When You Really Don't Get It But Pretend You Do

We are constantly and relentlessly bombarded with messages about how we should look and what we should weigh. I'm sure some people mean well, but if underneath your "healthy eating" plans, your body acceptance, your "stop binging now!" promotions, and all your promises of getting to the root issues, you're still pushing weight loss, you 100 percent don't get the damage you are potentially causing.

Many people, and I agree, argue that promoting weight loss violates dietetic clinical ethics. Read that again so it sinks in. There's a good chance that promoting weight loss does a lot more overall harm than good. Any dietitian, coach, or nutritionist who constantly shoves weight loss tips in your face is more concerned with self-promotion than your health, and this kind of gimmicky ploy to get you to buy the program or book is a pretty shitty thing for anyone who puts himself or herself in a position of authority to do. These kinds of people reinforce outdated ideas around health and beauty. Maybe, instead of looking at whether or not you need to lose weight, eat healthier, or exercise more, you should question the motives of individuals who push weight-loss rhetoric.

I used to follow a dietitian on social media but lost respect for her and stopped when she posted a few unsettling comments that reinforced diet culture. One of many comments was subtle, a joke about eating during the holiday season that promoted the idea that you need to earn your food, but it was enough to put a sour taste in my mouth. I may have mentioned this before.

Every now and then I check back, hoping this woman would finally understand how potentially damaging her constant weight-loss plugs are and how unnecessary her focus on posting images of her every meal is. She hasn't. What often starts out as something sensible with her, a suggestion that you look at what's underneath the urge to binge or encouragement that you accept your body, always, always comes back to weight loss and being lean. This kind of obsession is unhealthy and reflects both her own insecurities and those generally adopted by society.

The hook is telling you that she has the answers to your happiness, and of course this ultimately means losing weight. At every turn, that's really the main goal. Keep in mind that this is all about aesthetics. There's no real evidence that being thin over having a healthy lifestyle is better. Quality of life isn't really about looking lean; it's about feeling good and being healthy, both physically and mentally, and on the surface, it sometimes looks like that's what she's promoting, until she circles around once again to land on weight loss.

What's scary is that so many people refuse to acknowledge that weight loss doesn't necessarily translate into being healthier, and fat doesn't necessarily mean unhealthy. Weight loss doesn't mean more successful, and weight should never be a determining factor of self-worth or value, yet the prize is always that, to be thinner.

I stumbled upon this article recently and thought it fit right in with this blog post: "Science just clapped back at people who say body acceptance contributes to obesity" Actually, fat shaming contributes to it more than body acceptance: https://www.revelist.com/science/fat-shaming-health/6715

Fat shaming can be done in subtle ways with constant low-grade prodding to lose weight and offers of gimmicks, diets, and plans to lose weight instead of anything that encourages true body acceptance. See, if you really support body acceptance, you wouldn't have to whisper, "and once you do that, you can lose weight!", and if you really believe in the harm fat shaming causes, you wouldn't have to say, "that's when the weight comes off!" in the middle of a conversation about healthy eating. Your desire to see everyone thin is your issue, and people keep inflicting their issues onto others. No wonder so many people are obsessed with being thin, and all these warped ideas about health and body get passed to children and those around us.

This goes for any age, really. People who constantly promote weight loss, suggest being thin is a main goal, and talk about being lean over being healthy are really just promoting toxic beauty culture and set the stage for an increase in the development of eating disorders.

Kids learn by example, so if you spend your days working out, documenting every meal by photo and by log, and using schemes to lose or control weight, your child will be aware of your behavior, even if you try to hide it. Kids are very intuitive that way. I've already bitched about people who feel the need to share their insecurities by obsessively posting every morsel they consume during the day on social media and brag about their daily workout sessions that take several hours, so I won't rehash these topics here. Suffice to say that this is not helpful and promotes unhealthy comparisons. Nobody needs to see that shit.

I recently visited an online "healthy eating" forum and instantly regretted it. There were people sharing every detail about their meals from the weight of the food to the number of grams of protein, carbs, sugars, and fat they consumed, and this was all encouraged by the moderator. How is this healthy or a productive use of anyone's time? This is a huge step away from those who take photos of very nicely prepared arrangements of food for viewing pleasure. I'm not addressing true foodie posts and have no problem with them.

