I.... hmm. That was a REALLY impressive bit of reality editing that just happened. You didn't respond to anything I said and you completely dodged the question I asked. You just skimmed the words for key points, responded to what you thought I said then twisted it to be about how victimized you are. I still can't tell if you're doing it on purpose or if you really can't fully process or understand the things people are saying due to some kind of brain weasels.
I work in substance abuse recovery, and have worked in the past on crisis hotlines. You know what we learn in both? You can't talk to a person while they're in an altered state. It's why detox is "boring" and the next step (clinical stabilization) has the groups and the counselors. It's why we were instructed to not take crisis calls from people who were drunk or high. It's why the hospital won't admit people for suicidality until after they've sobered up, hence having to sit and wait under supervision for hours on end. Until she gets sober there's no point in trying to talk to her about how bigoted, reactionary, and abusive she's behaving. Nothings going to stick. I do hope you can get sober, for your and everyone else's sake.
Why do you have to remember that it's possible? Even if it were the case, why would it matter? Furthermore, what makes you think it's actually the case that some of them are "just making excuses"? What makes you think that "too many" people say that they have conditions? All the data we have available says that disabilities are massively underreported, and that many people who genuinely have problems that should be accommodated are afraid to say anything because of people like you. No data we have available suggests that there's even a statistically significant rate of people claiming conditions they don't have. Does it happen? Maybe! Does it happen more than 0.1% of the time? No. Does it happen often enough to justify talking about it or worrying about it? No. Does talking about it result in much more severe harm to people who really do have problems? Yes. You are actively contributing to severe harm to vulnerable people. You are not helping anyone at all. Your sole justification is that you are drawn like a moth to the flame to any opportunity to blame people for things that happen to them and make excuses for mocking them and hurting them. That is a shitty justification. And seconding Beldaran's point: You need to get sober.
So basically if they have it, they should be trying to manage their weight, say by switching to a diabetic diet? (Unless you're suggesting that diabetics can't sustain that forever?) If someone goes around saying that they have PCOS and aren't doing anything to manage their disease, that's on them. They shouldn't be trying to tell everyone else that they should be fat, too. I can't remember if they officically diagnosed me with PCOS, or just gave me Metformin and birth control. I can't remember if the wand was for looking at the ovaries, making sure my uterus wasn't wandering, or checking the placement of the IUD. But you know what? I'm not taking my medicine. Once I get the drinking dealt with, I'll lose weight without going back on Metformin just to prove that it's not impossible.
Exactly, and none of your business. You don't know! You don't know if they are trying to manage their disease or not unless they explicitly say they aren't. Exactly how often have you ACTUALLY heard someone go "I have [disease] but fuck treating it, I like being sick and in pain fat." Or do you just assume? (Here's a hint: someone not being torn by self-loathing from body issues doesn't count!)
hell, I do like being fat! It's taken me goddamn years to get to that point, but I do! I can't imagine my body another way. Feel free to tell me how I'm hurting the body positivity movement for not feeling shitty about my body.
It's rather unfortunate that I had to leave before the PCOS zine workshop at the thing I was at today, but I do have the Twitter thread on it to work off. Anyway, a thing that's extremely overlooked by the medical establishment is the increased likelihood of eating disorders, which makes sense because one of the parts of the standard feminization treatment everyone gets shoved into is making you lose weight and guilt-tripping you if you don't, because clearly it's the cause of all the issues the patient has. I actually suspect the improvement is in no small part due to the lowered stress from not having your doctor yell at you to lose more weight anymore.
Because if you don't remember, it's like you don't know it? I couldn't tell you when I was in Canada beyond "Beginning of September" because I don't remember the date. The ones who lie, be obnoxious about it, and get caught out are the ones who are hurting people by putting that doubt out there. People should give the benefit of the doubt, but realize that it can get hard if people abuse that. Yeah, I forgot this question under you insisting that I'm doing something that I'm not. How about if I don't have to spend so much time explaining how something is repeatedly? That way, I can focus in more on questions like this.
