Critique on Fat and Happy
Savannah Masters
Mrs. Williamson
W131
23 September, 2014
Fat and Happy? Critique In the article “Fat and Happy?”, Hillel Schwartz questions why society views fat people as pathetic and unacceptable. He argues that if it were not for “fellow citizens” (179) mocking and scorning them for being fat, they would be perfectly content with themselves. As well as stating that many people discriminate toward fat people, Schwartz also points out that physicians are giving facts about obesity that are deceptive. Although Schwartz has a strong claim regarding acceptance of the overweight, the absence of support and the lack of writing techniques used in his article defeat the purpose of his argument. Schwartz goes in depth with how society remains unpleased with the obese and will not tolerate them any longer. Society’s judgment then pressures the obese to make their bodies satisfactory. They try to lose weight, only to gain the weight back, known as failed dieting (180). Schwartz not only disagrees with dieting, but he refers to those who diet as “cannibals”, because they starve themselves and burn their own body fat (185). This effects confidence as well, with the only thought that they are failures. Society is not the only attacker; Schwartz writes that doctors, whom have little knowledge on nutrition, inform patients that being fat leads to diseases. Schwartz states that professionals are intolerant with the obese, and that physicians act as if “examining fat people is challenging” (181). Schwartz concludes by stating that the world will turn into a better, judgment-free place if everyone is fat (183). Initially, Schwartz writes this article to inform society that bullying fat people about their weight affects them physically and emotionally. For example; a stewardess was fired for barely exceeding the weight limit of her profession (181). Schwartz sees the discernment about the employee as unfair (181). Schwartz’s solution to end the discrimination is
Mrs. Williamson
W131
23 September, 2014
Fat and Happy? Critique In the article “Fat and Happy?”, Hillel Schwartz questions why society views fat people as pathetic and unacceptable. He argues that if it were not for “fellow citizens” (179) mocking and scorning them for being fat, they would be perfectly content with themselves. As well as stating that many people discriminate toward fat people, Schwartz also points out that physicians are giving facts about obesity that are deceptive. Although Schwartz has a strong claim regarding acceptance of the overweight, the absence of support and the lack of writing techniques used in his article defeat the purpose of his argument. Schwartz goes in depth with how society remains unpleased with the obese and will not tolerate them any longer. Society’s judgment then pressures the obese to make their bodies satisfactory. They try to lose weight, only to gain the weight back, known as failed dieting (180). Schwartz not only disagrees with dieting, but he refers to those who diet as “cannibals”, because they starve themselves and burn their own body fat (185). This effects confidence as well, with the only thought that they are failures. Society is not the only attacker; Schwartz writes that doctors, whom have little knowledge on nutrition, inform patients that being fat leads to diseases. Schwartz states that professionals are intolerant with the obese, and that physicians act as if “examining fat people is challenging” (181). Schwartz concludes by stating that the world will turn into a better, judgment-free place if everyone is fat (183). Initially, Schwartz writes this article to inform society that bullying fat people about their weight affects them physically and emotionally. For example; a stewardess was fired for barely exceeding the weight limit of her profession (181). Schwartz sees the discernment about the employee as unfair (181). Schwartz’s solution to end the discrimination is
Cited: Schwartz, Hillel. “Fat and Happy?”. Writing and Reading for ACP Composition, Second Edition. Compiled by Christine R. Farris and Deanna M. Jessup. MA: Pearson, 2013. 179-186. Print