Bodies That Matter
Introduction
“Hey, you there!” shouts the police officer (Althusser, 1972). At this moment, if you turn, the police officer is calling to you. You recognize yourself as the subject of his call thus becoming the subject. This could be a grammar lesson, but within this paper, this interpellation is about the body that we occupy, the flesh we call home. A police officer hailing different people in different bodies can create a multitude of scenarios – based on many intersections of identity. Throughout this paper, we will discuss the ways the axises of power create complicated relationships with the way we view and discuss bodies.
Everyone has a body. We are constantly looking at others, it is what makes communication possible. The way we present ourselves creates connections, friendships; it makes up our lives. There are some identities that we cannot choose for ourselves or hide from others, and some perceptions we cannot change. This literature review evaluates theories from intersectional research methods to discuss the usefulness and limitations within each study for theorizing about fat bodies.
Summary
Called into Being
Althusser (1972) discusses within this essay the definitions of the words “ideology” and the (re)production of power. When the hegemony is reproduced among subjects and systems of power created complicated relationships between domination and subjugation. Althusser uses the term “interpellation process” to describe the way subjects view themselves within the ideology. Ideology, interpellation, and subjectivity simultaneously exist and reinforce each other. Acknowledging one’s own subjectivity can be hard to do; one critic (Dean, 2016) argued that Althusser got the equation backwards – interpellation, Dean (2016) states, should be a theory of individuation – the enclosure of individuality comes before subjectivity. The police calling a subject from a crowd, becomes an individual experience once the individual realizes they are being hailed. Although Dean (2016) makes good points about where Althusser falls short, it could be argued that subjectivity and enclosed individuality are one-in-the-same. Althusser’s idea of interpellation can be applied to fat bodies by looking in a mirror (Murray, 2005). By seeing themself, the subject realizes their place and their personhood within the hegemony – focusing on trying to fit into the status quo, killing themself to fit within the ideology. Both subjectivity and individuality are interpellated and criticized. Where Althusser falls short is in understanding of reclamation and fighting status quo.
Foucault (1978) hailing to Althusser (1972) focused on the ways sexuality has become a place of implementing power imbalances starting in the seventeenth century. He did a genealogy of sexuality, explaining that the bourgeoisie was most afraid of their class dying out thus making sex out to be a private, practical activity. Foucault’s (1978) work moves into my critique of Althusser (1972), that Althusser (1972) leaves out the part of interpellation that discusses the “power that knowledge of subjugation can have; discourse represents a crucial tool that both conveys and produces power” (Foucault, 1976, p. 133).
In the nineteenth century, people began to understand their sexualities – some turning to prostitution and psychiatry to fight back against their repression. Foucault (1978) believed being more open about our sexuality, talking about sex, enjoying it is fundamental to free ourselves from this repression. Foucault, a post-structuralist, argued that our concepts of sexuality and self-image are ever-changing with history and culture. Foucault’s (1978) work can be applied to the way fat bodies are discussed. By reclaiming our bodies, expressing them, and enjoying them, we can prove that knowledge is power. Foucault’s (1978) work focuses on the French 1970s, so just at the beginning of the Fat Acceptance movement (Afful and Ricciardelli, 2015) and much before the medicalization and legalization of obesity (Freeman, 2020); however, I would argue that if fatness was Foucault’s focus and not sexuality, the same would be true – talk about it, show it, embrace it. I do worry that it would create an objectification of fatness, as sexuality discourse often becomes about the object of desire, and takes away the agency of the subject.
Butler (1993) cites Foucault as a starting point for research on gender and performance. Bodies That Matter (1993) focuses on the ways that we perform genders and the reasons that bodies (and gender) are so subjected to criticism. Butler focuses on queer and feminine bodies in her research, but most importantly, dissects the notion that gender and sex are one in the same. Butler (1993) discusses the ways that gender is a performance that someone puts on rather than something a person is. “Performativity” posits that the body in itself is a social construct and all factors surrounding the body – body, gender, sexuality, biology – are determined by public discourse and have nothing to do with the material body. As a non-binary mom, yes, thank you, Judith Butler. As a queer fat person, yikes. There are definitely ways that we can perform our genders and hide our identities (for protection/for ourselves), but many of our bodies (that matter) are not able to be hidden. There is no way to hide a fat body, a Black body, a disabled body. There is power in being able to dissect gender and sex, discuss the ways that we perform our genders, but there are many identities that are not capable/willing to change, and the failure to recognize this within their analysis of gender is harmful.