ARGH!! Are you reading a single thing I said? No?? PCOS is VASTLY UNDERDIAGNOSED and even when it's diagnosed can make it impossible to do anything about the weight side of it because one of the common treatment (hormones) can have weight gain as a side effect. Also what someone does, or doesn't manage their issues (IF IT'S EVEN DIAGNOSED; MUST I HIGHLIGHT THAT 70% ISSUE AGAIN) is their own damn business, not yours, unless they actively ask for your opinion/advice. Look if you don't wanna take your prescription meds that's your own damn business. But somehow I don't trust you not to turn into a massive ass about it and lording it over other people if you manage it.
frankly, greallan, i dont think "overweight person encourages others to gain weight/tells others its useless to diet" is as common a problem as you think it is and by that i mean that i have literally never seen that, ever unless you're seeing "im fat but learning to love myself" as that??? in which case holy reading comprehension batman
Thank you for answering my list of questions, which shows that the thing you're most stuck on is the idea of fat people telling other fat people to gain weight/not lose weight and... I have literally only ever seen that in feederism fetish zones. Nowhere else. The last time I thought I saw it outside of that, it turned out to be a bot using pictures of a lady who does fetish sex work and a legitimately fake abuse story to sell weight loss products at the end of the twitter thread, which was one of the most abhorrent methods of diet shake marketing I have ever seen. I've seen people telling other folks not to lose weight just so other people will think they are attractive, or telling them that they aren't inherently awful for being fat, which is very fucking different. But Beldaran is right, you need to get help. You need to be sober. Please get the help, because by actually answering that list I believe you've shown that you do want to get better and learn.
I mean it's been pretty well established that reading comprehension is not a thing greallan excels at, I would not be surprised at them taking any instance of "I've learned to accept myself and love the body that I'm in because it's the only one I have and would rather not live the short time I have on this earth in constant self loathing," as "promoting obesity" and "not managing [their] condition [to the arbitrary degree that greallan, who is not a doctor nor a part of any internet rando's life, deems acceptable]" which makes them fair game to target with shame and villify.
Do you know what this sounds like. Like, seriously, this sent a jolt of visceral distress through me because the most recent time I have seen that rhetoric, almost those exact words? Surrounded the recent supreme court appointee and rape accusations in general. Stop it. Faking disabilities, faking need, is incredibly uncommon and you are not qualified to judge any case of it, at all, even a little bit.
And to be fair to people who do like themselves the way they are, I mean specifically people using "I like my fat" openly as an excuse not to manage their disease. Because even with people who are body positive and have weight issues from being sick, I've never seen one decide that being symptomatic was preferable to being treated because they like their fat. I've known people who didn't treat their symptoms because they couldn't afford to, because their insurance didn't cover it, because their living situation made it infeasible, but were still body positive. But none who chose sickness and pain because of body positivity.
Do you have any evidence showing that this happens? Because I've never seen it. Not once. All the doubt I've seen has come from third-party agitators like you, who have never cited sources or shown that the thing they claimed actually happened. I've seen angry people who did no research mocking other people and asserting that they're "faking", but I've seen that many times in cases where actual medical records existed to show that the alleged faker was in fact entirely truthful and accurate. You have asserted, repeatedly, that this is a problem. You have put that doubt out there. You haven't even shown that the liars exist, but you're claiming they put the doubt out there. But they didn't. You did. For it to be "hard" to give the benefit of the doubt, you should have a statistically significant number of examples. Not just a claim that you're sure it happened. It should be, say, over 10% of all observed claims of disability being false. And that's not even close to true. Meanwhile, we have very good statistics showing that disability is massively underreported. EDIT: as pointed out, "statistically significant" is the wrong term. I'm looking for a number of samples large enough that there would be a measurable change in overall statistics from them. So, for instance, "if no one were faking disabilities to get access to scooters, the overall cost of providing scooters would decline by 1%". Or 5%. And I'd honestly say that 1% is probably "insignificant", but right now, I don't have evidence that it'd be even 0.01%; in other words, it's not a significant component of the statistics we have on the costs and benefits of accommodating disabilities.
I've seen it happen. TITP (this-is-thin-privilege) is a notorious example, or at least was a few years ago, haven't heard of that blog in a while. It's extremely uncommon, though, and practically everyone hates this sort of people, so trying to claim this is representative of anyone and a justification for treating other people like shit in case they're like this would be pretty stupid IMO.
That's not how statistical significance works. You should know this. Hell, when you're not throwing around jargon because you're mad, you do know this. I have silently watched you and your orbiters become increasingly angry and unhinged about this poster for quite a while. Take a big deep breath and quit acting like a goddam fool.