It has become more widely accepted that focusing on weight loss isn't fixing anything, and switching this outdated way thinking to one that includes a focus on promoting general healthy habits is far more beneficial. Unfortunately, not everyone gets this. Those who continue to promote weight loss feed into society's fears, biases, and assumptions about weight and health. They perpetuate myths and weight stigma that have become embedded in our society and encourage unhealthy thinking around body and food.

Bombarding people with weight loss fantasies potentially increases discrimination against overweight individuals and ignores the true causes of poor health. And it puts in danger those susceptible to eating disorders. Focus on health over weight loss or body size. Promoting weight loss means the pusher is focused more on aesthetics and warped beauty standards, not true health.

I will end with this, from the National Eating Disorder Organization:

"Weight loss diets, fitness programs, and detox programs are abundant but most of them come with restrictive eating habits, a big dose of weight shaming and a level of obsession around food that is neither healthy nor sustainable."

Everyone wants to claim their method is the exception, but if the end goal comes down to "You can be thin!" it's really not a program that supports body acceptance and overall health and well-being.

An Unwelcome Distraction

It has only been recently that I've started standing up to bullies. In general, I try to be fair, turn the other cheek, or take the high road, but that doesn't always work. It certainly didn't with Kim Duclos. My tolerance for people who go out of their way to be mean is at an all-time low. I'm simply not going to sit back and do nothing when someone threatens me or attempts to push me around. I'm three weeks out from a major surgery and this isn't exactly how I want to be spending my time, but I also feel the need to address this situation.

I'm going to make this post as brief as possible because it's mostly a waste of time to pay any attention to people who create conflict and drama and make issues out of minor disputes, but since Steve McConkey, a self-proclaimed Christian who spends his time asking for donations for his "Ministry" so he can continue to "work" on interfering with and condemning athletes in the LGBTQ community, threatened to sue me a while back and continues to violate my right to privacy, I wanted to address the situation. Social media is so strange in the way it gives some people a distorted sense of esteem and accomplishment. Writing everything out, it seems silly that an adult would spend the kind of time, money, and energy he does in order to get revenge on people who dare voice an opinion online.

What would warrant such anger toward me, you might ask. My big mistake? In response to some online bickering that was going on between a friend and Steve, I had the nerve to post a Bible quote as a comment on Steve's public Facebook page. THE NERVE OF ME! Apparently, it was a passage he didn't like because this resulted in the comment being deleted within minutes and me being blocked from viewing his page while logged in. My friend was also blocked. Almost immediately after, Steve decided to post a picture of my friend on his page that is or at least was set so that anyone not logged in can view it, and pretty much invited his friends to join him in a mocking session. Steve seems fond of mocking others and has done the same with Hillary Clinton, several trans and gay athletes, Democrats, and others he doesn't like. That's not all he did, though. He also contacted my friend's employer and, well, I won't go into the gory details since you can read about everything here:  https://chimprefuge.com/2018/07/20/steve-mcconkeys-funniest-lies-also-introducing-mcconkoids/#more-8163

I find it funny, in a creepy weird way, that Steve calls others stalkers given his actions. He's the type who likes to point his finger while three are pointing back at him. For example, he's quick to point out other people's past mistakes even though he has made plenty. In fact, he admits to doing hard drugs at one point in his life, an illegal activity that could potentially land a person in prison, not just jail. Just because he didn't get caught, it doesn't mean he's innocent, but the way he rips on others makes it seem like he thinks he's some kind of angel. He's not. Far from it.

After being blocked, I mostly stayed out of things except to occasionally like a comment or voice an opinion relating to something several friends posted on Twitter or Facebook, so I was surprised when a friend pointed out that Steve dragged me into the fray with a public threat to sue me and called me an accomplice, implying I had committed some kind of crime, something that could easily be considered defamation of character. When I noted this on Twitter, he deleted the post, which means he's obviously looking at what I do online.

That's not the only thing Steve has done, though. Instead of getting into everything here, I'd rather point my readers to other writers who have addressed Steve's antics. Since he's so fond of public postings about others, I'll leave it up to readers to decide what they think. Unlike many of Steve's postings, though, the following two by people remarking on his behaviors do not include lies.

