Oprah Is At It Again And Other Disappointments

I've seen a lot of talk online lately about normalizing ideas and behaviors, mostly when it comes to mental health. It used to be that people equated normalizing with removing the stigma around a topic, and, in most cases, it’s beneficial to avoid negative stereotypes that tend to come up when this type of approach isn't used. Normalizing when it comes to talking about mental health is generally seen as beneficial. It helps people feel less ashamed and less alone for struggling with any kind of disorder or illness.

Because of the way social media and the media have evolved, normalizing now has both pros and cons but probably more cons than pros. It should be obvious that normalizing violence is not constructive while helping an individual who perceives emotions as negative or bad normalize his or her feelings can be helpful. 

The problem these days is that frauds, extremists, and insincere individuals attempt to gaslight others into thinking that certain actions they're engaging in are OK when these actions could be dangerous, deadly even. Trying to rationalize continuing a risky behavior under the guise of normalizing this particular conduct is despicable, yet influencers and actors do it all the time. There's a not-so-fine line between sharing struggles and promoting a soothing yet unsound coping strategy. More and more, individuals are crossing this line in order to rationalize their unhealthy obsessions.  

I see this type of conduct a lot in eating disorder communities. Allie Ostrander is a good example of someone crossing the line from sharing to self-indulgence. I have to preface this by admitting I lost any respect for her when she was outed as a liar and cheater. What a disappointment she turned out to be. 

For anyone who doesn't know, Allie is a runner who was busted and served a four-month ban for using canrenone. In her failed, "It's my acne medication! I didn't know!" defense, she admitted googling the drug to see if it had an effect on performance. It doesn’t, but sometimes it’s best to shut the fuck up if you want others to believe you. In trying to cover her tracks, Allie accidentally over-explained and outed herself as a liar. 

You see, when you google this drug in relation to performance or anything remotely sports-related, the very first thing that pops up is that it's a banned substance. There is no way she didn’t know about canrenone being on the banned list, absolutely no way. There’s a reason why she didn’t elect to get a therapeutic use exemption, and it’s not because this drug doesn’t improve performance. Canrenone is actually used as a masking agent, so god knows what else she was and probably still is taking. There’s no doubt in my mind that she’s a flat-out fraud, and any coach who would take her on as a client at this point is suspect, too.

Cheating in sports aside, Allie is also blasting her audience with questionable content under the facade of promoting eating disorder recovery. In one of her cringe-worthy videos that I won't link to because it truly is upsetting, her boyfriend suggests that the content she’s putting out might be triggering, but Allie doesn't give a fuck about other people. This is about HER. She's part of the ME ME ME ME ME! generation after all. 

I have to ask, though, what good does it do others if she mentions the crazy calorie totals she's consuming for a particular video take? Who, exactly, does it help when she shoves what she eats in a day in her viewers' faces, many of whom are struggling with eating disorders of their own, and what good comes of her posting videos of herself training hard while admitting she's not fully recovered from bulimia? The answer is that it benefits her. Her YouTube channel and social media accounts are for profit. She's creating content, and it doesn't matter who might be affected negatively as long as she gets paid. 

I'm all for honesty when it comes to recovery, but what Allie is doing isn't honest. This is narcissism on full display. And it helps no one. Anyone claiming the videos and posts she creates benefit others probably thinks other fads and online scams are helpful. There is a big difference, a huge one, between admitting you're struggling and going into the gory details that can traumatize and negatively influence others. If she wants to pretend she's edgy and post garbage like that without offering much, if anything, in terms of actual recovery, she should stop lying about promoting recovery. She’s posting content to continue her sponsorships and to attract rubberneckers and those who will be fans no matter what she does. She's posting for money at her followers' expense is what she's doing.

I’ve written about Oprah Winfrey being a huge disappointment before, and this year, she has proven herself to be even more of a scumbag. Back in 2015 when I created a blog post detailing her shenanigans with Weight Watchers, I didn’t think she would stoop any lower, but her recent actions only prove how obsessed this woman is with being thin. You would think that someone as accomplished and successful as Oprah, a billionaire and the owner of her own production company, would focus on other things or at least leave other people out of her neurosis, but she can’t seem to be OK unless she lets everyone else in on her rationalizations and excuses. 

In 2023, Oprah was still a board member of Weight Watchers, a company she bought stock in before she joined. In 2024, she admitted that she started using a drug to help lose weight, and by the time she made this confession, she had been taking it for several months. Oprah didn’t step down from her position on the board of Weight Watchers back in 2023 when she started taking the drug; she waited until this year to do so. Once she was outed, she threw some money at the problem by donating to charity, a common action frauds take to make themselves look less corrupt. 

That was bad enough, deceiving individuals by losing weight on a drug without disclosing this to any Weight Watchers members, but because, underneath all that sham confidence and real success, she’s an insecure woman, she decided to host a dishonest television special called “An Oprah Special: Shame, Blame, and the Weight Loss Revolution." She claimed this special was about normalizing talking about weight loss. What she should have titled it is, “An Oprah Special: I Want to be Adored.” Oprah doesn’t want to normalize talk about weight loss; she wants approval from her audience to take drugs in order to look a certain way, though she will probably tell you the drugs are for health. 

I didn’t watch the full special and have no desire to do so. Watching Oprah justify taking these kinds of drugs is like watching an active anorexic talk about the benefits of taking speed. These drugs she's taking and promoting are prescription drugs designed and approved by the FDA to treat diabetes. Some doctors provide them to individuals who are obese or who meet other criteria. The drugs were not meant to be given to people who simply want to lose weight and have money to buy them, but some shady healthcare professionals will sell them to willing customers. 

In a lot of ways, I feel sorry for Oprah. To be that much of a powerhouse and still be caught up in an illusionary beauty image that's circulating in her own head is depressing. In her special, she stated, "I come to this conversation with the hope that we can start releasing the stigma and the shame and the judgment, to stop shaming other people for being overweight or how they choose to lose -- or not lose -- weight, and most importantly, to stop shaming ourselves." But how is taking a potentially dangerous drug in order to lose weight and conform to society’s warped beauty stereotypes removing the shame around anything? 