Shugart (2008) writes about the way culture views obesity by doing an analysis of media coverage of three women who have “struggled” with weight gain; Oprah Winfrey, Carnie Wilson, and Kirstie Allen. Shugart faults neoliberalism for blaming individuals for weight gain/fatness. Because neoliberalism touts obesity as a personal responsibility and not collective (or not a problem), people are shamed for their weight. These examples I think are good for thinking about popular culture and how it deals with body size.
Fahs (2017) used qualitative data from a study of 20 women in the United States. She found that there were five things most of the women discussed in their interviews: “Women’s dreaded bodies: (1) defective femininity; (2) ‘Freak’ body parts; (3) fear of excessiveness; (4) dread about a specific person’s body; and (5) disgust about Smelliness.” (189). Fahs connects the interview answers with the intersectional nature of oppression; so many of the women spoke about how they don’t want to be with someone (or be someone) too dark, too old, too fat, too smelly, or too disabled. Fahs focused on body acceptance in her research, which she defines as “Body acceptance refers to the process whereby individuals attempt to renounce the dominant body discourses and achieve a state of comfort in their current body (195).” Is that enough?
Elias and Gill (2014) discuss “love your body” discourses’ connections with neoliberalism, capitalism, social media usage, and the commodification of feminism. “The market for self-esteem” can be seen in advertisements from companies like Dove and American Eagle (Aerie). The companies that embrace the “love your body” campaigns are often the same companies that profit off of body dissatisfaction (Fahs, 2017). Darwin and Miller (2021) evaluate the “Body Positivity” movement and its goal of cultural change and reclaiming self-love.
Body positivity has reinforced heteropatriarchal values that encourage women to self-objectify for the sack of liberation – leaving hegemonic power systems in place untouched. Elias and Gill (2014) note that fat studies scholars argue that Fat Positivity should not be seen as the same movement as the Body Positivity movement as the Fat Positivity movement has a focus on systemic discrimination that fat women experience. Body Acceptance and Body Neutrality are also seen online, and although they focus on accepting one’s own body image – it also reeks of neoliberalism and self-surveillance. Murray (2008) discusses Wann’s 1998 book, Fat! So that encourages people to celebrate their fat bodies, creating positive political identities and connotations with their own flesh. Murray (2008) criticizes Wann’s rejection of political and lived experiences that cannot be escaped by accepting your own material flesh (108). Wann (1998) argues that by declaring yourself a “fatso”, you can be “at home in your body” – oversimplifying the experience many fat women have of detaching themselves from their bodies. This “Body Acceptance” does not erase shame, attempt to change the hegemony but rather reinforces neoliberal ideas of self-love that cannot fight the oppressive systems that exist. Murray (2008) claims these declarative statements are attempting to reverse the ideals rather than dismantling them once and for all (117).
Murray’s (2005) article examines the way fat acceptance groups have been created and started because of people rejecting the hate the society projects onto fat people. Fat people are “known” to be lazy, unwilling to change, commit to healthy living, and are “failed body projects” (p. 155). Murray’s article recalls the first time she was told to wear shapewear by her mother. She saw the way her body was supposed to create an illusion of being a thin body. This experience made Murray look into a “Size Acceptance” movement on the internet that celebrated fatness and accepted their bodies as they were. We come out as fat when we recognize that our fat body is as it is, but the society and oppressive system is still intact. Instead of moving from thin is good, fat is bad to the opposite, Murray states that it’s complicated; we can be pleased in our bodies, but fat bodies are still seen as lazy, ugly, invisible, despite being so visible – there needs to be more than coming out as fat – we need to fight against the stigma, oppression, and we need to do it for everyone.
Murray (2007) analyzes the way fat bodies are seen in culture as deviant and "other"ed. Murray compares the way Black bodies are pathologized negatively to the same way fat bodies are. Within the health community, there are still cultural implications and if culture deems Black or fat bodies are deviant, not standard, they are often neglected and ignored. The persistence of tacit bodily knowledge does not leave the medical room. When there is a "normal", there is an abnormal which makes discrimination and neglect ever present. This article breaks down the socio-cultural function of normality. We can see and read that Black patients are underdiagnosed, misdiagnosed, not referred way more often than white patients. Murray just extends this to fat bodies as well. Although Murray does not do this in the article per se, it is easy to recognize the intersectionality of race, class, ability, size, etc. that can cause neglect in the medical examination room. Not only do our doctors give us mistreatment, but our media does as well. When there is a standard, a norm, there is a clear path to abuse and punching-down to fat, Black, disabled, etc. bodies.
