Posted on 08/12/2004 7:27:38 AM PDT by SJackson
Don't expect to see much of Elizabeth Edwards on the campaign trail this fall. Oh, she'll be campaigning alongside her husband, all right. But the TV cameras just might decide to miss her.
After introducing her husband at the Democratic convention in Boston, she has all but disappeared, which is curious given that she is arguably the best thing the Democratic ticket has going for it. An intelligent and accomplished professional woman who exudes genuine, down-to-earth homeliness and warmth, Elizabeth Edwards also earned the respect of traditional-minded Americans by courageously deciding to have two young children in mid-life after losing her eldest child in a car crash. A woman of quiet dignity, refinement, and grace, she is the perfect antidote to the arrogant condescension of the "opinionated" Theresa Heinz Kerry.
So why won't you see a lot of her on TV? Because America doesn't like heavy women. It hides them away where they won't be offensive. They are seen as unattractive and are endlessly analyzed by armchair psychologists as to why they would have allowed themselves to become repellant. Worse, they are treated as if they have committed some sin.
This is especially true of women who, like Elizabeth Edwards, were once thin. The women who were always heavy elicit the public's sympathy. "Maybe it's genetic," they think inwardly. But women who were once thin and attractive, like Elizabeth Edwards, but who dare to put on weight – even after suffering horrific personal tragedy like the loss of a child – are treated as if they have violated some sacred commandment: Thou shalt always look pleasing for thy menfolk. And by menfolk, we mean here not only Elizabeth Edwards's husband but all American men who have a right to look at a young candidate's wife and see something that pleases the eye, like Jackie Kennedy.
By now you have no doubt heard the endless political commentary about how handsome and vibrant John Edwards is and how he nicely complements the long-faced taciturnity of John Kerry. Even Kerry himself praised his good-looking vice-presidential candidate for having "great hair." But those same commentators are utterly silent on the looks of Elizabeth Edwards because to them, as to the rest of America, the fact that she is overweight – itself a pejorative implying extremism – means that she is unsightly.
For the longest time, America has been waging a holy war against women that dare to be fat. The American tabloids have for months shown us pictures of the "obese" actress Kirstie Alley. The pictures of her at 300 pounds are invariably contrasted with photos of how she looked when she was thin and pretty on TV's Cheers. She is a legitimate object of ridicule, depicted as a circus elephant, replete in tent-like clothes. The implication also is that she is possessed of some grave mental illness to have allowed herself to mushroom to such proportions.
Now, I do not deny that shedding extra pounds can make us healthier, improve the quality of our lives, and enhance the self-esteem of both men and women. But do we really want our daughters to be numskulls like Paris Hilton and Britney Spears, who have perfect bodies but rotting brains?
Just think about the message that American girls get when large women are unjustly treated as repulsive. They learn that personality, education, virtue, and motherhood – pregnancy often causes women to put on and retain weight – counts for nothing in the eyes of men. Spending all your time in a gym burning off fat, rather than being idle in a library and reading a book, is the only way to get noticed.
EVEN THE American TV networks these days seem to hire only thin, beautiful women to read the news, and highly intelligent women like Greta Van Susteren feel pressured to undergo plastic surgery in order to get ratings on their TV shows. Indeed, you are more likely to see a space alien on your rooftop than a heavy-set woman on your TV screen.
This is also part of an ugly double standard. Weight is not an impediment to power and success among men. Just look at Michael Moore and Harvey Weinstein. But the only women who are allowed to be heavy in America are funny women, like Starr Jones.
Thinness may have become synonymous with beauty in America, but it is decimating the erotic life of marriage. In multiple sexual surveys, one of the biggest complaints that husbands voice about their wives is that they rarely initiate sex and are far too reserved in the bedroom. But can we really expect the American wife to be sexually adventurous when she is permanently self-conscious about her weight? It makes sense that women who feel unattractive will choose to hide under the covers.
Indeed, Dr. James Watson, the Nobel prize-winning geneticist who was jointly responsible for discovering the structure of DNA, maintained that plumper women were more likely to enjoy a better sex life than their thin counterparts. He told an audience at University College London that extra pounds had the biological effect of making a woman well rounded in character and better in bed. "Thinness is never associated with sexuality."
He explained that extra fat had the effect of boosting endorphins, the natural mood-enhancing chemical that is also linked to sexual desire. "Kate Moss is probably the most famous thin person in the world, and she's looking particularly sad. Who has ever heard of a happy supermodel?" Watson asked.
He also argued that leptin, which is produced in fat tissue, boosts the chemical MSH, which enhances sexual desire. "Your mood is controlled by endorphins, and you make more of these when you are fat; hence, nobody has ever drawn Santa Claus thin. Thin people are discontented."
And the obsessive American war on fat is also decimating the American family because women are afraid to "disfigure" their bodies with pregnancies and post-partum pounds.
Elizabeth Edwards didn't worry about all that, and she has two young beautiful children who treasure her, even if the superficial American media does not.
"Heavy" means "fat", right?
Where's the Barf Alert?
Interesting article....Candy Crowley bump..BTW...I don't recall many comments about Barbara Bush's figure...
Kate Dillon - I think she's attractive.
I think Edwards' daughter Cate is a major league hottie.
Nonsense. Except for a (very) small number of people with hormonal imbalances, being fat is a choice people make. It's the path of least resistance.
OK, mean....but funny.
I agree with the other poster who prefers ladies who are feminine, meaning curvy and shapely. Sticks are icky.
But I just can't stand it when people hide behind euphemisms because they can't own their condition. Not "fat", but "heavy" for example.
I'm fat. I'm fat because I eat too much and don't move enough. But I'd never tell someone I'm "heavy" or "big boned" or blame it on genes or glands or whatever else.
Just one of those things that bugs me.
I concur most wholeheartedly. But I susptect she's only about 160-70. Over 200 it's not as nice.
Hells yeah. See my other post on this thread.
I'll take classic pin up girls over modern stick-chicks ANY day.
Slip of the keyboard?
I would like to see some statistics on this. Seems like a leap. Having babies does not make one fat. Eating too much and not burning off the calories makes one fat.
I agree with the other poster too, but there's a 'huge' difference between the photo posted above (a curvy, feminine woman) and someone like E. Edwards, who's just chunky and unappealing.
Being fat is unhealthy....
I wasn't aware there was a war against fat people. Did I miss something. I'm not exactly attracted to a waste I can't see for the folds; but, then I don't consider that being at war - save maybe a war of the senses. Shuddering.
Me, I'm an individual, and I happen to like the average 5'6" cuddly brunette with big brown eyes. If I'm gonna throw my back out picking someone up to cross the threshold and possibly break something in the crossing, I don't see that as a match made in heaven but rather a mission impossible.. as in ain't gonna likely happen.
I'm small and thin and have trouble keeping weight on. So I can sympathize; but, let's get real. Ok.
Of course she's "down-to-earth."
You have any idea how much thrust it would take for her to achieve lift-off?
If she values life so much as to (allegedly) become grotesquely overweight from it, why does she live with a man who values life so little as to vote against the ban on partial-birth abortion?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.