For obvious reasons, Oprah didn't go too deeply into the side effects and dangers of these drugs in her little special. From what I gather, Ozempic and other related drugs are medications used primarily for Type 2 diabetes. They’re used off-label for weight loss as well, meaning this isn’t the suggested usage. The common side effects include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, belching, stomach pain, fast heartbeat, and constipation, to name a few. Severe side effects of these prescription drugs include gastroparesis, allergic reactions, changes in vision, kidney failure, gallbladder issues, and pancreatitis. Also, Ozempic carries an FDA warning on the box for the risk of thyroid C-cell tumors.

Ultimately, Oprah is and already was free to do whatever the fuck she wants. She’s so desperate for approval that it’s mind-boggling, though. The fact that she had to hold this televised rationalization fest shows how stuck she is in obsessing about her weight. I agree in part that society did this to her. The public has never been kind when it comes to her or anyone else's weight, but maybe if she hadn’t made it such an issue by promoting fad diets like Slim Fast and flaunting her slim body and then hiding it when she gained weight, people would have lost interest. I don’t blame her for being a product of our society, but I will call her out on inflicting her unhealthy obsessions and behaviors on all of us. 

Blocked by Association

In his book, "Medium Raw," Anthony Bourdain first calls Alan Richman a douchebag before correcting himself and opting for a more appropriate description: cunt. The insult was preceded by a long explanation of why the guy deserved the title, but just as flawlessly Bourdain wrote paragraphs praising those who deserved it. The phenomenon of vilifying those who react to misdeeds instead of those who commit them is nothing new, so it wasn't surprising that some readers bristled at Bourdain's use of the C-word and unjustly turned their anger not on the food critic who ripped on the New Orleans restaurant scene shortly after Kartina but on the guy with the flowery vocabulary.

This kind of reaction occurs quite a lot in politics and online where everyone is looking for any reason at all to become irate and quickly blame the messenger instead of those engaging in questionable behavior. Surprisingly, though, it happens in the athletic community as well. Ross Tucker addressed extreme thinking and an "us vs them" mentality in the most recent episode of The Real Science of Sport. When it comes to transgender athletes in sport, those on the extreme left immediately paint anyone who considers it unfair for trans women to compete against women as someone on the extreme right, which is rarely the case. It's a terrible take for anyone to define a person by only one issue and to assume that, based on that one issue, a person automatically thinks a certain way across the board, that this person who wants fairness in competition is transphobic, a Nazi, or associated with extremism. 

More people are starting to realize that, despite the issue being complex when it comes to emotions, inclusion versus fairness in women's sport is pretty straightforward when it comes down to the science, and with increasing evidence that transgender women retain an unfair advantage even with hormone suppression, over 50% of Americans are against allowing trans women who have gone through puberty as their biological sex to compete against women and girls. Yet anyone who holds this majority opinion is often called names, threatened, vilified, or blocked for having an opposing opinion. You're seen as the enemy if you think differently on this or any other issue. It's no different from extreme religious cults. You can be on the same page as far as human rights, education, taxes, climate, and abortion, but if you want fairness in sport or truth in reporting, holy hell you are the goddamn fucking devil. 

Recently, I was blocked without warning by another individual because of my association with Kevin Beck. I may not like the fact that Anthony Bourdain called someone a cunt (I hate that word) even though the guy deserved it, and I may not like some of the adjectives Beck uses to describe certain individuals. I also don't agree with him 100 percent of the time, but I often repost his material because he is a phenomenal writer, is almost always correct, sticks to the truth as much as humanly possible (except for the obvious stretches meant to be humorous), isn't afraid to defend his position, and is one of the few writers who consistently puts out great running content, far better and more accurate than that of most paid journalists. But because he's not on social media for anyone to block, I'm the next best thing. Forget the shitty content, lies, and misinformation others publish and post, shoot the messenger of the messenger. 

What's bizarre to me about all of this is the fact that other people who repost the same content are not blocked. There's something about me in particular that apparently scares people like Chris Chavez, Erin Strout, David Roche, and whoever runs the Citius Magazine Twitter page. I'm trying to figure out why simply not looking at my Tweets and retweets, mostly of Smol Paul and rescue cats, wouldn't be a better solution since I haven't ever really interacted with any of these people and have never called anyone names. That's not my style. From a business standpoint, why would anyone associated with Trail Runner, Women's Running, or Citius Magazine block someone who has a long history in the sport, has co-authored a book about running, and has run at an elite level? True, I'm no longer a runner, but I occasionally keep up with the sport and write about it. And I'm not that scary. 

After a recurrence of an issue I've been having and a short trip to the ER, I spent two weeks not being able to walk and another one gradually moving one foot in front of the other. As much as I wish I could get into watching track meets or keep up with other races, running events never pull me in like they used to, unless I suspend disbelief, which I have mentioned before. Every time I see someone fall and feel bad or see someone win and feel excited, I remind myself how unlikely it is that those at the top are clean and feel depressed that I ever put so much effort, to the point of being a gimp now, into a sport that attracts so many liars, cheats, and ass-kissers. I'm starting to sound like Beck, but how can anyone who follows the sport at all not? How can people just accept the obvious misbehavior of so many individuals, even if they try hard or are nice? Running journalists act like they're in a popularity contest, not there to report. The exceptions are Sarah Lorge Butler and a few others, mostly old-timers, who tend to stick to actual reporting, not biased coverage. 

I find myself having a harder time wanting to be in this world a lot of the time. Between the pain I've had to endure to the shitty way people are to deep self-hatred, there's not a lot to look forward to. Sometimes I think I'll continue working on my novel, and then I look at it and think how bad it is. It might be better than some really terrible published shit, but I can't seem to push past the self-doubt and my critical mind. I'm lost with where to go with it. No wonder people like Bourdain eventually end things on their own terms. The world and the people in it can be nice, but this planet can also be such a difficult place to exist. Too bad I'm too much of a coward to act on any of my dark thoughts. At least there's chocolate, I guess. 