Look at my arm! I have ploughed, and planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could head me! And ain’t I a woman? I could work as much and eat as much as a man— when I could get it— and bear de lash as well! And ain’t I a woman? I have borne thirteen chilern, and seen ’em mos’ all sold off to slavery, and when I cried out with my mother’s grief, none but Jesus heard me! And ain’t I a woman? (Truth, 1851)
Reclaiming Your Citizenship
When we think about the concepts of “interpellation”, “discourse”, and “performance” and their application to bodies – the question of agency is important. Three white people writing about discursive powers create questions about, well, everyone else.
McKerrow (1998) does a critical analysis of the “administrative rhetoric” that we are so used to analyzing -- the distribution of resources to maintain power. He suggests using the new rhetoric -- corporeal rhetoric -- that focuses on the lived experiences people have. McKerrow evaluates the way corporeal rhetoric helps us understand the lived experiences of those that are not included in the administrative rhetoric (women, people of color, non-academics). When fatness is talked about in a medical field (Freeman, 2020), the word fat is not used – obese, obesity, overweight – are all thrown around. Because fat people are able to reclaim fatness for themselves, they have more agency and more corporeality.
This article is helpful for understanding how personhood/citizenship can be created/erased based on the rhetorical devices used – which helps when we move into intersectionality – where we discuss the importance of identity and being able to be present and heard through all of our identities.Intersectionality is a fairly new concept to rhetorical studies. Aristotle nor the Sophists were writing about this term during the construction of rhetoric as an art. Taken from feminist theory, “intersectionality” is the idea that identities cannot be looked at linearly, but like at a stoplight with distinctions such as race, sex, sexual orientation, gender, ability, education, class each playing a role in the traffic. Intersectionality is complex, and almost every study of intersectionality is a work-in-progress because there are always identities that can be constructed into the study.
Crenshaw’s (1989) article was the first official article in rhetoric to lay out the need for intersectional thought in communication scholarship. Crenshaw discussed court cases to evaluate the difficulties Black women face in America to get justice because of their “complex” identity. The Moore case lays out a case of Black women being discriminated against by a workplace. The court did not agree that Black women were a special class. They separated the race of the women and the gender making it more difficult and impossible for the women to win the suit. Standards for Blackness in society are centered around Black men while standards for women focus on white women. Because Black women are constructed of both of these identities, their viewpoints and lives are often erased and replaced by white dominating female empowerment. Crenshaw’s work allows for us to dig deeper into political implications, be they institutional, cultural, or representational. Identity politics play a large role in rhetorical studies; being able to analyze intersectional rhetoric is helpful to communication theory. This article started the conversation about intersectional rhetoric; without Crenshaw’s work, rhetoric would not be where it is today.
Crenshaw (1993) analyzes identity as a Black woman, and in this article, as a woman of color in general. Crenshaw looks at the power dynamics because of identity politics, structural intersectionality, political intersectionality, and anti-racist politics. Crenshaw discusses institutional problems as it relates to violence against women of color. Shelters for Battered Women are often set up by middle-class white women and do not reflect a safe or accessible space for women of color. Intersectionality is so important to our understanding of bodies, especially fat bodies. Not only is Crenshaw doing the work of discussing intersectionality, Davis (1983) discusses the racist and classist bias that have corrupted the women’s movements and debunks racist ideas of Black women that stem from slavery. Roberts (1997) recalls the corrupt medical procedures that the American government has done to Black women, the Global South, and people with disabilities. Others (Strings, 2019) (Harrison, 2021) that focus on fat Black bodies and discuss the ways that anti-fatness posits itself in anti-Blackness, how fatness is used to validate race, class, and gender prejudice.
