May 5, 2011 at 11:37 am.

I love the last paragraph on this post, as it succinctly sums up my conflicted visceral response to the Village Voice article. Dude, you are such a great writer. When is your book coming out? I can’t wait!


Awlbiste on May 5, 2011 at 11:56 am.

I actually found it very difficult to read that Village Voice article and couldn’t finish it. As far as I got into read it they really did make it sound fetishy. And that’s okay I guess, people do have fetishes. And while my body is me I’m way more than my body. I completely get being attracted to particular body types (hello 6’+ men) but there’s a point at which it becomes obvious some people only like your fat, and not your other parts. For me, personally, (and I can only speak for me) I’m not into that.


Awlbiste on May 5, 2011 at 11:57 am.

Oops, “as far as I got into reading it.” So much for proofreading my own comment.


I-Need-Vambrances on May 5, 2011 at 12:15 pm.

I don’t know if I’ve ever commented, I’m not much of a commenter. I just finished reading that article and hopped over hear to see if you had. The article bothered me for the same reason it bothered you: they’re reduced to their bodies. I don’t want to be a “fat chick” any more than I want my thin friends to be the “skinny girl” all in order to get laid. My boyfriend, who is fat like me, does not date me because of my body. He is with me because of my brain, my wit, my awesome chocolate chip cookie recipe (that I stole from Alton Brown). The fact that he loves every inch of my body just comes with that.

I have a friend who met her fiance on one of those BBW sites and they’re happy. But I also know that she has complained that they’re not like me and my Mr.–he and I have one of those ‘fairy tale connections’, where we’re two sides of one coin. Basing a relationship off of a body time sucks. Physical attraction will only get anyone so far–and then you have to dig deeper to see if there is something else. But fat chicks…we’re just fat. The cavity in our cranium stores extra adipose tissue not actual brain matter.

By the way–thank you for your blog. I don’t remember how I found it, but I love it (and you!) a lot.


I-Need-Vambrances on May 5, 2011 at 12:50 pm.

*I hopped over HERE
*Basing a relationship off of a body TYPE sucks.


Jackie on May 5, 2011 at 12:18 pm.

At the end of the article this quote from one of the FAs:
he pauses. “That’s why I’m willing to put my life—if you want to call it that—on the line for this.”

oh my.

Thanks for the link Lesley–your feels spot on to me, positive, but also problematic.


YellowValkyrie on May 5, 2011 at 1:36 pm.

Here’s an article about how some truly revolutionary researchers in Australia are *actually talking to fat people* about how anti-obesity public health campaigns affect them:

It’s a departure from how such campaigns are typically framed, which is that there is “society” and then there are “obese people” who are the other, who exist outside of society and are a burden upon it. This is why we see writers who produce pieces like that stupid Marie Claire “watching fat people kiss is gross!” article, get all surprised that fat people are reading it.

Their approach is still problematic – the Australian researchers are still coming at fatness from a place of “how did you get this fat and how can we change you?” rather than a more HAES-style, inclusive approach to public health. But it’s good to see that the approach of talking to fat people, while headdeskingly obvious (to us), is finally getting some play in the mainstream.


kbryna on May 5, 2011 at 4:27 pm.

I just started reading the article you linked to and started laughing too hard to keep going:
“The way newspapers report on obesity can lead to only one conclusion, says Dr Samantha Thomas.
“Obesity causes headlessness,” she says.”

Whoever Dr Samantha Thomas is, I love her. 🙂

Not a bad article. I particularly like the “Obesity Myths” list at the bottom.


cutselvage on May 5, 2011 at 7:18 pm.

Dr Thomas is the bomb, y’all – a brilliant ally. Her blog is here:



YellowValkyrie on May 6, 2011 at 1:59 am.

Thanks for the link! The article I linked to originally was the first time I’d read about her and I wasn’t aware of her blog or any of her other work (I am American so that’s probably part of it). She seems more FA friendly than the article I read portrayed her. Sweet!


Samantha on May 8, 2011 at 8:15 pm.

Thanks for sharing the article 🙂 Always happy to chat about our research and share some of the articles we have written. You can find me on Twitter too at @doc_samantha


Samantha on May 8, 2011 at 8:18 pm.