It's funny that I wrote the first paragraph of this post and struggled to get through it. Then it suddenly disappeared, one of those glitches that leaves a writer stunned and horrified, all those carefully placed words sucked into some kind of Internet void. I had a tantrum and immediately thought it was a sign I should give up writing. After some deep breaths, though, I started putting the ideas back down and recreated what I had lost, probably not exactly in the same order. I'm not sure why I share this, but maybe it's not quite time to give up on everything completely. 

Why Am I So Angry?

Because I already addressed the Shelby Houlihan case, and nothing has really changed after details of the CAS ruling came out, I'm mostly sidestepping the issue except to say that this write-up is one of the few that gets directly to the point. The way the loudest running "journalists" have handled the topic is atrocious, and I can't really add much to the conversation, at least not in any kind of scintillating way like Kevin Beck has. The whole thing makes me angry. 

Regarding all the sorting through the rubble that's occurring, though, what's shocking is the reaction of some Houlihan supporters who have harassed journalists like Alan Abrahamson for expressing what many of us feel about the situation, that someone needs to come clean. But even if that were to happen, which is unlikely, would that change anything? I doubt it. Look at cycling after the downfall of Lance Armstrong. People will always find ways to cheat, but fans don't like to see their idols knocked down or even called out. It's frightening how abusive people can be toward others who have a different opinion. Then there are those who just stick their fingers in their ears and look the other way, pretending nothing's wrong, which is fine, I suppose, if you're not a journalist. 

Erin Strout, who has boasted about muting people on Twitter, as if that's anything to be proud of, highlighted the fact that Houlihan had character witnesses testify over the fact that the athlete's burrito defense was more than a little unlikely before the writer set her tweets to private, which actually might be a good thing since fewer people will see the way she skews facts and is careless with triggering content. However, I'm not sure what the point of having a blue checkmark on Twitter and claiming the title of journalist is if you're too afraid to have a public voice. 

It's strange, but the fact that she took extra time to block me on a social media website is more bizarre than upsetting to me. I'm a female runner with a very long history in the sport, but she has a right to limit her audience to only those who fully back her. It's a bad look for anyone who's representing a publication like Women's Running, though. Blocked or not, nobody can see her tweets unless she approves it. I feel sad for anyone who continually boasts about her job as a journalist, usually by complaining about it publicly, the long hours, the work, the deadlines, the travel issues, yet feels it necessary to hide from anyone who doesn't agree 100 percent with her various takes. 

I guess I had more to say about that than I originally thought. 

Speaking of being angry, I experienced an unpleasant incident the other day while jogging on the trails. Two people were blocking a very wide and heavily used trail by walking side-by-side with their two dogs. I was coming up behind them and uttered two "ahems" in an effort to get their attention. Just when I was about to say, "excuse me," each one moved, she to the left and he to the right, so I assumed they had heard me. I went through the opening, ran a little longer, and then turned around to go back the way I had come. When I came upon the couple again, she started yelling at me, insisting I should have notified them that I was using the popular public path that they were hogging. In response, I pointed out that they must not have heard my efforts to do just that and later added something she probably didn't like but also may not have heard. 

It was a trivial occurrence, but it upset me. Initially, I brushed it off, but the more I thought about it, the more it pissed me off. Not that long ago, my mom fell, and I was rushing her to the hospital (she's OK now but broke her wrist) when some complete and total asshole ran a stop sign and then leaned out his window to make wild ape-like gestures and yell who knows what at me. Then he started in with the fucking games, driving 5 miles per hour and breaking hard on occasion specifically to impede my forward motion. I'm not a violent person, but I have never wanted to punch someone in the face so badly. Everyone is more on edge lately, though. It's not just me. 

Call it road rage or situational anger, I can see why there are so many horrific ends to minor incidents, though, as far as I know, it's not in me to actually go there. Still, the kind of anger I experienced in that moment made me realize how and why something that seems minor on the surface can get ugly fast. People's online behavior can be just as concerning, but I want to point out that there's a difference between someone calling out a person’s incompetence or lies and an individual being an actual bully who harasses others. Expressing opinions in a blog post about obvious bias and misinformation coming from journalists in the running community is not bullying. It's always odd to me how so many people who act pompous and arrogant are quick to play the victim when criticized.

While it's understandable to get angry at someone like the idiot who ran a stop sign who's very clearly in the wrong and intentionally being a piece of shit, sometimes determining what's right or what's not right isn't quite as clear-cut. It's also more difficult to call people out when their track record isn't 100-percent shitty and their unsavory behavior doesn't fall into the serial killer or road rage category. In fact, a few of the individuals I have scolded on my blog share similar views on many topics, but I can't bring myself to support or approve of anyone who intentionally misleads others, triggers individuals with sloppy content, or outright lies, even if we both like cheese.

In terms of how I look at information online, especially regarding running-related matters, things took a turn for me when I did a podcast on eating disorders with Lauren Fleshman and Ann Gaffigan that has mysteriously disappeared. For the life of me, I can't find a copy of it anywhere. Based on that interview alone, it's puzzling how Lauren is or ever was seen as any kind of expert in the field of recovery, but that seems to be how she's viewed. She has never fully addressed recovery in a compassionate or thorough way because she presents a flawed view of what others experience in the throes of severe illness. Her story seems to have changed since she participated in the podcast, but, despite the 180, it's difficult to understand her involvement with eating disorder recovery anyway. 

Whether or not she is aware of it, she has continually taken little swipes at those of us who struggle, subtly suggesting it takes the kind of mental toughness she possesses to avoid an eating disorder, thereby removing any emotional, genetic, or physiological component associated with these kinds of illnesses. I guess I'm just flummoxed by people's resounding support of her, no matter her behavior or what she says. On the one hand, she prefers recruiting athletes who haven't struggled with body image issues in the past, but on the other, she can be seen tweeting about Molly Seidel and her recovery during the Olympic marathon. It's a head-scratcher. I mean, Molly isn't exactly the kind of athlete Lauren suggests she would like to coach. I guess it's good that she can still cheer on someone who struggled, even if she prefers working with athletes who don't have any kind of history of eating disorders or body image issues, though, as I have stated before, I'm not sure how one determines this or why any coach would make this distinction. I'm just glad to see that Molly's coach didn't take that kind of approach with her. 