This post is by Hemant Mehta. It goes into detail about Steve's desire to ban trans athletes and more:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2018/04/15/leader-of-christian-athlete-group-condemns-marathons-allowing-transgender-runners/

This one is also interesting:

 http://whatwouldjackdo.net/2015/11/greetings-from-the-atheist-gestapo-world-headquarters-all-your-bibles-are-belong-to-us11111.html


I really hope his attempts to damage my reputation and interfere with my and others' professional lives and standing don't continue. I'm not going to stand by and watch him lie, though. He even lied about a legal document that's public (but not newsworthy or relevant - more right to privacy violations).  Pertaining to that, the last time I owned a dog, I was in grade school, so his claims about someone abusing my dog aren't accurate, nor are several other claims. It's tempting to make assumptions when looking at certain brief statements, but, unless you were there, you really don't know what happened and shouldn't speculate, especially publicly which could be considered libel.

I hate taking up space on this blog to post things like this, but as long as he keeps up his lies about me and keeps pointing to his posts that reveal the address of one of my friends, I will keep Tweeting and exposing his lies, as will my friends. In reality, the more Steve keeps up what he's doing, the more he exposes his unchristian-like behavior, to say the least. Meanwhile, my true Christian friends are working in Uganda helping refugees, serving others, practicing kindness, and being the beautiful human beings that they are.


ETA:

Keep in mind that this is the first blog post I have written addressing this issue. It's almost laughable Steve's response to me defending myself. His "friends" are now calling me disgusting because of the lies he spews about me, and for someone who's almost scary in his quest to find out information about me and others, him calling anyone else a stalker has to be breaking every irony meter in the universe.


"The Colorado Stalker and his sidekick Lize Brittin are writing volumes (Um, no that would be you about us, but since you won't let up on the lies, I'll gladly continue writing.) on me that nobody reads (Not accoring to my stat counter, but OK), however, they come up on google search (Wait, you're not the stalker but you're Googling us?) as you go down. She lectures me on ethics (Nope, I wrote a blog post describing what happened.), but she promotes the killing of babies (Liar. This is a complete lie. I don't even really "support" abortion, but I stand by a woman's right to choose. I've never had an abortion and never will.) and endorses the Stalker (I don't think he understands the meaning of the word endorse. Agreeing with someone doesn't necessarily mean supporting someone.) . Kevin lies continually (Nope. He has some strong opinions, but he has not lied about Steve.) about me and makes up fake news (Again, he doesn't make stuff up about Steve, and blog posts and tweets are not news, real or fake). He says he coaches Olympic runners, but never has (Yes, he has, actually. You should ask his athletes about it.). His criminal record is long (Steve's would probably be at least as long -- crashing a car drunk, doing hard drugs, etc. -- he just never got caught, and Kevin has already publicly addressed his past)."

I don't think this needs a caption.

ETA Dec 2019:

I briefly took this down but decided to repost it when Steve just couldn't stop lying and dragging me into his online spat with Kevin. One thing I really can't stand is people behaving in terrible ways and then hiding behind the title of Christian. 

Similar to my comment below:

I recently talked to my brother, Alex, and sister-in-law, Lisa, (both lawyers) about all of this and got some good advice, but it's strange that someone who keeps violating the terms of service on websites like Twitter and keeps lying to the point where these websites are forced to remove content, insists on calling himself a Christian. If a God saw this kind of unethical behavior, all because some guy got mad and wanted to get revenge on someone who called him out on his questionable statements and actions, there's no doubt "he" wouldn't be happy. 

The whole thing is a sham, this POOR ME! I'M BEING ATTACKED AND STALKED bullshit by people who, in reality, are bullies and too immature to have any kind of civil conversation. That's why they resort to shitty tactics like lying online and expanding the scope of conflict by dragging as many people into it as possible.

I am grateful to those who took my personal information down and am glad they can see through this guy's act of being a good Christian. If that's being a good Christian, send me to Hell knowing I made an effort to be a better person than that and at least did my best to be honest. I mean really. Starting online battles, intentionally and improperly posting personally identifiable information online, and outright lying are not honorable qualities. How do people like this sleep at night? I really want to know. I do my best to be a decent person, and I have all kinds of lingering worries about my actions, putting way too much pressure on myself to do the right thing and questioning all the time what the best action is. And then there's this guy who boasts about being in line with God, yet stoops to such incredibly, incredibly low levels. Just yuck. 