Smalls (2021) does a semiotic, autoethonographic analysis using Black feminist studies, African American studies, feminist studies and fat studies to discuss the trinomial phrase “fat, Black, and ugly”. Smalls looks at the way American culture views Blackness as abnormal and fatness as abnormal so fat Black women are never seen as normative or American citizens because of these marginalized identities that keep them out of the praxis of NA bodies. Fat people can be hypersexualized or dehumanized, but not often are they seen as bodies that matter, especially Black fat women -- the stereotypes of Mammy or Jezebel that began during and around slavery still permeate through our culture today. If someone rejects the identity the society gives them, they are told they are being deviant and resisting, while they are just existing. Smalls looks at Lizzo as an example of someone who has rejected fatphobic America but has faced a lot of backlash, even from (and especially from) progressive white people. Smalls writes that when we discuss fat people living their lives, it is hard to do so without reducing them to their bodies and their pain.
Anne Morrow (2017) discusses Eric Garner’s death and the way his fat body was used as a scapegoat for his death. Eric Garner’s death was blamed on his fatness rather than the police officer who put him in a chokehold in public discourse. This leads back to slavery – Black people were thought to be prone to disabilities that made them incapable of being successful without their white slaveowner. “New racism” blaming Black peoples’ social disadvantages on moral failings (laziness/lack of personal responsibility) rather than biological impairments. Neoliberalism (again)/post racial. Fatphobia enables “new racism” by purporting recurring stereotypes of Black people as being the fault of their “obesity”. Stigma around fatness comes from two assumptions “1) Fatness is a choice, 2) leads to disabilities.” Fat Black disability studies – brings together fat studies, critical race theory, disabilities studies, and the Black Lives Matter movement. 1) body size is used to diminish the importance of antiblack violence by blaming deaths/injuries to Black people on their size 2) hegemonic constructions of “obesity” – fatness as corporeal diversity 3) disability studies’ social model and how fatphobia and the racialized state violence fit in within 4) fatphobia role in sustaining violence of environmental racism 5) fatphobia buttresses tropes that Black bodies are excessively powerful and dangerous. Blackness, fatness, and disability operate together to legitimize the maintenance of the social terrain that maintains that Black people are unvictimizable and their lives are expendable.
Smalls’ (2021) discussion of deviant bodies is important to this discussion because existing as a fat Black woman means that her existence will always be resisting, her mere image is enough to be sent to the principal for talking too loudly, followed at the store, or killed by the police (re: Eric Garner, Breonna Taylor, George Floyd, Alton Sterling, children – Mike Brown and Tamir Rice, and the list goes on and on).
When we discuss fatness, disability is always possible to make an appearance in the conversation. Not because people believe disability is important, but that many people are ableist and afraid of becoming disabled (by way of being fat). As Morrow (2017) discusses, fat Black people are subjected to “new racism” that is the same ol’ racism just disguised as people being “afraid for their health”. In the same vein, some fat studies scholars have drawn parallels to the queer experience with the fat experience.
Fat? Pride? Maybe Both
Rothblum and Solovay’s (2009) book of essays spanning across discourses (medicine, popular culture, fat experiences). One important takeaway thus far has been around how fatness is inherently queer because both are viewed as unhealthy and thus rejecting “reproductive futurism”, the imperative to cultivate maximum longevity. Saguy and Ward (2011) discuss the overlap in queer and fat activists groups because of similar stigma forced on both social groups. Comparing assimilationists and radical political strategies within these marginalized communities – focusing on what it means to have traits of social groups (practices, values, norms). Saguy and Ward (2011) discuss the ways that there is no escape from being perceived for people that are fat, Black, female, or homosexual – these identities carry clear social sanctions (71).
This notion that fatness is similar to queerness because it is deemed as unhealthy, not ideal for reproduction, and rejecting futurism is simultaneously enriching and angering. Not only does this co-opt the Gay Rights movement, but it also makes claims about fat women that they are incapable of reproduction – which is not true, but it creates excuses for medical professionals to reject assisting fat women from reproducing. Saguy and Ward’s (2011) explanation of comparison makes sense as these social groups are incapable of escaping their identities, there is no performance to be had. No amount of shapewear will take away a fat body, no amount of concealer will take a Black person’s Blackness away. Do I agree that homosexuals or females have clear social sanctions? Maybe. I do think the comparison and the distinction about the perceivability of these identities are important ones to be made, but they do have diachronous implications that may age badly.
Leboeuf’s (2019) article looks at the way body positivity has been co-opted in the media, as well as the way the message of body positivity focuses on limiting body shame rather than creating “body pride”. Leboeuf focuses on feminist philosophy of bodily alienation that focuses on the ways women’s bodies are not totally theirs but everyone else’s to critic as well. Body pride is about one’s self assessment. Most importantly, Leboeuf discusses consciousness-raising, which is the opposite of false consciousness; this component of body positivity acknowledges the oppression that people experience. Making note of the oppression people face (whether it is the intersection of fatphobia/homophobia, racism/fatphobia) etc. is a vital part of moving forward towards happier, more understood citizens.
