[lilyblue]

So that makes the female "gang" considered "too fat to be healthy" about 53% of the world's population, in total. And that is why a female "gang" of "fat" women (nothing scares the world more, trust me) is more than appropriate.

agreed! i would add the word unapolgetic to that description. this also plays into the "good" fats and the "bad" fatties line. if they were actively talking about how they ate right and exercised, would people have a problem?

maybe it's time to bring back the sizeism thread.

[ginger_kitty]

I prefered this issue to the last issue. But thier were a few articles that I disliked. However it was nice to hear Charlotte Gainsbourg, actually say yes I am a feminist. Finally the lady on the cover of the feminist mag actually being proud to be a feminist. I loved the Iggy pop article! Hated the global fashion spread. And enjoyed City of women.

[i_am_jan]

chachaheels: Thanks for the enlightenment, I think more people are in desperate need of being aware of these issues. I do agree that the "medical concerns" are more about dollars and bias against women than anything else. It would explain why - no matter how much exercise women do or how little they eat - we *still* continue to develop fat *naturally* on our bodies. It's like the age thing. Your body ages naturally, no matter what. I believe women are *supposed* to have fat on their bodies and that it can be not necessarily harmful. Yes, the Chubster Gang is rad and these issues are in their infancy as far as awareness is concerned and that's what makes them so controversial even among the more enlightened.

[kittenb]

I actually re-read the article and I have to admit that the suggestions about teaching English were given. However, I still didn't like general idea.

[hellotampon]

Here's an idea, if you really want to travel and are poor, volunteer with an organization. Work teaching English somewhere. Don't plan so poorly that your only alternatives are mooching off your family at 4 AM or giving bjs to strange men.


What really bugs me is that I worry that my own reaction shows me to be a prude

I don't think that was a prudish reaction at all! I haven't picked up the article yet but from what I've read in this thread, the behavior they promote is unsafe, no matter what your opinions on sex work etc. are.

[chachaheels]

Well, the reality is that a lot of noise is made about the supposed correlation between health and weight is made, but when medicine is asked to prove the claims with real science they continually come up amazingly short, specifically where the realities of women's bodies and health are concerned. Medicine's got a long, guilty, and ongoing history of ignoring the reality of the female body on every issue from birth onwards--and they haven't changed much yet.

So fat has always been a feminist issue, since it is what differentiates the female body from the male one. To date, even this very minute, the male body is still considered the health norm. A vast amount of "data" about health is still gathered on male test subjects--and that includes everything from information on specific pathologies to information on drugs and their effects in the body, yet that information is applied without question to women no matter how inaccurate and irrelevant it becomes by this application.

So that makes the female "gang" considered "too fat to be healthy" about 53% of the world's population, in total. And that is why a female "gang" of "fat" women (nothing scares the world more, trust me) is more than appropriate.

[candycane_girl]

lily, I guess I'm lucky because I haven't had to deal with doctors like that. I'm overweight and yes, my doctor has encouraged me to lose weight but I'm not offended by it because I think it's in my best interest as well. I know that obesity doesn't always equal unhealthy but I still think that there is a lot of correlation between the two. Obviously women are supposed to have a certain amount of fat on their bodies anyway but I just don't see why they needed to do an article about a "gang" of fat women.

[chachaheels]

That's a really good point, Lillyblue, about the article on the bias against obese women.

It's really, really strong, and nowhere is it more pronounced and deadly than in the way the medical profession treats obese patients.

There's more than enough evidence, already (and tons more is coming) that women can be perfectly healthy at any weight at all; and also that legitimate ailments suffered by patients deemed to be obese should be treated just as they are when they affect patients who are not considered "obese" at all (and this is NOT being done by many--the vast majority--of doctors).

Contrary to what a lot of people believe (doctors included) "obesity" does not always result from eating too much and not getting enough exercise. I think that much of medical "science" hasn't got a clue about fat and how weight gain affects people at all (most MDs are ignorant of the fact that excess weight on women is not harmful, whereas even a small amount of excess weight on men is--and why that is); I also think much of the big hoopla about "obesity" is as much about selling fantastically lucrative weight loss plans and pharmaceuticals as it is about "the concern for health". Probably even more so about $$$ than it is about concern for women's health.

So, bravo to BUST for that article.

[kittenb]

Mouse, if I didn't know it before, now I am conviced, I love you.

