You may now love yourself

11th March 2008

posted in Body Image, Diets, Eating Disorders |

Talk of faith-based diets have popped up again recently, both on blogs and in the news. According to these profiteering proselytizers and charlatans of Christ, gluttony is a sin (because all fat people gorge themselves, of course) and thinness is next to godliness.

The diet industry is a heartless and manipulative beast, concerned more with fattening the pocketbooks of its company execs than on the health or wellness of its diet-minded denizens. But faith-based diets are especially heinous because they play upon and exploit the very real religious and spiritual beliefs of people. If you can’t lose the weight, is it because you lack faith? If you can’t sustain the weight loss, does it mean you are sinful and blasphemous? Really, there have even been reports of people developing eating disorders after participating in some faith-based diets because they fear weight gain – an inescapable inevitability for 95 percent of all dieters – will keep them somehow from going to heaven.

Effective March 10, I am now an ordained minister through the Universal Life Church based in Modesto, Calif. Yes, really. It’s a “regularly established church or congregation” that holds regular meetings every Sunday morning, with congregations in all 50 states and internationally. My ordination authorizes me to “perform all peaceful rites and ceremonies of the church, including weddings, funerals, baptisms, blessings, and to preach, teach and hold meetings.”

My first sermon is this: God, however you define the concept, does not care how fat or thin you are. He/she does not care how good you look in a bikini nor does he/she care if you can now run marathons or scale large mountains. God is not impressed with how “good” you are nor does god measure your self-worth by the numbers on the scale. He/she does not want you to contribute, financially or otherwise, to a $55 billion-a-year and growing industry with a 95 percent product failure rate that succeeds only in fostering unhealthy relationships with food, weight and body image.

God, if there is such an entity, is more concerned with promoting love and kindness, tolerance and compassion, acceptance and non-judgment, altruism and giving. Your body is not only a temple, it is a sanctuary to be loved, respected, appreciated and nurtured, not subdued, subjugated, overpowered and whittled to an unattainable perfection. God would rather you focus on changing the world and making it a better place instead of narcissistically obsessing over your bodies in the name of secular ascetism.

By the power vested in me, I now pronounce you free from dieting of any kind. You may now love yourself.

Click to Bookmark

This entry was posted on Tuesday, March 11th, 2008 at 12:08 pm and is filed under Body Image, Diets, Eating Disorders. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

1 On March 11th, 2008, Paul said:

Preach on, Reverend.

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 12:19 pm

2 On March 11th, 2008, Karin said:

AMEN!

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 12:36 pm

3 On March 11th, 2008, Eden said:

I think that’s my date of ordination too, come to think of it. Hallelujah

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 12:42 pm

4 On March 11th, 2008, WeightlessOne said:

Welcome to the fold fellow ULC minister! And I think that’s one of the best sermons I’ve ever heard. AMEN!

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 1:09 pm

5 On March 11th, 2008, Becky said:

If anybody’s interested in a Christian perspective on this, I read a really good post at Ad Imaginem Dei.

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 1:23 pm

6 On March 11th, 2008, Tari said:

You are fucking brilliant. That is all.

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 1:27 pm

7 On March 11th, 2008, hotsauce said:

when i was in college, two of my friends got ordained with ULC and one night we thought it would be hilarious to have them marry me and one of my roommates. there was some alcoh– emmm… libations involved.

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 1:39 pm

8 On March 11th, 2008, spacedcowgirl said:

I agree with you 100% on all of this.

Even when I was much more clueless than I am now about the politics of dieting and the economics of the dieting industry, I thought these faith-based diets were ridiculous. I would think Christians across a wide range of conceptions of and beliefs about God could at least agree that God does not fucking care if you wear a size 6. In fact, it seems much more likely that he/she would rather you get out and do something positive (even if that’s just working in your garden, to say nothing of spending quality time with your kids, praying, doing charity work, and the like) instead of spending hours in the gym on an essentially narcissistic pursuit (i.e. exercise solely for weight loss instead of to love and take care of your body so it can stay healthy and “do God’s work”).