PS: I dont think our approach is about ‘how did you get that fat and how can we change you’…. but I can understand how it might be perceived that way. Always happy to discuss!


YellowValkyrie on May 13, 2011 at 1:31 pm.

Sorry, I just saw that you replied to my comment! The part of the article that I was paraphrasing as “how did you get that fat…” was something they quoted you saying: “…no one had actually talked to the people themselves about what it was like to be obese, what had brought them to be where they were, how that affected their life chances…” (emphasis mine).

My interpretation of the quote and the article in general, not having any background knowledge of your work, was that you were critically examining the ineffectiveness of current public health campaigns, but still focused on implementing strategies to make people less fat.

Anyway, I’m looking forward to reading more of your work!


Louise on May 5, 2011 at 4:47 pm.

I’m not comfortable with the fat admirers thing, the main reason being that I consider myself to be an individual and if someone admires me it should be because they like me for myself and not just because I happen to be fat. That’s not to say I’m ashamed of being fat because I’m not, it’s part of my identity and I love my identity! But that identity is very personal and I don’t like being pigeon holed for my weight. Why can’t people just fall in love / lust with individuals rather than groups or types??


Jerome on May 5, 2011 at 5:49 pm.

But in high school, there were two ‘out’ gay kids before I turned 16. People were like, ‘Ah-hahaha, you’re gay.’ They were maybe on the outskirts of the socially accepted circle, at the end of the day, but enough people liked them that it didn’t really matter. For me, I was actually ostracized.”

What the FUCK?! Too…much…stupid…

I’m not saying that this person didn’t have a difficult experience in HS but I fail to see how it is just like the experience of gay teenager who may face daily threats of physical violence at school and at home, etc. What bullshit.


austin on May 8, 2011 at 5:38 am.

ypu ay not see it, but that is because you didnt experience it.


AlisonY on May 5, 2011 at 7:16 pm.

I actually liked the Village Voice article somewhat. Because, yay, fat people can be found just as attractive as thin people! WHO WOULD’VE GUESSED.

I actually checked out the guy’s blog on dating fat girls. And I liked it, mostly because he admits on a few posts that he has been in relationships with thin girls and that he doesn’t solely focus on dating girls because of their weight and that it’s just an attractive trait to him. Because it turns out that beauty is subjective. Again, WHO WOULD’VE GUESSED.

My big problem with the Village Voice article though is how they focused more on the voices of the thin men than on the fat girls.

I really don’t like the not-so-marginalized group being shown so “brave” and having their voice heard for being attracted to the marginalized group, the latter of whom only has SOME input in the article.

I’d like to hear MORE of the fat girls’ take on their relationships and dating life. I would’ve like that the article have been more about THEIR story.

Unfortunately when it comes to the topic of fat girls, it still seems that everybody’s voices but the fat girl’s is heard.

And people wonder why I hate that Judy Blume book (Blubber, if any of y’all are curious…)


thirtiesgirl on May 6, 2011 at 2:36 am.

I’d agree with most of what you’ve written here, especially this: “My big problem with the Village Voice article though is how they focused more on the voices of the thin men than on the fat girls.”

Having spent some time on some of the fat friendly forums and communities mentioned in the Village Voice article, I’ve observed a lot of fetishistic behavior from many members in those communities – some straight up fetishes (feederism, squashing, general fat fetish), and an overall simplistic “admiration” (their word) of fat bodies that comes very close to reducing people to just their bodies. I’ve also heard from some of the women who have met in person and dated some of the men in these communities, and it seems, by and large, that the men they meet are mostly interested in an instant hook-up with a person who has a body type that they objectify and/or fetishize. Not true, of course, for all the women in these communities. I’ve read accounts from several women who say they’ve found wonderful guys to date, and a few have married. But for the most part, most of the women’s experiences with men in these communities seem to lean towards objectification and fetish.

