Fat people cannot win, says columnist, as Ozempic debate intensifies
Rebecca Shaw argues that society subjects fat individuals to moral scrutiny regardless of how they manage their weight, using the viral discussion around actor John Goodman as a case study.
Opinion writer Rebecca Shaw has published a column in The Guardian arguing that society treats fat people as unable to win, regardless of their actions. Shaw, who identifies as a lifelong member of the "Fat Lesbian Club," uses the recent viral discussion surrounding actor John Goodman’s weight loss to illustrate what she describes as a broader societal conundrum.
A photo of the 74-year-old actor, known for roles in Roseanne, The Big Lebowski, and as Fred Flintstone, showing significant weight loss went viral last week. The image sparked a debate about the method behind his transformation, with some observers praising his hard work while others claimed he had used medication such as Ozempic.
Shaw contends that the use of weight loss medication is unfairly labelled as "cheating" or "taking the easy way" compared to other health interventions. She notes that when people quit smoking with medication, society does not typically accuse them of cheating, nor does it insist they go "cold turkey" to prove their commitment. She argues that the same logic should apply to weight loss, where making the process easier with less suffering does not make the outcome less legitimate.
The columnist asserts that fat individuals face moral scrutiny whether they lose weight or remain fat. If they are fat, they are often viewed as a moral failing; if they lose weight with drugs, they are said not to have earned it. Shaw describes this dynamic as condescension and cruelty packaged as health concerns, noting that society often demands fat people prove they are sufficiently miserable about their size.
Shaw explicitly states that she does not know the details of Goodman’s specific method and does not care, arguing that the focus should be on the societal reaction rather than the individual case. She suggests that the debate reveals a desire for fat people to suffer sufficiently to "deserve" their weight loss, rather than simply acknowledging that bodies are different sizes and respond differently to various treatments.
In her conclusion, Shaw calls for fat people’s bodies to be treated as private matters rather than public property. She argues that individuals should be allowed to lose weight without providing a moral explanation for how they did it, and to remain fat without having to convince others of their unhappiness. "We should be allowed to exercise, eat, dress, date, and just go about our lives without our bodies becoming public property," she writes.