Regarding my own feelings during the podcast I now regret doing, it's not that I can't handle myself around opinionated people -- I grew up in a house full of them -- it's more that I wasn't expecting any kind of discord. I realize that not everyone is going to act in a way one might expect, but up until that point, every interview, podcast, and speaking event I had done that related to eating disorders was done so in an incredibly supportive, nurturing environment, a safe space, if you will, even if everyone involved had different ideas on recovery and different experiences. That was the first time I was caught completely off guard and couldn't quite figure out how to address someone skewing the facts. 

It left a really sour taste in my mouth, has bothered me since, and yet initially I tried to be supportive and search for some kind of greater good in the situation. It wasn't until recently that I couldn't bring myself to do that anymore, try to be accommodating and nice to people who don't deserve it. Misinformation never serves the public well. I won't condone it, especially if the content is potentially harmful to others and even if that makes me look like the bad guy in some people's eyes.

All this said, anger that grows doesn't serve the person who's holding it well. It clouds a person's perspective in other areas. I'm going to work on letting that shit go, but I'm not going to stop addressing liars, frauds, and cheats. 

The Danger of Disagreeing

The other day, I jumped into a discussion on Twitter that addressed Colorado voters and Lauren Boebert, the representative of Colorado's 3rd US Congressional district. Someone tried to put the blame on all residents of Colorado for her winning Colorado's 3rd Congressional District, 51 percent to 45 percent over her closest opponent. I and a few others were trying to explain that the entire state doesn't vote in specific districts and that most residents of Colorado, including many of her own constituents, are unhappy with her representation. Hers is one of seven districts in Colorado, meaning that by definition only about one-seventh of the state's voters even had a say in whether she was elected, and has leaned strongly Republican for many years. 

Someone who couldn't seem to understand this started arguing with me, and, after just a few responses, he went berserk and started posting right and left, calling me a racist and a Nazi. I don't need to prove that I'm neither of these things by explaining my heritage (we're all mutts, as they say) or detailing whom I've dated in the past or who my friends are and have been. It's just a flat-out ridiculous accusation, especially if you consider what I was saying in the thread.

Oddly, or maybe these days not so much, this guy and I have the same general political viewpoint, something he didn't realize until later. His rampage started after I suggested that I and others in Colorado, including some Republican leaders, are not happy that an extreme right, gun-collecting Trump supporter with a shady past is in congress and possibly causing trouble. Claiming that even a significant fraction of Coloradans voted for her, let alone all of them, is like insisting people in Utah are responsible for the city council members elected in Nevada. It just doesn't make sense.

Like many online trolls, Boebert can't take criticism either, much of hers coming from the people who live where she actually was elected. The Twitter troll later put up a poll on his page saying he "got into it" after someone "came at him" and didn't realize he and this person were "on the same side" and had a list of possible actions to take to help him move forward. The whole thing was weird and unsettling, and someone else on Twitter pointed out that the guy's posts tend to be consistently inflammatory. However, the damage was done. Others who don't know me liked his Tweets that called me names without even knowing what the discussion was about. 

But I'm not the only one who experiences this kind of outlandish attack. See, the left extremists have become just as radical and full of hate as those on the right, and they're as quick to stoop to name-calling and lying, sometimes even more so.

Two incidents that occurred on social media recently demonstrate how closed-minded and quick to criticize and exclude others some individuals who claim to accept and even promote diversity are.

In the first incident, a writer, Kevin Beck, posted a piece celebrating diversity and referenced a well-written article in Runner's World. In the blog post, he praised four of the five individuals who were profiled in the RW article and the author herself. It really is a good article. The fifth person profiled in the article is an outlier, someone who has been in a position of both bully and victim and has been caught in at least one lie, among other transgressions. When the blog post caught the attention of people in a Facebook group where the link was posted, several of the members were quick to criticize Kevin rather than his article, one going as far as calling him a "crotchety old white guy." Others poked fun at his use of big words, claiming he uses a thesaurus excessively. 

I know the author and have for a really long time. Comments criticizing his work upset me far more than they affect him at all. That kind of vague criticism of the piece being too long or too wordy reminds me of the "too many notes" scene in Amadeus. For the record, in all the years I have known him, collaborated with him, and spent time with him, I have never, ever seen him use a thesaurus. Whatever you think of his writing style, which of course is not at all the point anyway, the guy's just really fucking smart, and, for whatever reason, I think that upsets some individuals. A few of the same people complaining about the blog post admitted to not having read the whole thing, which makes me wonder why they would take the trouble to comment at all, but everyone likes to be heard, even those who don't have much to say. There were plenty of people who were happy to read the blog post and even agreed with the content. Kevin told me he got more new sign-ups and subscriptions in the days after that post than after anything else he's published, so maybe not everyone has the same amount of trouble with big words.

As unpleasant as it is to see someone I admire and care about being called names, it's far more concerning to see at least one of these critics lie about him. In the thread in the Facebook group, the same individual who was the first to stoop to name-calling also claimed that the blog post was an "article written by a man who has pretty clearly stated over and over again that's he's uncomfortable with so called "social justice warriors" and diversity and longs for the good old days." All of this is a lie in one form or another.  

This same lie has been told off Facebook, too:

Kevin very clearly defines two different types of social justice warriors, one he supports, as he did in his blog post that ultimately caused some friction, and the other he does not because he sees those involved as not being authentic. Regarding the latter, he states, "SJW antics are invariably a power-attention-and-money grab, not earnest activism. This means that fragile alliances and bridge-burnings are inevitable and easily foreseen features of any relationships forged with such people, whether they call themselves influencers or not."