The body issues, societal prejudices, and disordered thinking of the authors of these diets are usually painfully obvious if you read them with a critical eye. It’s sort of sad, but it’s hard to feel sorry for them when they suck so many others into their vortex of self-hatred.

9 On March 11th, 2008, OTM said:

God also doesn’t care if your team wins the big game, btw. And doesn’t it ever occur to people that by bugging God with all this sports and weight related bullshit, they are distracting Him from more important matters? Like, I’d rather God ignored the Superbowl and focused on, oh, Darfur.

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 2:13 pm

10 On March 11th, 2008, OTM said:

Also, “profiteering proselytizers and charlatans of Christ” is now the officially preferred term for Godbags in Ottermatic’s Guide to Style.

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 2:16 pm

11 On March 11th, 2008, Emily said:

I was a member of Overeaters Anonymous for a couple of years. While there, I met several people who had lost over 100 lb and kept it off. How? By believing that it was God’s will for them to follow their diet. Therefore, any bite of food not prescribed by a nutritionist was a sin. It works, but is a scary way to live.

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 2:27 pm

12 On March 11th, 2008, Karen said:

So, Emily, were they otherwise sinless as well? Did they lie? Were they mean to people? For that matter, did they love their neighbor like themselves? Or did they decide that the only thing God was grading them on was keeping their weight off? Do people seriously think it is their responsibility TO GOD to be pretty?

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 2:41 pm

13 On March 11th, 2008, Katrina said:

Um, is that Simpson’s pic from an actual still? or something you cooked up? Because it is awesome!
As is the rest of the post.

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 3:03 pm

14 On March 11th, 2008, Meowser said:

Will you marry me? That is, perform the ceremony between me and my love? (If there ever is one?)

(And is that Simpsons thing actually from the show, or is that a mockup?)

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 3:08 pm

15 On March 11th, 2008, ShannonCC said:

Can we get an Amen? (oh wait, already have one, LOL!).

I ran into a Biblical dieter once. She was such a nice person and really meant well so I didn’t tell her how funny I found the idea that God cares what people weigh.

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 3:17 pm

16 On March 11th, 2008, Charlotte said:

I’m studying to become a pastor (I attend a seminary), so I feel this kind of “kinship” with you right now because you’re a minister. I know our particular churches/denominations don’t see eye to eye as far as doctrine and beliefs are concerned, but I’m glad to serve alongside you in ministry.

That being said, preach on sister! You are bringing truth to the masses, and there’s nothing wrong with that.

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 3:37 pm

17 On March 11th, 2008, Bree said:

I have a friend who is a devout Christian and went on a religious diet. She lost just a little over 20 lbs, but couldn’t lose anymore. She was frustrated, but I told her that she had probably hit her plateau. She attempted to stay on the diet, but after a few weeks, stopped it.

Those who use their religion to shame people into going on potentially dangerous diets are perhaps the worst out of all the fatphobes. There is a huge population of people out there where for them, the church is the only outlet they have for support. When you tell them that God hates fatties and they are sinful gluttons, you’re setting them up for some major self-esteem issues and perhaps harming a body that was never bad in the first place.

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 5:18 pm

18 On March 11th, 2008, Rachel said:

Charlotte, I’m a *minister* in name only. The church ordains anyone who applies through its website. Although I do find it highly ironic that I, a Buddhist atheist, can now be called reverend.

As for the Simpsons sign generator, as much as I’d love to claim my mad design skills, it’s also available for free on the internet at SignGenerator.org

Emily, one of the biggest problems I have with Overeaters Anonymous is the complete and total reliance they place on a higher figure (a.k.a. god). The first step requires members to admit they are “powerless” over food. While I do not believe eating disorders are a choice, I do not like nor promote the idea of a victim mentality here. The second and third steps require participants to “turn their lives over to the care of God as we understood Him,” which is really just code for the Christian god. Atheists like me wouldn’t be able to get past this third step.