ETA 2020
Apparently, he liked what Kim was doing by mocking me about my job and telling people I want my mom to die, so he posted something similar. These two are disgusting. I am so lucky to have decent people in my life. I can’t imagine what goes on in someone’s messed up head to do these kinds of things to another human being. 

Supposedly, this is how he thinks good Christians should behave, by lying and mocking people, which is bad enough, but the people liking it and feeling sorry for him are equally bad. Imagine thinking you're morally better than someone by resorting to this:

You may not want to read through this entire exchange, but it's interesting to see someone who provoked a guy turn around and play the victim. Kim and Steve are the same that way. They continue to poke the bees and then whine when they get stung:  http://www.kemibe.com/stevemcconkeythreat.htm

And both Steve and Kim are fond of dragging me into this mess. For a long time, I kept quiet, but that did nothing but cause them to include me more. In the email exchange between Kevin and Steve, Steve boasts about being able to post records online, but there are limits to doing that. See, I have talked to lawyers, too, and while I think it's ridiculous to sue someone over online bullying, unless it gets bad enough, there are some limits to what people can legally post. For example, yes, you can post someone's records online, but if it's done with malicious intent and is not newsworthy and also gives out otherwise private information, like an address (considered doxxing), then it can be considered a violation of someone's right to privacy. But who wants to go to court over that, especially when Kevin has said over and over that he doesn't care? Maybe a cease and desist letter would be enough, but I doubt it with these types. Both Steve and Kim are so dead set on "getting" Kevin that they don't give a shit whom they hurt in the process. In fact, they think that by hurting people associated with him, it will somehow be a "win". But it's so fucking pathetic. The whole thing started because of them. Neither one has the courage to have a conversation either online or otherwise, so they take stupid little jabs and then retreat, hide and pretend they are being attacked. 

The funniest thing in all of those email exchanges is Steve suggesting Kevin offer Kim an apology. Dear Kevin, please offer one of the biggest bullies I have ever encountered -- someone who lied from the start just to fuck with people and made up shit about me waiting for my mom to die -- an apology. Jesus Christ, people are fucked up.

What Outside Magazine Got Wrong

I wish online social media fuss didn't bother me as much as it sometimes does, but here I am writing another post on an article that derails the conversation about young athletes we should be having, one that includes how to properly guide them into a long and successful career. These kinds of situations are distracting, but I feel it's important to offer my viewpoint given my past as an athlete and my desire to continue mentoring others. This is a serious topic, so I don't like when people hamper progress in an area by quibbling over minor details. When there's a fire raging, you don't stop to yell about the dirt on the floor. 

For whatever reason, the article in the New York Times I mentioned earlier caused a lot of commotion. People stomped onto Twitter to say a lot of things about it. A few even suggested men shouldn't write about female issues. Imagine applying that logic to all areas, and you start to see how ridiculous an idea this is. But then a different man wrote something these same individuals agreed with, and it suddenly became OK for men to write about these topics.

It's unfortunate that so many people are misinterpreting the NYT article. The author, Mathew Futterman, recently mentioned on Twitter that his intention was to address the pressures young athletes experience. Could he have done it better? Probably, but nobody is suggesting puberty is the culprit or that the cruel twist Futterman mentions is the female body itself. The puzzle is why so many promising young female athletes have, as Kara Goucher put it, a "bumpy" experience when it comes to their running careers. The conversation should be about how to better support young athletes. Instead, despite the author's clarification, Outside Magazine Online decided it was necessary to slam the piece and insisted the article would somehow teach athletes to fear maturity. This isn't the first time Outside has published an article specifically to bitch about a New York Times article, either. It should be noted that the Outside article came out days after Futterman clarified his position.

A few errors that stood out to me in the Outside Magazine piece are listed below.

1.
"The article quickly changes tack, however, in order to make the point that many top female high school runners fail to live up to their early promise because of changes to their physique. One of the “cruelest twists in youth sports,” it seems, is that girls become women."

No, this isn't what the article stated or even suggested. It suggested that the pressures young female athletes experience, especially those who have had some success early, to keep their former form as their bodies change is why you often see disordered eating patterns, overtraining, and body image issues develop, and this is ultimately why  many of them don't have continued success in their sport and why the success of those who manage well later isn't always a straight progression. As I mentioned before, it most definitely does not say that the cruel twist is puberty itself, becoming a woman, or a woman's changing body.  