It's laughable, almost, that, regarding a blog post celebrating diversity, the critic wants his audience to believe that the author has stated over and over again that he's uncomfortable with diversity. When pressed, the critic ignored that particular part of his claim and simply went on to say that his usual response is "what I said is valid, so it's not my fault that trolls and bigots are amplifying and repeating it." Notice how quickly he tosses out loaded terms like "bigot," and, as others in the group pointed out, he tried to make something that was about ethics and morality entirely about race. He also accused the host of the Facebook group of treating a black woman differently but offered zero evidence, zero. Meanwhile, the host of the group presented evidence to the contrary. There is also no evidence that the author of the blog post ever made any statements about longing for the past. This accusation is entirely fiction. If you go looking hard enough for something you want to find, though, you will probably eventually find it, even if it's not actually there.

It gets worse. On one of the critic's social media accounts, he posted the content of an argument that unfolded in that same thread but very craftily left out the last few posts to make it look like he had the upper hand, when in fact he did not. 

Omissions like this are another form of lying. It looks like he wants to make it appear like he "won" as if a conversation is some kind of competition, which shows exactly what kind of person he is, not someone who is for inviting a civil exchange of words. Anyone who's into publicly putting down others in such a way that the ones involved aren't invited to reply is not the best example of a model for inclusivity. Then, he has the temerity to suggest that others who don't like Snell's lying and bullying could look the other way and claims, without any proof, that people want her to disappear, yet he looks pretty comfortable making public comments about people he could easily ignore. Why the double standard? 

For someone who talks about wanting to make running spaces inclusive, this individual sure is combative, arrogant, and not truthful -- that is not the best advocate for bringing about harmony in any space at all. Still addressing the string of lies in just that one sentence, the author of the blog post never mentioned the good old days, not in the blog post referenced or anywhere else, for that matter, and the critic never bothered to provide a single example. Whenever a person takes an "I'm right, you're wrong" stance without any evidence at all, there is no room for dialogue. 

People can criticize Kevin's flowery language and lengthy posts, but the truth is that he's bringing up topics that many others are too afraid to discuss, most likely because bullies and trolls who claim to be woke come out in droves to insult anyone with an opposing opinion. Fortunately, Kevin's skin is thick, so bullies and general critics who either don't bother to read the content, make assumptions about it without reading for comprehension, or just plain lie about him don't affect his drive to address difficult topics. 

The other incident involved a tweet criticizing an individual, the same ACLU lawyer I have mentioned before, for lying. The one posting about the lawyer was immediately called homophobic and a bigot, and only one person asked for more information before defending the lawyer who lied, claiming he had done great things. That may be so, but he has also attempted to damage the reputation of several people simply for voicing their opinions, and, again, he hasn't always been operating above board. This kind of scenario is the perfect example of shooting the messenger. 

Here's my problem with all of this. Online debate, even bickering, is one thing, and I think most people like the idea of a healthy or lively discussion. The hosts of the Keeping Track podcast, Alysia Montano, Molly Huddle, and Roisin McGettigan, do an excellent, really outstanding job of encouraging conversation. They are shining examples of how the running community can become more inclusive. In stark contrast to these women and others who actually invite a civil back-and-forth, are those who can't control themselves and immediately call others racists, Nazis, and bigots throw out some serious accusations, often without merit, and, in turn, look more like fanatics than those whom they are attacking. 

It's uncalled for to drag out such potentially damaging smears when simply expressing an opinion is an option. Not that long ago, an American was sued when he called some German officers Nazis because he was upset, not because they were acting like anything other than officers. Certain words shouldn't be used simply because a person is pissy. "Wah, I'm mad so I'm going to slander your name and attempt to ruin your reputation." What an awful approach to life. But that's where we are, and the more people respond to their unchecked anger with a string of hateful insults, the more division it will cause. 

Tricia Griffith of Web Suleths says that nobody should be allowed to make false accusations against another person and attempt to tear a person's life apart, but, for the most part, it's legal. You can call someone a racist, bigot, or Nazi online with little to no repercussions. I know this doesn't matter to those who live in a small online bubble among like-minded individuals who like to see bullies attack anyone, no matter the reason, but these types of bullies will lose potential allies because of their bad behavior. 

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.

Same As It Ever Was II

I'm lucky that my job doesn't require me to stand out on social media. Basically, if I aim to do my best in terms of being honest, kind, helpful, and knowledgeable, it usually translates into doing well at work. When I look at how people who rely more heavily on being in the public eye behave, it makes me realize how far we as a society have to go in order to even begin to change the unhealthy but terribly ingrained habits that form the often dangerous beauty standards we constantly see. Most of us are still so very unaware how we contribute to cultural assumptions and norms.

I was late seeing some of the more bizarre takes on the "if you don't love me at my XXX, you don't deserve me at my XXX" meme phenomenon that's occurring on Twitter at the moment. The original quote is: “I’m selfish, impatient and a little insecure. I make mistakes, I am out of control and at times hard to handle. But if you can’t handle me at my worst, then you sure as hell don’t deserve me at my best.” - Anonymous. People initially made some cute or funny memes based on this, but, as they often do, those who crave the spotlight had to join in because everyone else was doing it. Then, all of a sudden, too many people took the opportunity to draw attention to bodies, women's bodies in particular, showing one supposedly less satisfactory image and one glammed up image side-by-side. It didn't take long for pretty much everyone to jump on board with their versions of worst and best, and I noticed a large number of people simply posting images of themselves at a higher weight or slightly less toned contrasted with a more socially accepted image.

My tipping point and why I wrote this post rather than engage with anyone on a social media platform was when someone who has been interviewed as an eating disorder recovery advocate and partnered with an expert to teach a virtual class on body image in 2017, through Oiselle presented an older image of herself shortly after having a baby but still in shape enough to be engaging in a high-intensity sport next to an image of herself looking extremely fit in a fashion show for a women's athletic apparel company. Since a few people already said what I was thinking, there was no need to beat a dead horse and get involved in any direct conversations. It was surprising that she posted something like this, and there was a lot of explaining afterward about how it's really a good thing, somehow aimed at progress, which I fail to see given the meme movement and the images themselves. When a few people called her out on what appeared to many as an odd way to support body positivity, what followed from both her and the clothing company was more than a little concerning. I couldn't help but have a reaction, one that I felt deserved a more measured response on my blog.