So, basically, you entrust your recovery and health to a god figure and trust “Him” to remove all your “shortcomings” and “defects of character.” I call bullshit. Even if I were of a religious persuasion (and I grew up Christian), I believe this is very irresponsible advice. Just like with faith-based dieting, what if god doesn’t “cure” your eating disorder? Does this imply a lack of faith or sinfulness on your behalf? And while one is sorting through these questions, the eating disorder continues to intensify and get worse.

I think its very telling that like most diet companies, OA and its partner program, AA, refuse to release reports indicating both the short- and long-term effectiveness of its programs.

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 5:20 pm

19 On March 11th, 2008, stefanie said:

Oh, Lordy, here’s another one.

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 5:35 pm

20 On March 11th, 2008, Charlotte said:

I see, thanks for the clarification.

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 5:37 pm

21 On March 11th, 2008, Meowser said:

The second and third steps require participants to “turn their lives over to the care of God as we understood Him,” which is really just code for the Christian god. Atheists like me wouldn’t be able to get past this third step.

For what it’s worth, though, there *are* atheists in AA and other 12-step programs. They are encouraged to think of GOD as an acryonym for “Group of Drunks” (or, if you’re in DA, “Group of Debtors”). IOW, you make the group itself your higher power. Also, individual groups are allowed the discretion of degenderizing the God concept, as in “God as we understood God,” rather than “God as we understood Him.” This does allow for other god concepts besides the monotheist male “Christian God.” But it goes from meeting to meeting. I am in a program that is not AA or OA, and my home meeting does the degenderizing (which I’m fine with, being more likely to believe in multiple gods than only one), but when I’m at a meeting where the readings say “Him,” I’m likely to simply decline the readings (which you’re also allowed to do).

Just my .02.

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 6:09 pm

22 On March 11th, 2008, Grumpus said:

I’ve been checking out your site off and on every few days for months now…a lot of it has been news to me and I have to thank you for your insights.

Somewhat off-topic, but inspired by the theme…did you know gluttony has several sub-categories? It’s not just one basic sin? It’s a really convoluted one! Ah, so many ways to offend:

-Eating too soon! (this begs the question: Too soon from what?)
-Eating too expensively (tricky to avoid in these modern times…)
-Eating too much
-Eating too eagerly!
-Eating too daintily (though ‘too sloppily’ somehow doesn’t make the list)
-eating too fervently (??)

Just a slightly-related aside.

I really enjoy your site.

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 8:15 pm

23 On March 11th, 2008, Tori said:

That is so ironic…I’m involved in an eating-disorder support group that works on focusing our time and energy on GOD instead of food, so basically the opposite of using God as motivation to lose weight. We’re replacing our obsession with losing weight with something healthier. And it was a free group to join. The only profit the leaders get out of it is the knowledge that they did right in God’s eyes by helping all of us.

–

Tori
http://tori927blog.blogspot.com

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 8:28 pm

24 On March 11th, 2008, Karen said:

Not having any definitive proof one way or another as to the form of God’s existence, I tend to disregard nearly any reading of gender, form, or motivation into the word “God.” I read “God” to be a shorthand form of whatever you believe to be the driving force in the universe. We don’t have a good single word for it, and “God” works better, and is better understood, than any other explanation. I don’t like calling myself “agnostic,” mostly because I don’t expect proof to materialize. The fact of the world is enough proof to me that there is something keeping it going, so I don’t argue that. This may be a great deal or semantic double talk to people, but it does enable to me accept the word God peacefully. If you didn’t need/want that perspective feel free to disregard without offending me.

posted on March 11th, 2008 at 9:56 pm

25 On March 12th, 2008, Jen said:

lol Great post! Goddess bless you as you spread the good word.