As Lesley writes, I think the article does a pretty good job of trying to normalize an attraction to people who are constantly ostracized for how they look. And I can understand why people are drawn to the communities mentioned in the article. If you’re not having any luck finding someone to date at school, at work, in your daily life, or on other dating websites, the realm of “BBW” dating sites and “FA” (“fat admirer”) communities may provide an outlet. …But again, the experience in those communities mostly seems to revolve around simplistic objectification bordering on fetish, and straight up fetish. If you want to date someone who has the ability to move beyond objectification of a specific body type (collective ‘you’ here), it seems rare that you’ll find it in those communities.


Jess on May 5, 2011 at 7:22 pm.

Keith is a dear friend of mine. I know pretty much almost everyone they talked to in that article on a very personal basis. I can’t speak for some of them, but Keith is a stand-up person. He actually WAS ostracized. I believe his parents legit kicked him out of their home. One mistake we make is assuming fatty lovers have it easy. Some do. A lot do. Some don’t, though. I do not think it is our job to compare the suffering of a fat person to the suffering of anyone else. What is going on in this blog entry is basically that, though.

Signed, fat chick.


Lesley on May 6, 2011 at 11:42 am.

I don’t doubt the truth of what Keith says in the least. However, making a comparison with other forms of oppression (i.e. “This is WORSE than being gay!”) is extremely problematic for many reasons. For one, it minimizes or dismisses the very real marginalization faced by gay folks. For another, Keith doesn’t actually know what it’s like to be gay, so he’s ill-equipped to make such a comparison. He could have described the ostracization he experienced without referencing any other forms of oppression, which would have been a lot more useful and a lot less off-putting.

You said: I do not think it is our job to compare the suffering of a fat person to the suffering of anyone else.

It’s a shame that’s what Keith did, then. It was an error that has probably made him less sympathetic to many folks who might otherwise be allies.

Also, I have NO illusions that FA dudes have it easy, by any stretch. But I am a teense annoyed that their suffering gets the spotlight here, when fat folks get it far worse AND don’t have the option of passing.


Abbe on May 6, 2011 at 2:01 am.

Did you catch Amy Farrell on the Colbert Report talking about her book “Fat Shame: Stigma and the Fat Body in American Culture.”
Rather difficult to get her point across amongst his jokes, but she made a good effort.


Erina on May 6, 2011 at 6:14 am.

Here’s a link for you — Really stunning and shaming ads starring fat children 🙁

Childhood Obesity Ads Rely On Fat-Shaming


paintmonkey on May 6, 2011 at 7:52 am.

If I could, I would make the Daily Mail sit on the naughty step and then abruptly send it to bed without a drink of milk forever. I’m sure it is run by a nest of wasps who sit cackling about weight all day, and then sting children’s legs for pleasure on sunny days.
Dreadful paper in every way, and I’ve had to stop looking at the website in order to save my monitor from being smashed in two.

I can only see that leggings might make you fat if you ordered a very large pair, filled them completely with ice cream, tied the leg-ends up, re- froze till set into an amusing double cone effect shape, and then consumed every day.


Pam on May 6, 2011 at 4:41 pm.

I can’t say much that hasn’t been said….except that I LOVE the big-girl-on-top photograph!


silentbeep on May 6, 2011 at 5:05 pm.

I want to say something here: sometimes people enter into “fetishistic” relationships willingly, consensually and quite happily out of their own accord. Speaking for myself, there was a time in my life I had no interest in a full-fledged relationship, and entering into purely sexual, consensual and respectful relationships were my thing. It is entirely possible to enter into a respectful relationship with someone, that’s based entirely on sex – I say this as a death fat woman.

I respect that fact that not everyone wants to be in a relationship purely based on bodily attraction(good for you in knowing what’s best for you!) but others do- I wish there was a little less judgment shown towards people who choose to participate in fetishes, kink or “purely” sexual relationships based on bodily attractions. Not all fetishists are “creepy” – in fact, in my experience, consent and respect were cornerstones of such relationships.


kbryna on May 7, 2011 at 1:04 am.

Oh, I agree about fetishistic relationships – as long as everyone’s on the same page and consenting, it’s all good.
I commented that I was creeped out by the fetishizing of the article, and I still am – though maybe objectification would have been a better word to use.