Before I even get into what was tweeted, let me remind everyone that it's widely accepted and has been for years that there's a strong correlation between social media and body image concerns. We already know the line between fitspiration and thinspiration is a slim and often blurred one, and the content of the two is often indistinguishable. I'm not going to get into how common it is for images to be stolen and use as pro-ana content. That's a separate issue, but it happens and is one more reason people should be more concerned about the types of images they post. Teens and young adults are especially vulnerable when it comes to being influenced by the messages and images found on social media, but it's not limited to women and girls. Boys and men are also affected, as are people in the LGBTQ community.

Blasting others with images of your body in such a way that draws disproportionate attention to the body itself will always have the potential to negatively affect those who are prone to compare themselves to others and seek approval through their weight, size, or fitness level. This kind of image with a strong emphasis on looks is obviously different from an image of someone simply engaging in a certain activity or enjoying a moment in front of the camera. In the case of the former, excessively promoting images that fit into the narrow definition of our society's warped definition of beauty is likely to negatively influence some, and contrasting two images that focus entirely on the body is certain to cause at least a few people to engage in unhealthy comparisons.

Most individuals post images on social media without thinking about the potential damage they can cause. What's surprising is how many individuals are unaware and uncaring in this area. Can we please just stop it and shift the focus away from women's bodies, period? We don't need new and different ways of looking at the aesthetics of a woman's body. This isn't helpful in the long run because the focus is still on looks rather than wellbeing, health, or anything deeper. Why must everything come back to this?

I know this seems like an impossible task. Everyone has rights and wants and needs, and many people want to get some validation through the images they post. The argument is that everyone wants to look good and be their best versions of themselves, Oprah style, which is all fine; just stop shoving your body parts, toned or not, in our faces and intentionally drawing attention to them at the expense of real content. Nobody should be supporting or encouraging people who post memes and images that very clearly send potentially harmful messages, even if the intentions of the poster are... the best. I'm sure some people will misinterpret what I'm saying and think, incorrectly, that I'm for a world with no images of bodies at all be it in fashion, athletics, or in general. That's not what I'm saying. If you feel that posting images of yourself somehow betters the world, by all means, post away. All I'm doing is presenting another side.

Let me spare you more ruminations and just post some of the thread responses along with my thoughts in red.

Q1: Why is her natural post-partum body at her worst?

(Exactly what I was thinking. Shouldn't this be a highlight in life, especially if you have a child and are able to return to the activities you love?)

 A: Our interpretation of the meme was not that the first image equals worse but more what is real - and not traditionally shared (as LF’s original blog points out). Either way, thank you for the comment.

(Despite the original quote very clearly stating "worst/best," we are somehow supposed to magically know by looking at the images that the OP had a different interpretation. In addition, aren't we the fools for not having read every single word of the OP's blog, especially posts dating back to 2013 and 2014. Shame on us, but since it has been brought to your attention that it's unlikely that anyone would take the images in the way they were supposedly intended, what now?) 


Q2: I think this trend should just be "if you don't love me at my XXX...you don't deserve me." The implication of "non-ideal" photos/bodies as "worst" & "beautiful" photos/bodies as "best" is not a healthy subtext


(This is one of the best responses I have seen. Yes, it's not healthy. I wish more people would understand this.) 

OP: I see it as a powerful way to say “take all of me or have none of me.” I think it subverts rather than endorses simply by encouraging the posting of a range of images as lovable. To each her own!

(OK, fair enough, but what about the message the images send without the added explanation? How many people are going to look at the images and then take the time to read all the responses to get to this explanation?)

Q3: "So let's review this," he said, incredulous. "Oiselle uses strategic lighting and angles so that its athletes look maximally lean and ripped for its ads, and now it's imploring its own target audience to be real about women's bodies."

 Q3: "I really think you should replace your entire marketing department," he said with unconcealed scorn. "I thought the 'Drink Responsibly' crap from booze-peddlers was patently hypocritical, but this is several levels worse."

 OP: For the record, both are my actual body :). And it is worth pointing out that the meme never says “worst” or “best” in reference to the images. Could be “candid” or “posed,” or any number of things. It’s telling that many assume “worst/best!

(Again, the original quote specifically states this, and the answer below couldn't be better, right down to the third-person panache.) 

 Q3: "I didn't assume anything!" he thundered. "But only a fool could fail to note what's implied by this juxtaposition. Oiselle is like virtually every other women's active-wear company in trying to have it both ways. It's as simple as that."

 Q4: Have you looked at their advertising lately? Oiselle makes it a point to have models of various shapes and sizes and clothing to fit them. Maybe you should become informed before you speak.

 Q3: "Well, isn't that sweet!" he trilled. "But the use of bigger models elsewhere has nothing to do with THIS post, which implies that it's OK to look 'normal' IF 'normal' is a temporary condition. I 'get' the intent, but trust me, it backfires."

I don't claim to have all the answers. Free speech includes freedom of expression, and anyone who wants can flaunt her body in any way she sees fit. I just wish more people would consider how easy it is to reinforce unhealthy or unrealistic standards of health, fitness, and beauty when the online audience is so vast. My concern is that if those who consider themselves knowledgeable about eating disorders are unaware of how potentially damaging certain kinds of memes and images can be, you can imagine how little is known about the toxic side of social media in the general public. Given this, it's likely we are going to see more and more people developing eating disorders. And that's why this kind of trend is so upsetting.

Few people take the time to consider the impact the images they post can have. Images send a message in an instant. You don't always have the luxury of looking away before an image pops up in your feed, and whatever message comes from it is internalized quickly. With some posters -- and I'm not suggesting this is the case with this particular situation but I'm sure it happens a lot -- as long as they're getting whatever benefit posting brings them, and as long as they get those reinforcing "likes," it's doubtful anything will change any time soon. One can hope, though. Damn, one can hope.

A Little Compassion, Eh?

Last week was eating disorder awareness week. I noticed both positive and not so beneficial messages on social media throughout the event. As an eating disorder recovery advocate -- not an eating disorder advocate, a term I saw a few times and questioned -- I find myself looking closely at how others talk about recovery or about eating disorders in general.