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 12:00 am

26 On March 12th, 2008, wellroundedtype2 said:

Beautiful.
My concept of God isn’t that there’s a deity in the sky conducting a mass weigh-in. (wow, lots of potential for puns there).
My concept of God does include the idea that God doesn’t enjoy human suffering.

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 7:01 am

27 On March 12th, 2008, Vanessa said:

you know, i just have to say i think overeaters anonymous is in a different class than the weight loss with god diet clubs and groups and stuff. i’m a lapsed member of OA and i find the latter category creepy as hell. i’ve met a lot of people in OA who believe their weight is up to god and their faith can help them to avoid binging and accept their bodies for what they are.

i’m not sure what the official FA position is on compulsive overeating as an eating disorder, but it’s no fun to feel compelled to stuff yourself to the point of pain day after day. i don’t think self love can make that no longer a problem. so if people find help to stop doing that through OA and find that god helps them to accept themselves at whatever weight they settle on after they stop binging, what on earth could be wrong or anti-FA about that?

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 7:40 am

28 On March 12th, 2008, Rachel said:

Vanessa: My only problem with OA, outside of its promotion of a victim mentality, is that one’s eating disorder recovery is left entirely in god’s hands. I am deeply spiritual, a Buddhist, and while my faith has greatly enhanced my recovery, I would never entirely leave my earthly physical and mental health to a game of spiritual chance. While one’s faith can certainly aid in recovery, eating disorders – and I view compulsive overeating as one – require medical guidance first and foremost. Many an eating disorder has a strong biological component that can be alleviated with modern science – and science is much more reliable and immediate than praying for a “miracle.”

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 9:46 am

29 On March 12th, 2008, Karen said:

Vanessa, Rachel: I sorta subscribe to the old saying of “God helps those who help themselves.” Mostly, it seems to me that God has put these tools here and if we don’t use them, why should he give us more that we won’t use? Faith is a reason, not a cure-all.

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 9:57 am

30 On March 12th, 2008, Rachel said:

Very well put, Karen. An faith should be a positive force in one’s recovery, not a detriment to it (as in the cases of those who think their spiritual after-life depends on their ability to recover via faith-based programs).

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 10:07 am

31 On March 12th, 2008, Karen said:

Grumpus: The idea is that “gluttony” is really “obsession with food/eating.”

“Eating too soon” would be like showing up to a reception and heading straight for the buffet without greeting the host and/or waiting to be invited.

“Eating too expensively” is a relative term; just because food is expensive doesn’t mean you’re guilty. If you could feed multiple families of your size on your food bill for the same period, you’ve gone overboard. Really, this is more vanity, but its food related, so . . .

“Eating too much” is fairly obvious, includes binge eating (probably including bulimia, because of the binges), but the Catholic Church has always been big on the idea that God made your body exactly the way it needs to be, and if you’re doing something you shouldn’t it certainly isn’t because it works incorrectly. That might imply that God messed up the design somewhere.

“Eating too eagerly” is your “sloppily.” Really, if you don’t take the appropriate time to be careful, things get ugly.

Anorexia fits in with “daintily,” as to are obsessed with care in eating.

“Eating too fervently” Well, the only thing you should be doing fervently is praying. You certainly shouldn’t be giving that kind of attention to your earthly existence.

Disclaimer: I don’t believe it, I just explain it. I may have gotten some of it wrong; the Pope doesn’t let me use his special phone to God.

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 10:10 am

32 On March 12th, 2008, Ms Ingrid said:

I totally agree with you all. I have lost a lot of weight on one of those food plans that the FA or OA suggests.
But I strictly adhere to the food plan only and NO 12-steps or admitting being powerless and all that higher power stuff. Gives me creeps as I am not religious.

That part, I believe, scares so many people away from a very decent food plan.

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 10:12 am

33 On March 12th, 2008, Rachel said:

I may have gotten some of it wrong; the Pope doesn’t let me use his special phone to God.