The new issue gave me all kinds of conflict. It was mostly the "traveling while poor and young" article. I don't hjave it in front of me but the line was something like "Everyone has talents, cooking, math, blowjobs, etc." I just cannot belive the author was making it sound like such a perfectly fine idea to trade sex for money. No indication that menat you were participating in the sex trade. Not even an indication that that may not be the safest idea ever. Did it even suggest that if that was your way to travel bring your own condoms? And the graphic that looked like Tara Reid on a bender really added too the whole Maxim magazine feel.

Here's an idea, if you really want to travel and are poor, volunteer with an organization. Work teaching English somewhere. Don't plan so poorly that your only alternatives are mooching off your family at 4 AM or giving bjs to strange men.

God, I normally feel like I can share the magazine with my 16y/o step sister. The last thing I need to show her is one more example proving that women are nothing more than money mooching skanks. Isn't that what the rest of pop culture shows?

What really bugs me is that I worry that my own reaction shows me to be a prude (I am in my life, I know it.) I honestly have no problem with people choosing to work in sex work. But that article was just stupid and dumb and encourage girls to not take care of themselves and to not take responsibility for their choices. It really, really bothered me!

[lilyblue]

I forgot to mention, that I wasn't impressed with the article on the Chubster gang. First off, do we really need articles on people that call themselves a gang? To me, it's just using the word gang in a positive sense.

And not only that but the women pictured are just plain obese. I don't care what anyone says, maybe they're fine with living that lifestyle but I don't think it should be promoted in any way. It's one thing to be against being harrassed by strangers but I just went to their website to check out more of their views and they're even against "narrow-minded doctors and health professionals". So apparently having a doctor that wants you to live a healthier lifestyle is a bad thing? I am all for accepting people of different sizes, but please, if they at least tried to eat the recommended amount of calories, fat, vegetables, all that stuff, I doubt that any of them would be nearly as big as they are.

this is just plain NOT COOL!

Here is the actual quote from their site:

"It should be noted that Narrow Fucks are often well-meaning though hopelessly misguided doctors and health professionals, although thankfully not always. "

I can identify with that comment. It's all nice and good to be concerned, it's another thing to not pay attention when someone is suffering from a condition not related to weight. It's what I went though when I was going through my last bought of depression. There are doctors who would actually ask questions before just assuming that my weight was the reason why I was depressed. The last doctor I went to didn't. That's what fat folks deal with constantly.

That is what the Chubsters are pissed off about.

[mouse]

yeah, the interviews were both very good. i'm not sure how i feel about them totally writing off the fact that charlotte gainsbourg has two kids, though (who knew??)--it felt like an afterthought, and like the interviewer was like, "oh shit, she has kids??? how can i resolve this one?", and though as much as i believe in the childfree movement i think that there needs to be more of a light shone on feminists who are very much doing their own awesome thing while still having kids. thank god for ayun halliday.

[grrrlyouwant]

so i finally got my new issue. the trade blowjobs for room and board "travel" article did indeed suck. but i was very pleased that in both major interviews (charlotte gainsbourg and jennifer saunders), the ladies had no problem answering with an unequivocal "yes" when asked if they considered themselves feminists. after last issue's gwen-gate, that was refreshing.

[grrrlyouwant]

grrr, i changed my address effective march 3rd when i signed my new lease, and my current bust still isn't here. we were having issues with all of my mom's mail getting forwarded along with mine, so she she bitched to the post office about that, and now neither one of us has gotten anything beyond junkmail for a week. the whole point of subscribing was that i'd get my issue before it was in stores, but now i don't know if it's stuck in mail limbo somewhere or which address it's going to show up at, if at all. i know i need to put in a change of address, but that link just opens up a new email, it doesn't give instructions about what info to include. and is it too early to demand a replacement issue, and how long til the address change takes effect? cause i don't wanna be doing this every two months trying to get my mag in the mail when it's sitting there taunting me from the shelf of my local borders. stupid post office. and this long-ass bitch probably should have gone in the questions and comments about the mag thread. my bad.