It might seem like I'm straddling the fence on some of the issues I'm attempting to address, but these matters are complex. When it comes to the different types of illness and the different movements emerging, I can see the various viewpoints and the concerns of each. What worries me is the increasing lack of compassion with which people are voicing their ideas. I understand the outrage. Hell, how many times have I angrily hit the keys as I typed a blog post about people on Instagram promoting disordered behavior under the guise of healthy living? I keep looking inside to see where this anger is coming from, and while I know I want desperately to protect the world from the damaging shit that's out there, and there's just so much shit, I'm also willing to look at the possibility that the anger might go deeper than that.

Here's the thing; I will never know what it's like to navigate the world in your body with your mind, and you will never truly know my struggles. That being said, I'm not going to discount what you're going through simply because I haven't experienced your life first hand, which is exactly what some people, people I usually respect and admire, seem to be doing. Those of us who are advocates generally speak from the heart about where we are and where we have been. It's not always going to be all-inclusive, but it doesn't mean we are ignoring the reality of others.

I don't know the details about what went down between Geneen Roth and several other recovery advocates, but I assume this had something to do with diet culture, the assumption that Geneen wasn't using the "right" terminology when addressing weight. I saw a few posts from several different people indirectly addressing Geneen and wondered why, if these people were so offended, they didn't confront Geneen directly. I fully support HAES and the Body Positive Movement. What I don't support are those who try to tear down others who have been instrumental in helping people recover from life-threatening eating disorders, people, like me, who might be dead had they not read one of Geneen's books. For me, reading what she went through, even though she didn't have the same illness I did, gave me the tiny bit of hope I needed to keep going. Even if her language isn't perfect (and whose is?) she doesn't deserve to be attacked.

I love Geneen Roth's reply to one of the individuals who attempted to vilify her:

I’ve heard (thank you, those of you who have let me know) that someone who calls herself an emotional eating expert is posting aggressively unkind Facebook ads about my work and that they are popping up on your pages.

I’m sorry to hear this and would like to take a moment to respond, not to her particularly, but to the notion that tearing someone else down will build us up. That being mean and aggressive is a winning strategy.

We’ve all tried that one. We’ve all blamed and fought and, from a lost or lonely or desperate place inside, cut other people to shreds. Or at least, I have. And when I wasn’t doing it explicitly, I was thinking about doing it. Blame was one of my favorite strategies and make no mistake: tearing someone else down is a way to blame. It’s a way not to take responsibility for our own feelings, our own decisions, our own actions.

It’s challenging not to go to war, either with ourselves or with someone else. It’s challenging to notice when the voice in our heads takes over and says, “War is the only option. Being unkind is the way to go. It’s my turn and I deserve to win, no matter the cost."

Everything—and this situation is no exception—is a chance to question where we stand.

Do I feel personally attacked? No.

Do I feel the need to write to her and call her out? No. (See below about taking action.)

Do I notice that the tactic she is using is familiar to me and that I’ve done it many times myself? Absolutely.

Can I find the place inside me that wants to go to war with myself? Fight with the parts of myself I think would be better vanquished? (That’s the war part. "Let’s destroy what we don’t agree with and what will be left will be only the good parts." How many times have I done that, starting with "let me lose weight and what will be left will be a happy, relaxed, thin person").

At least a million times…

Which doesn’t mean I don’t take action or speak up for myself. I do. Often. Although in this case, many people have already contacted Facebook about the aggressiveness. Also, the ad has not popped up on my page and I would need to be served the ad in order to report it.

The bottom line is that in any situation, I look and see what action I can take and if it feels in integrity, I take it.

And all along, I keep questioning what in me gets triggered and reactive, turning towards those feelings with as much kindness as I can muster. And I keep strengthening my resolve to untangle what’s left of the web of self-loathing and blame because the less and less I do it to and in myself, the less I do it with anyone around me.

It's working. Sanity and clarity are constant companions these days.

I'm a straight, white woman. The only thing missing for me to be the ideal typical stereotype of an anorexic is my youth. I'm older now, so I no longer fit the stereotype. I'm also in recovery, but you get my point. Whatever your eating disorder, it's as painful, as potentially deadly, and as difficult to address as mine. It might even be harder in many ways if it means that you are also experiencing prejudice and discrimination. I fully understand that and want to help raise awareness around these issues and change the way society views anyone with an eating disorder, no matter what his or her size. What I wish others would understand is that talking about what I experienced is in no way meant to put my needs above anyone else's. I don't see anorexia as some kind of top illness to discuss at the expense of other disorders, and I know that straight, white women aren't the only ones struggling with eating issues. Eating disorders affect all genders, all races, and all ages.

I used to think we were all in the same boat, that anyone who could relate to the suffering associated with an eating disorder would show compassion toward others battling their own illnesses. The way social media is, people constantly spouting this or that belief or thought without any filters, I can understand why people feel vulnerable. I thought anyone who had lived through an eating disorder or witnessed someone else wrestling their demons would show complete compassion and understanding toward others. Instead, what I see is a lot of anger and resentment directed at an entire group of people, exactly what most recovery advocates claim to rebuke. I see that and a lot of shameless self-promotion. Self-promotion isn't necessarily a bad thing, but when it comes at the expense of the actual cause, I take issue.

The big thing now is to post about anger being a great motivator, which can be true in one way, but it's an energy that burns out quickly. I ran in anger for a while. I was fierce and determined, but I was far more successful when I came at it from a place of forgiveness and love. This is a hard topic to address because I don't want to make it seem like I don't understand the hurt and frustration of living in a fucked up society that shuns people based entirely on how they look. It's more that I want to point out that trashing someone else isn't as effective as simply stating your argument.

People talk about Roxane Gay having a sharp tongue, but her memoir "Hunger" is one of the most poetic, moving, honest, and thought-provoking memoirs I have ever read. Her tongue isn't really all that sharp; she's just more direct and truthful than most. At no point does she feel the need to unnecessarily tear anyone down, even those who nearly destroyed her, but she has no problem defending herself with her words. In her memoir, she simply shares her story, but this is a book that absolutely has the potential to change the way society looks at anyone struggling with an eating disorder or disordered eating or even anyone who's different. I highly, highly recommend everyone read it.