Puberty is natural. How society and many coaches view it may not be. We also look at mothers who have recently given birth and expect them to be back to their pre-baby bodies too quickly. The focus is relentlessly on women's bodies. That's the problem. We don't need to be defined as strong or thin or fit or fat. We need new ways of looking at women altogether. THAT is the problem. People reinforcing diet culture, fitspiration, thinspiration, and posting images that strictly define women as something to look at that put unnecessary attention on the body only are a big part of the problem. Keep in mind I'm talking about athletes here, though this happens in the world at large, too. 

The New York Times article is not the problem, far from it. All it did was point out something that happens that many of us observe or have even gone through and offer ideas about how to possibly prevent burnout, injuries, and disordered eating from occurring in a specific population. Another problem is that we aren't willing to look at statistics and information objectively anymore. Bill Mahr is right when it comes to outrage. People get riled up over someone who's actually trying to help instead of addressing the bigger issues in society and the root issues. 

2.
"Others criticized the author’s decision to cite Mary Cain, another high school standout from New York, as an example of a former teenage star whose career has “largely stalled.” Cain, as more than one person noted, has only just turned 22 and hence still has several years to develop and improve."

Nobody said Mary Cain's career is over, but it has stalled. That's an observation, not a criticism. There's nothing wrong with that at all. It just is. It doesn't mean she won't run well later or even soon. Still, she's missing what could be some of her most enjoyable years as a competitor, and there's no indication that she will return to the sport. Whether or not she does is nobody's business, really, but to pretend she's not like many others who had extra bumps in the road isn't being realistic. Bringing her up at all was only to mention that Tuohy and her team are aiming to try things differently and keep social media pressure and other stresses off of her as much as possible. I already addressed this in my last blog post. Whatever Mary does, she has already placed herself among the best of the best in running. If she likes, she has every right to rest on her laurels. If not, she has plenty of time to continue her running career. Nobody is denying that. 

3. 

Right before speculating about Tuohy's future and comparing her to another young athlete who set a world record, the author had this to say:

"As for Tuohy and her fellow high school runners, I think Fleshman and Goucher are right in that we should forswear speculating about their future potential."

The whole thing is rather confusing presented this way because we are supposed to acknowledge and celebrate her success, but only if we do it in the context of "her current athletic level." Despite the fact that this young lady is breaking course records and has two national high school records, we are NOT supposed to call her a prodigy defined as a person, especially a young one, endowed with exceptional qualities or abilities. No, that would be BAD and put too much pressure on her. 

In my opinion, what's more problematic than pointing out the prevalence of female runners who struggle to have a steady progression with large stretches of smooth sailing or calling someone with talent a prodigy is discounting or outright denying the number of times runners, even those who have had tremendous success, go through career-ending or potential career-ending struggles. I know at least three female Olympians who had major slumps early in their careers. Not that my personal observations mean anything, but there's a difference between a difficult transition and dropping out or being forced out of a sport you love early. This isn't to say women should achieve the same statistics or aim for the same type of progression as men; it's just pointing out that there is a difference and questioning why. 

What we should be addressing are how coaches can better guide young female athletes through the changes they naturally experience and how to keep the pressure off them so that the temptation isn't to try to hold onto an unrealistic standard. Encourage building strength so that they don't fall into disordered eating patterns or attempt unrealistic training schedules that their bodies may not be ready to handle. 

Though this wasn't the main topic of either article and is, perhaps, somewhat unrelated, we also need to be more aware and not deny the prevalence of eating disorders and body image issues at the elite running level. We also need to stop stereotyping those with eating disorders and other mental issues and stop focusing only on how someone looks as an indicator of wellness. Those who struggle don't choose a disorder and don't use it primarily to gain an advantage athletically. Mental illness is not a method of cheating. Implying otherwise certainly doesn't help resolve any issues young female runners might experience. 

Well, That's Disappointing

I understand more fully why people in the recovery community are upset with Geneen Roth. I was disappointed to find out that she will be participating in some sort of feel-good summit this summer. There are several keynote speakers that, on the surface, look like they have some decent credentials. The problem with this particular event is that it looks more like a good old-fashioned weight-loss camp than anything promoting actual wellness. The website is filled with all kinds of trendy catchphrases that are sure to intrigue you, and right before the claim that it will be a judgment-free zone, there's a nice little bit of bullshit about willpower, more specifically your lack of it that keeps you from experiencing life at its best.