[mouse]

the really depressing thing is that i would've been thrilled to see the travel article in something like "jane". they're super sex-positive, but they tend to not acknowledge that some of their readers might not actually want to put on a bikini and flirt with foreign men. like i said before, i expected more from bus.

you know, this is funny, and this should probably go under one of the feminism threads, but it's interesting how i reacted to it. i think i've got my back up quite a bit to be offended by bust these days so maybe i was halfway looking for something to piss me off, and i haven't read any ariel levy and don't plan to, but it's kind of interesting where all of this sex-positive feminism (which i wholeheartedly agree with) has taken us to--if it's considered empowering to give a blowjob in exchange for room and board or a meal or drinks or whatever, does that make those of us who aren't comfortable with that, frigid or unempowered? i'm not saying that oh my god i would never ever ever give a strange man a blowjob!! but it most likely would not happen. i'm not unattractive, i've had several boyfriends, but i'm not the kind of girl that boys regularly hit on. i'm the friend that, after talking to for a long time, they finally realize is really awesome, and then they get me into bed and they're totally suprised that i actually really want to have sex and will gladly comply with whatever they want to do to me and suggest some things of my own. i shock the hell out of them in bed because they expect me to be a mouse (ha), but i'm not. the thing is, i'm really picky, and i also don't tend to come out of my shell unless i trust and really like someone and as much as i want it to, that has never happened right away. i wish this third-wave post-feminist whatever would acknowledge that just because you don't put it all out there doesn't mean it ISN'T there, and that just because it IS there, doesn't mean you have to let everyone know about it, or if somehow people don't know about it it doesn't make you any less of an empowered female.

[juls]

For Xmas, I gave my sister a Bust subscription, and I kept telling her how totally different this magazine was from all the rest, so imagine my dissapointment when I saw that her first magazine had Gwen on the front... even more dissapointed by the article.

Just read about Corinne Bailey Rae on Wikipedia... she considers herself a feminist... would've been so much more interesting to have her front the mag.

[gogosgirl]

oh treehugger, bless you! that's exactly the artist I was searching for...mahalo for your help!

[treehugger]

gogosgirl, are you thinking of Camille Rose Garcia? She was featured in the October issue, so it wasn't the most recent one....but she's who came to mind when reading your description.

[anna k]

The raves about Sassy reminds me how much I liked Seventeen circa 1994. I know it wasn't as "indie" as Sassy, but Seventeen turned me on to indie films, Me'shell Ndegeocello, Bjork, Francesca Lia Block, and I loved the first-person narratives by writers like Karen Good and Lisa Miya-Jervis. I really loved how thick and exciting the magazine was for me, yet it has a bad rap because it's a crappy teen magazine now. It did have the usual makeup/fashion stuff, but I got a lot of good things out of it.

it reminds me too often that i'm not cool/sexy/hip enough . . .

Even though I like the publications, I tend to get those feelings when I read Jane, Nylon, or Paper (NYC hipster magazine).

[mouse]

it reminds me too often that i'm not cool/sexy/hip enough, and it used to make me feel the opposite.

exactly, or it's just sort of a suprising disappointment. i always feel like going, "...really?" after i read the latest issue. i expect so much more, and they don't deliver, and instead of really being awesome they focus too much on trendy shit or product placement. i used to love bust because it was the perfect happy medium between jane and bitch, which is pretty much exactly where my own politics fall--aware of bitch's issues, but also tired of ALWAYS MAKING *EVERYTHING* A FEMINIST ISSUE, while at the same time, tired of jane's desperate grasping after celebrities and trends. now jane has totally gone to shit, and bust is fast in following.

i felt the same way a few months ago when LAist.com, a generally great blog about LA, did an article on this cobrasnake girl. maybe this is something that won't make that much sense to people unfamiliar with that scene (and consider yourself lucky if you are unfamiliar), but i always thought of LAist as being the antithesis of that kind of hollywood. they were doing articles on people who weren't famous and who were doing interesting things regardless. it felt like a cop out, and like a betrayal, and i feel like bust is doing the same. it's really a fucking shame--they have the readership and the support and money to be so awesome.

[kelkello]

Does anyone remember Sassy magazine before it was bought by corporate hacks and went under? As a teenager, I worshiped that magazine because I finally felt like I had a place. Bust was that for me. Now it's becoming Sassy's corporate hack version, slowly but surely. I LOVE the lounge and the ladies here. And I have always liked that Bust is fun and politically forward. But now it's just becoming something else, and I don't like it.

As for that blog...hmm...I never knew feminists had to be serious at all times and eschew pink and masturbation. I like to feel pretty and I like to make myself feel good sometimes. That doesn't make me a slave to the patriarchy.