Several times recently in my real life, not on social media, people have responded to me in unkind ways. I'm sensitive to this kind of behavior and don't react well to it. I tend to shut down. I will never quite understand when someone continually takes little or not so small digs at someone else or goes out of his or her way to make an inconsiderate comment. People tell me the problem lies with the one who chooses to be unpleasant, but it's hard to not take mean-spirited or judgmental attacks personally, even if I assume the issue really isn't me. I sometimes wish I could respond, "You, sir, may fuck off!" (Crime in Sports reference), but that's only because it would make me laugh, not because I aim to be as nasty back.

I guess all this rambling I've stumbled through is a long-winded way of saying, "Have a little compassion, eh?" 

Social Media and Eating Disorders

I think I have thrown this rant out there before, but I'm in the mood to complain about things again.

There's not a whole lot of improvement in the social media world when it comes to people posting potentially triggering content. When I look at tweets, blogs and facebook posts of people struggling with an eating disorder, I sometimes wonder if all this sharing is a good thing. Of course, there are many who are committed to recovery, and even some who aren't, who can still provide others with some insight, encouragement even. My biggest problem is with those who constantly post questionable content while pretending they are fully recovered.

I aim for honestly in my posts, and my main goal is to help others. That's why you won't see tons of images of my XXX calorie breakfasts or photos of me pretending to lick an ice cream cone. Readers might remember that I have a thing for ice cream. I eat it. I enjoy it, but I don't feel the need to document my desserts in photos. If this were a food blog, it might be a different story. Quite often, I get the feeling that people who post a lot of food images in recovery blogs are trying to convince themselves they are well when maybe that's not the case. In some instances, it's painfully clear it's not.

But I'm not here to bash anyone, mostly because I couldn't do it with as much flair as Anthony Bourdain, but also because I don't want to be mean. I just have a hard time understanding why people who look incredibly unwell would be motivated to post so many potentially damaging images of themselves. I get more upset when I know the inside story and see that the blogger's content paints an entirely different image, one that's not at all truthful.

When I was sick, I wanted to disappear. The last thing I wanted was to be in photographs. I didn't want people to see my bones sticking out in odd places or my pale, sometimes yellowish skin. More than that, though, I was frank about my struggles and at least admitted I had a problem.

Perhaps social media has encouraged a new way for people to seek attention, a way that's not healthy or constructive, but I wonder what goes through the mind of someone who is so dedicated to broadcasting her compulsions. Is it a cry for help? Is it a symptom of narcissism? Maybe it's a warped way of seeking approval. Ultimately, my concern with all these attention-seeking attitudes is that what's depicted in blog posts etc. can end up sending the wrong message, especially to others who might be struggling.

Nobody who's trying to recover needs to be reading: "LOOK AT ME! I WEIGH  XX POUNDS, AND I JUST ATE A CUPCAKE FOR DINNER!" It's fine to eat a cupcake for dessert and even mention it, especially if you're breaking through some fears around it, but do it and be done with it. We don't need to see an entire documentary about your date with a cupcake, the hours and minutes leading up to it and all that goes on relating to it for days and days after the big event. If you want to get into the calories, point exchanges, exercise changes, meal replacements and restrictions leading up to eating the thing, that's not helpful in any way. It's a fucking cupcake.

I want to make it clear, though, that there's a difference between someone committed to recovery posting images of herself enjoying a meal, snack or dessert, maybe even with friends, and someone who's sick posting an image of her 1/2 cup of non-fat yogurt in a bowl with 1/2 a small banana and 10 frozen blueberries claiming it's a "recovery meal" after a 9-mile jog, especially if this person calls herself a coach or life coach. Um, no, that's hardly even a snack! What confuses me more is that these types of posts often get the most likes and encouraging comments, but there's a dangerous message in there, one that the poster should acknowledge. And I'm sorry, but posting something like that probably isn't helping you, your readers or anyone, really, because you're focused on the symptoms.

The struggle for anyone suffering from an eating disorder is real and often life threatening. That's why I get so upset about these kinds of issues. I'm not making light of anything here. I just wish people would move away from their own obsessions with details, numbers and fears and stop inflicting their unhealthy patterns onto others under the guise that it's healthy. Again, I'm not talking about anyone who's merely trying to process -- I do a lot of that here -- or being honest about what she's doing, and I'm definitely not talking about anyone who's seeking help. I'm talking about people who try to give the illusion that they have their shit together when it's so very obvious they don't. Mostly I'm talking about people who are unable to think about how their actions might affect someone else.

There are times when I can't look at running or training blogs, because I know seeing posts from streakers, high-mileage boasters and race-every-weekend types can upset me. That's my own shit. These kinds of posts can be very inspirational to others and probably are. I just don't want to get into comparing where I am with anyone or where I wish I could be with where I am now, but I fully support people being able to post whatever they like. In these instances, it's easy for me to look away and know that I'm not perfect and need to take steps to make sure I'm doing all I can to stay healthy both mentally and physically.

I'm more concerned with people being honest about what they post in so called recovery blogs or health-related blogs. Yes, it's up to the reader to look the other way if need be, but if you claim to be a mentor, health professional, someone in the women's health field or even someone who struggles with an eating disorder, at least have some sense that what you post could possibly negatively affect someone. Ask yourself why you're posting it, and then go one step further and ask yourself what message you're trying to send.

As far as where I'm at with everything, I know that any time I'm getting too caught up in details or other people's issues, it's time for me to take a step back, reflect, listen and search for some inner peace. That's easier to do away from the computer. Sometimes it's just fatiguing to be exposed to other people's shit, but I should have more patience since I was once very ill too. I can't say I'm ever triggered by online content, but I guess I'm somehow affected or at least concerned that others might be and get a little bit angry about how insensitive others can be.

For the record, none of the blogs I follow fall into this category, so if you are looking for inspiration, please feel free to click on any of the links to blogs on my list.