Kaesa on May 7, 2011 at 1:21 am.

I’m not currently attempting to date (other stuff is going on in my life) but in my very limited experience, the “creepy” fat admirers are the guys who are basically Nice Guys ™ with a preference for fat women. They do NOT claim to want a purely sexual relationship and indeed would never sully someone as lovely as me with such base desires, only they really love my ass/thighs/belly/whatever and if I could just gain x amount of pounds here, here, and here, I would be The Perfect Woman, and they turn all attempts at non-fat-related conversation back to my body, and wait, where are you going? NO ONE WILL LOVE YOU AS MUCH AS I DO, FATTY! I LIKE FAT GIRLS, BUT WHY ARE THEY ALL SO MEAN TO ME? Cue manly tears as I get the hell out of Dodge. Again.

I doubt there are more guys-who-prefer-fat-women are like this than there are in other groups of guys with a “type,” although I do think because the characteristic they find desirable is culturally stigmatized, the creepy entitled guys feel even MORE entitled to a one-way romantic AND sexual relationship, because as fat girls, we SHOULD be desperate and/or promiscuous.


thirtiesgirl on May 7, 2011 at 3:13 pm.

I have no issue with people engaging in fetish play and entering into a strictly sexual fetish relationship, as long as both parties are clear on what they want and they’re specifically looking for a no-strings-attached fetish relationship. My issue with communities like Dimensions, Fantasy Feeder, and others mentioned in the Village Voice article is that many people in those communities are not honest with others or clear with themselves about their intention for being there.

I’ve observed a lot of women (specifically, younger women) join these sites, often looking for people to date after experiencing a lot of ostracism in “real life” and other online dating and social networking communities. There are plenty of men and women in fat friendly/”fat admirer” communities who openly state their attraction to and flirt with the young women who join these sites, which is very appealing to them.

If a woman decides to meet a guy she’s met in one of these communities, the guy will often make a good show of ‘dating’ her – taking her to dinner, coffee, etc. – and having some conversation. If the first date/meet-up doesn’t lead to sex, the guy may be invested enough to go for a second date and even a third – maybe take her to a movie, or have dinner again, and basically put on a good show that he’s interested. But ultimately, his expectation is that the date will lead to sex because he likes having sex with fat women. If the date doesn’t lead to sex and/or the woman sees through his fakery, the connection ends there.

Or perhaps the woman goes along with his game (I mean, who doesn’t like to be flattered and told they’re physically attractive, even if you’re not entirely sure if the person is being sincere), has sex with him and eventually comes to the realization that she’s just fulfilling the guy’s sexual need and he’s not really interested in anything else. If he has other fetishes in mind, such as squashing or feeding, he may try to convince her to engage in those fetishes when they have sex. If the woman isn’t interested in participating in fetish play and feels devalued by the guy’s objectifying behavior, it’s obviously not a good experience for her. Which is why I don’t like some of the behavior I’ve observed and experienced myself from straight guys on “fat admirer” communities and “BBW” sites.

If people in these communities want to participate in sexual fetishes, including objectifying fat women (which is not really fetish play, but borders on fetishization, in my opinion, since the attraction/stimulation is derived not from who the person is, but what their body looks like), I think they should be clear about their intentions so the people who are interested in sharing their sexual fetishes can join them, and the people who are looking for a different connection can avoid them.

That, of course, is nearly an impossibility, and people will continue to deceive others and themselves to get the kind of sexual stimulation they want. Which is why I’ll continue to make cautionary statements about these communities when I can in the hopes that people will use their best judgment when deciding to join them.


swingswingswing on May 6, 2011 at 5:26 pm.

CURSE YOU, Leslie!

Because you spoke so highly of it, I started to watch “My So-Called Life” on Netflix. It was so good I couldn’t stop watching it! Then the end came…Has there ever been a worse cliff-hanger??!

That is all.


fatvegancommie on May 6, 2011 at 9:52 pm.

i was so happy to see fat women associated with romance, sex, and desirability instead of monstrous revulsion, i was at first read quite pleased with the article.

after it sunk in, i said to my husband, “oh I get it, straight white male likes fat women -that must mean we are okay, totally accepted and mainstream.” So, buck up ladies, when white men like you, you’ve arrived!

what a world


JupiterPluvius on May 7, 2011 at 7:57 pm.