Maybe you should ask President Bush if you can use his?

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 10:17 am

34 On March 12th, 2008, Vanessa said:

i think the OA apprach can be helpful to some people, less helpful to others, and there’s no reason to think it’s incompatible with either FA or other forms of help. to me i know people who may not know what FA is but espouse some of the exact same accepting your fat as biological and loving yourself type sentiments (those are some of my favorite people from OA).

12 step programs do their best not to impose religion, god, or any other oppressive concepts on their members. sometimes they succeed better than others but i can certainly name people in OA who are atheists- everyone isn’t a god nut. wheras i have definitely seen articles and tv spots on groups that literally do “christian dieting” and seem totally foreign and just plain crazy to me.

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 10:36 am

35 On March 12th, 2008, Karen said:

Bush is a Methodist, right? I don’t think Methodists get those, I think they go for the more democratic method. You know, if everyone agrees that something is then it must be? Like pi=3.14 or fat is necessarily unhealthy.

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 12:26 pm

36 On March 12th, 2008, Meowser said:

My only problem with OA, outside of its promotion of a victim mentality, is that one’s eating disorder recovery is left entirely in god’s hands.

My big argument with OA, actually, is that it actually encourages people to be more obsessed with food, with what they “can” and “can’t” have, and winds up being focused on weight loss in most groups rather than actually having a sane relationship with food and letting your weight fall where it may. I remember having a terrible time finding a sponsor in that program, far worse than in any other I’ve ever tried, because every time I called someone off the list I’d get, “I can’t, I just had a binge.” (A “binge” seems to mean “eating anything that’s not on the gray sheet,” which is a lot of “anything.” IOW, 2 crackers can be a “binge.” Too obsessive for me, thanks.)

But I can tell you that in every 12-step program I’ve ever been in there’s a concept of “footwork” as a tool in recovery. It’s absolutely NOT all left up to chance if you recover; not by a long shot. There’s a reason sponsors have you do inventories and examine your behaviors and attitudes and make amends to people you’ve harmed. That’s not just busywork; it’s the entire point of the program, taking responsibility for yourself. Where the higher power of your understanding comes in is giving you the strength and courage to do what’s necessary to clean up your side of the street.

I still think it’s a problematic concept when it comes to OA, because weight loss as proof of recovery is a notion that’s just going to make me even crazier. But if they had a Dieting Anonymous? Where weight loss was not even mentioned? I would so be all over that!

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 2:27 pm

37 On March 12th, 2008, Karen said:

So why not start one? Seriously, that may be the best Fat Acceptance idea I’ve heard since I found FA. Make “chronic dieting” synonymous with “chronic alcoholism” or “chronic gambling.” Dieting is, in nearly all instances a choice, and one that appears to become an obsessive addiction. Or does everyone think I’ve gone off my rocker completely?

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 2:36 pm

38 On March 12th, 2008, Rachel said:

Good thinking you two. I actually made up a shirt through Cafepress that reads “Diet survivor.” With all the shirts I’ve made or have ideas to make, I should really get on that setting up my own Cafepress storefront idea I meant to do ages ago.

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 3:04 pm

39 On March 12th, 2008, Emily said:

I love the idea of Dieters Anonymous. OA varies a lot depending on the place and people in the group. My group did a very strict version (known as HOW, which stands for honesty, open-mindedness, and willingness), which involves getting a food plan from a nutritionist and following it to the letter. That means telling your sponsor what and how much you are going to eat for the day, weighing and measuring everything you eat no matter what and not eating anything you didn’t commit to your sponsor. Many people lost a lot of weight and kept it off. I am a recovering anorexic, so I used the plan to gain weight — 25 lb. over 8 months and then maintained it for a year. The problem was that this kind of eating is just like being anorexic, but more food. Even when my food plan included 3000 calories a day, I found myself obsessed with food because I was very much on a diet. I had to eat specific things at specific times and it all became quite fetishistic. What I realized was that, although I returned to a healthy weight, eating in this way never let me get over my anorexia. I continued to be scared of food, and was terrified of going off my meal plan. The program promises “physical, emotional, and spiritual recovery,” and it delivered, but I never got the MENTAL recovery. I was still completely anorexic, even though I was eating enough to sustain a healthy weight.