Mark Hyman, who boasts about his ties to Dr. Oz, among many things, leads the Feel Good Summit and offers a "clean food" designer meal plan (red flag) for those attending. Right away, this doesn't sound like an individualized program that takes into consideration people's food preferences or actual needs, and it doesn't sound like the method Geneen Roth previously used and promoted as a way to break free from compulsive eating, quite the opposite, in fact. No diet plan can be predesigned for anyone. Every day, your nutritional needs change, and, more importantly, what you or your body craves does too. If you're given a meal plan designed by someone who doesn't know you or your history, a plan that's exactly like everyone else's, how likely are you to continue eating that way once you're not in a camp-like setting? How restrictive is that plan? How much freedom are you getting through controlling portions and types of food, eliminating "junk" food and opting for "clean" foods instead?

This guy states outright that you shouldn't eat ANY crap. Is that realistic? He insists that if you eat crap, you will feel like crap. Is that accurate for you? It's not for me. I often eat some cookies or chocolate or french fries and feel physically and emotionally good later. Clean food. Shit, dust off a twinkie and eat it if you want and need. Fuck clean eating. It's such bullshit, a marketing tool and nothing more. A healthy diet can include what you want it to. Yes, nutrient-dense foods will give your body a good dose of what it probably needs, but what about enjoying life and feeling good about your choices, even if you choose to eat a bowl of ice cream?

There's a lot of talk about feeding or nourishing yourself so that you can be the best version of yourself possible, or something along those lines, but promoting wellness can be done without frowning upon those who don't follow a clean-eating plan. Overall health is not about skipping dessert. If you haven't figured it out by now, this kind of retreat is a great way for anyone there to sell you their product, a new book, a diet plan, a wellness program, therapy sessions, or one-on-one consultations. They want you to believe that they have the answers and experience profound energy, happiness, and wellness on a daily basis. Oh, one or two will admit they aren't perfect, but the overall message is that you can be as socially accepted as they are, and all you have to do is pay a bunch of money and eat and exercise the way someone else suggests.

Nobody trying to help others lead a healthier life should be promoting the idea that any food is bad or dirty or sinful. Everyone has the right to eat what fuels their body, mind, and soul. Yes, good nutrition usually does help you feel good, but nobody else can define what healthy means for you. The problem with these kinds of restrictive and measured diet plans is that they don't teach awareness. The focus is on eating certain types of foods and avoiding others instead of trusting yourself in your choices and being able to weather whatever emotions and fears come up after you have eaten.

The whole thing seems a little too controlled, but the magic is supposed to happen in three days at the cost of $2,500+, the amount and time it takes to completely transform your life. These kinds of retreats are designed to target people who probably need something deeper, not a weight-loss or "feel-good" plan. Of course, the advertisements aren't addressing weight-loss per se, but there are subtle and not so subtle clues that are obvious to anyone looking. Plus, Mr. Hyman likes to bring the conversation, no matter what's being discussed, back to diet. That's what he's selling, all his fad-diet books including those on detox diets, eating fat and getting thin, and the ultra this and ultra that diets. His speakers promote the bulletproof diet, the archetype diet, genius foods (foods that make you smarter AND happier), and one that suggests you can eat your way to better health. I won't go into the one author who, if you buy her book, wants to tell you how to make every man want you. Is anyone else feeling queasy yet?

Years ago, a friend of mine went to something similar. She was always on a quest to improve her life and lose weight when she didn't really need to, so she signed up for a three-week raw foods retreat. She left a strong, healthy individual and returned looking dangerously thin and so weak that she could no longer run with me and couldn't even complete the hike we did as a substitute for running one day. She insisted she felt great, but she didn't look or act like a specimen of health. I was concerned and let her know. She eventually gained back the weight she lost plus a few extra pounds that she complained about but looked just fine on her body. She was also back to being healthy and able to exercise again.

When I look at retreats and seminars like the Feel Good Seminar, I can't explain all the reasons why they make me cringe. There are so many. I get a physical reaction to all the bullshit they're trying to spread. There's always an air of fat phobia and not a lot of diversity with the presenters, all lean, smiling citizens with extra white teeth and abnormally wide eyes.

I'm sure some people benefit from retreats. If you happen to be looking for more positive ways to spend time away from home, try Women's Quest. Colleen runs programs that are designed to actually support you, not sell you gimmicks.