If a tree falls in the forest and no straight cis white middle-class man is there to see it, did it even happen?


Kath on May 7, 2011 at 1:56 am.

I wanna know what the hell the leggings that physiotherapist was wearing are made of! Adamantium?


Mulberry on May 7, 2011 at 8:04 pm.

All right, I’m asking what is wrong with fetishism. I think fetishism is a name given to activites considered to be deviant, that is, a bad word for something that may not in itself be particularly bad.
As I understand the term, fat fetishism is not a bad thing. What is bad is the lack of power associated with it.
If someone prefers fat women because he fancies what he perceives to be at the bottom rung of society, that is a problem, but not because of fat.
Thin fetishism is a seller’s market; fat fetishism is a buyer’s market and this is what comes of it.


thirtiesgirl on May 8, 2011 at 12:10 pm.

My take on it: I see nothing wrong with fetishism, for fat bodies or anything else. If both parties enter into a fetishistic sexual relationship with consent and with clear motives on what they want to get out of the relationship (i.e., it’s purely sexual and/or solely for the purpose of meeting someone’s fetish), I have no problem with that. If, however, the parties entering into the relationship are *not* clear about their motives, either to themselves or to the other person involved, that creates a problem, in my opinion. I’ve observed many guys in “fat admirer” communities who are not clear about their motives. They “date” women they’ve met in these communities solely with the intent of fulfilling their fetish to have sex with fat women, not because they’re interested in getting to know the person they’re “dating.” And many times, the women are unclear that the guy is just interested in casual sex and fulfilling his fetish, because he isn’t open about it.

Again, nothing wrong with fetishizing fat bodies and wanting to have casual sex with fat people, as long as both parties involved are clear on the intention and what they’re getting out of it. But if the guy isn’t honest with himself and with the women he’s “dating,” it creates a problem and can lead to women losing confidence in themselves because they start to feel like the only reason they attract heterosexual male interest is for casual sex and fetish play.


Kendra on May 12, 2011 at 2:36 am.

Re: interesting links — can “totally pissed me off” count as interesting? I really really REALLY would love it if you would address two articles by the same author that recently ran in Salon:

First, “Why the Fat Guy Should Lose His Privilege”:
This pissed me off so immensely that I just can’t… even… And my first thought was, “God, I need Lesley to excoriate this guy!”

And then! AND THEN! This asshat dares to write an article about “How Our Culture Is Ruining Women’s Health,” bemoaning a study that says a significant portion of women would prefer to be depressed or blind than obese:

I just posted a comment on that second article attempting to take the author to task. But I’m so pissed, I can’t form complete sentences. And even if I could, I couldn’t take apart his arguments and rip him a new one as well as you could.


YellowValkyrie on May 13, 2011 at 1:42 pm.

Here’s another link: lose weight by mutilating your tongue and making it too painful to eat! ITS ABOUT HEALTH, PEOPLE.


Steph on May 15, 2011 at 12:02 am.

I just found this on Youtube – had never seen it before, it’s v old – from the mid-90s, so it’s very dated, but has a lot of interesting stuff in it. Dawn French’s confidence and humour are inspirational, she seems completely comfortable exploring these ideas, not caring who feels uncomfortable about it.

The attitudes of the photographer in part 2, and the magazine people in part 4 are almost hyperbolic, for a while I thought it was a joke but was alarmed to realise they are being genuine. You have probably seen this but I thought it was worth posting in case you haven’t. 🙂


LadyWhoKnows on May 25, 2011 at 11:06 pm.

I saw that about a year ago and it was kind of my introduction to FA, preceeded only by Lynn Murray’s novels. Dawn French is a favorite comedian of mine and I clicked on the youtube feature without realizing what it was, but I watched the whole thing. She had some interesting things to say, but I think she thin-bashes a little too much and as a not skinny but average weight person that irritated me. If you want respect, you have to give it.


Leave Your Comment

Your email will not be published or shared. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>