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 3:40 pm

40 On March 12th, 2008, Karen said:

And your sponsors could be the person you call when you really, really, really want a sundae, but you don’t think you could make yourself eat “bad” food on your own without bucket loads of guilt. Or go on the shopping trip with you when you’re afraid you will buy clothes that don’t fit, just to get the smaller number on the tag. Maybe talk about what you enjoyed eating that week. Help people face and deal with their fears about food.

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 3:57 pm

41 On March 12th, 2008, devil said:

I don’t understand how ardent diet promoters can screech about the sin of gluttony while overlooking the sin of greed exhibited by the diet industry. I mean, sin is sin…right?

I was taught that the reason the seven deadly sins are so terrible is because they directly violate the first commandment (no other gods). So, any situation in which a Christian places something other than God before God would apply. This could mean the worshiping of money, fame or a particular dress size.

Wow. People who say the diet industry is evil aren’t off the mark, are they?

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 4:49 pm

42 On March 12th, 2008, Karen said:

money and fame are covered under “greed” or possibly lust, depending. I would imagine that a prettier body would be under either envy or lust, depending on circumstance. Lust isn’t just screwing everything in sight, it is preoccupation with things of a sexual nature.

posted on March 12th, 2008 at 5:46 pm

43 On March 13th, 2008, Ms Ingrid said:

Doing the Kay Sheppard plan with no OA or sponsors involved has ridded me of food obsession. I know exactly what I can eat, when and what I canNOT eat. So I don’t need to think about food outside my meal times.
It is such a feeling of freedom I cannot even describe.
All by myself. I never binge and I used alot before.
And I have lost 140 lbs. That’s the way to go.

posted on March 13th, 2008 at 8:36 am

44 On March 13th, 2008, Emily said:

Following a meal plan can be quite freeing in terms of breaking out of food obsession, but when a program sets you up to feel like a cosmic failure if you deviate from the plan (by as little as one bite, or one licked finger or knife), the plan itself becomes an obsession.

posted on March 13th, 2008 at 9:41 am

45 On March 14th, 2008, HeatherRadish said:

I’ve always felt if God wanted me to be small, He would have made me small. Instead, He gave me wide hips, a Rack of Doom, and the capacity to enjoy various plants in His Creation (especially hops and cacao). Who am I to tell him He’s wrong?

posted on March 14th, 2008 at 12:21 am

46 On June 20th, 2008, Muse said:

Gorgeous women by ‘social standards’ of Western society are allowed to be utter narcissists. We encourage that in Western culture. What a sad state of affairs. When life is lived through ‘ego’ everybody suffers. Faith is faith in the soul to be courageous. Narcissism encourages weakness… to ‘image.’ Even thinking in ‘non-faith-based’ terms this is powerful stuff… for example Jung et. al… our archtypes… our knowledge that body is spirit in cellular form.. we are all light … when atoms are enhanced by soul they get pretty excited and turn to light. So let’s not forget that the culture teaches narcissism. Let’s keep things at a soul leve and then we can understand the place of our bodies in the overall scheme of life itself. The channels that we are.. we must love. It’s a mandate… to love ourselves. That’s not narcissism. It’s keeping the soul alive through nourishing its channel: the body.

posted on June 20th, 2008 at 9:38 pm

47 On July 6th, 2008, minerva said:

There really IS a dieters anonymous now. This is a fat-positive 12-step group for compulsive dieters. Please join us, we need members!

http://www.dietersanonymous.org (forwards to the yahoo group)

posted on July 6th, 2008 at 7:16 pm