Harrison (2021) argues for body liberation for all – discussing the historical implications of patriarchy, misogynoir, heterosexism, and hegemonic masculinity that have caused them to suffer and many AMAB fat Black people to suffer. Harrison (2021) cites Hortense Spillers in discussing the “ungendering” of Black bodies after slavery, delegating them “Beast from birth” (Harrison, 87). Harrison’s input on anti-fatness and anti-Blackness is so imperative for fighting against systemic oppression as a whole.
Conclusion
The art of being called (interpellation) is important to understanding our subjectivity and the way discourse impacts our lives. Understanding the performance of gender and the ways many of our identities are not fluid and that distinction makes a difference. Making note that when discussions of bodies become norm, performing body positivity can become co-opted by neoliberalism and is then no longer progressive, we should hope for more representation and consciousness-raising content of fat people/experiences. To fight against the systemic powers of oppression, we need to analyze what body pride means, what it will take to get fat liberation, and finally body liberation for all.
References
Afful, A. A., & Ricciardelli, R. (2015). Shaping the online fat acceptance movement: Talking
about body image and beauty standards. Journal of Gender Studies, 24(4), 453–472.
Althusser, L. (1972). On the reproduction of capitalism: Ideology and ideological state apparatuses. Verso.
Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of “sex.” Routledge.
Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989, 8th ser.
Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241.
Gill, R., & Elias, A. S. (2014). ‘Awaken your incredible’: Love your body discourses and postfeminist contradictions. International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics, 10(2), 179–188. https://doi.org/10.1386/macp.10.2.179_1
Fahs, B. (2017). The dreaded body: disgust and the production of “appropriate” femininity, Journal of Gender Studies, 26(2), 184-196
Foucault, M. (1976). Archaeology of knowledge. Routledge.
Foucault, M. (1978). The history of sexuality (1st American ed). Pantheon Books.
Freeman, L. (2020). A matter of justice: “fat” is not necessarily a bad word. Hastings Center
Report, 50(5), 11–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.1180
Harrison, D. S. L. (2021). Belly of the beast: the politics of anti-fatness as anti-blackness. North Atlantic Books.
Leboeuf, C. (2019). What is body positivity? The path from shame to pride. Philosophical Topics, 47(2), 113–127. https://doi.org/10.5840/philtopics201947218
Mollow, A. (2017). Unvictimizable: Toward a Fat Black Disability Studies. African American Review, 50(2), 105–121.
McKerrow, R. E. (1998). Corporeality and cultural rhetoric: A site for rhetoric's future. Southern Communication Journal, 63(4), 315–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/10417949809373105
McKissack, Pat, 1944-2017. (1992). Sojourner Truth : ain't I a woman? New York Scholastic.
Murray, S. (2007). Corporeal knowledges and deviant bodies: Perceiving the fat body.
Murray, S (2008). Fat Pride and the Insistence on the Voluntarist Subject. The ‘Fat’ Female Body. Social Semiotics, 17(3), 361–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330701448694
Murray, S. (2005). (Un/Be)Coming out? Rethinking fat politics. Social Semiotics, 15(2), 153–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330500154667\
Smalls, K. (2021). Fat, black, and ugly: the semiotic production of prodigious femininities. Transforming Anthropology. 29(1), 12-28.
Roberts, D. E. (1997a). Killing the black body: Race, reproduction, and the meaning of liberty (1st ed). Pantheon Books.
Rothblum, E. D., & Solovay, S. (2009). The fat studies reader. New York University Press.
Saguy, A. C., & Ward, A. (2011). Coming out as fat: Rethinking stigma. Social Psychology Quarterly, 74(1), 53–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272511398190
Shugart, H. A. (2013). Flesh made word: The obese body as cultural matter. Communication, Culture & Critique, 7(1), 55–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/cccr.12025
Smalls, K. A. (2021). Fat, Black, and Ugly: The Semiotic Production of Prodigious Femininities. Transforming Anthropology, 29(1), 12–28.
Strings, S. (2019). Fearing the black body: the racial origins of fat phobia. New York University Press.
