Nothing tastes as good as thin feels

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You are off your rocker. No one is saying to eat "a whole bag of chips."

A) Crazy extreme thin advocates: No chips ever.

B) Normal, healthy people: Some chips sometimes.

C) Crazy extreme unhealthy people: All the chips all the time.

Most people on here are saying that B) is the best option. And you A) people are trying to say that that makes them advocates of C).

Learn to read, and think about what you're reading before you respond.

Wow. You think only "crazy extreme thin advocates" don't eat chips?

I like dessert sometimes, but I think chips are gross. I can't remember the last time I bought a candy bar. I'll eat dessert at a nice restaurant, but I think mass-produced junk food is just gross. Does that make me crazy?

Depends - can you be twirled??

Joking - I think focusing on the chips is missing the point. Replace chips with anything - the never/sometimes/always is the point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP here. Ever heard of a man picking up a woman and twirling her around? It's fun and I enjoy DH being able to easily do that.

My issue is that you all make it out to be this empowering thing to be able to eat junk food and be bigger than the fashion industry thinks women should be. I agree it's absolutely empowering, but so is saying that I don't want to eat junk food and enjoy being at a lower weight. You don't get to call me anorexic for not wanting to celebrate sitting on the couch and downing a whole bag of chips.

Everyone should be able to define what being empowered means to them.

You are off your rocker. No one is saying to eat "a whole bag of chips."

A) Crazy extreme thin advocates: No chips ever.

B) Normal, healthy people: Some chips sometimes.

C) Crazy extreme unhealthy people: All the chips all the time.

Most people on here are saying that B) is the best option. And you A) people are trying to say that that makes them advocates of C).

Learn to read, and think about what you're reading before you respond.

Wow. You think only "crazy extreme thin advocates" don't eat chips?

I like dessert sometimes, but I think chips are gross. I can't remember the last time I bought a candy bar. I'll eat dessert at a nice restaurant, but I think mass-produced junk food is just gross. Does that make me crazy?

FFS. We all know some people don't like chips, some people don't like cake, etc. Substitute whatever "indulgent thing" you DO like and plug it into the following:

A) Mindset: I will NEVER eat cheese/cake/cookies/cream/butter/candy/sausage, even though I like it, because I want to be thin.

B) Mindset: I will SOMETIMES eat indulgent foods because I want to enjoy all the good things that life offers and be healthy and balanced.

c) Mindset: I will eat a lot of all the indulgent foods whenever I want, because I am not prioritizing my health and leading a balanced life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP here. Ever heard of a man picking up a woman and twirling her around? It's fun and I enjoy DH being able to easily do that.

My issue is that you all make it out to be this empowering thing to be able to eat junk food and be bigger than the fashion industry thinks women should be. I agree it's absolutely empowering, but so is saying that I don't want to eat junk food and enjoy being at a lower weight. You don't get to call me anorexic for not wanting to celebrate sitting on the couch and downing a whole bag of chips.

Everyone should be able to define what being empowered means to them.

You're really moving the goal post here. The OP quote is that NOTHING tastes as good as thin feels. Not that your second or third piece of cake (where is all this cake? I love cake) isn't as good. The clear end game here is that you do not eat anything more than the bare minimum needed for survival, because thin feels zomg good.

Yeah - go ahead and eat a sensible amount so that you are a healthy weight. That seems like a good idea. That's clearly, clearly, obviously not what OP is suggesting. But go ahead and take it that way because nothing feels as good as mis-reading pro-ana quotes in order to serve your own purposes.

Oh no -- what the PPs are implicitly saying is that the only way to be a woke, empowered woman is to be a size 6 or above. Anyone who is smaller than that is obviously a victim of disordered eating.

I am the PP you are responding to - and I am smaller than a size 6. But I think you are really misunderstanding what people are saying. Be whatever size is right for you - but this idea that food is sinful and thinness is holy (which is CLEARLY what the OP quote is saying) is really nuts. Anyway, I think some of the ZOMG thin people on this thread aren't eating enough to do proper reading comprehension.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP here. Ever heard of a man picking up a woman and twirling her around? It's fun and I enjoy DH being able to easily do that.

My issue is that you all make it out to be this empowering thing to be able to eat junk food and be bigger than the fashion industry thinks women should be. I agree it's absolutely empowering, but so is saying that I don't want to eat junk food and enjoy being at a lower weight. You don't get to call me anorexic for not wanting to celebrate sitting on the couch and downing a whole bag of chips.

Everyone should be able to define what being empowered means to them.

You're really moving the goal post here. The OP quote is that NOTHING tastes as good as thin feels. Not that your second or third piece of cake (where is all this cake? I love cake) isn't as good. The clear end game here is that you do not eat anything more than the bare minimum needed for survival, because thin feels zomg good.

Yeah - go ahead and eat a sensible amount so that you are a healthy weight. That seems like a good idea. That's clearly, clearly, obviously not what OP is suggesting. But go ahead and take it that way because nothing feels as good as mis-reading pro-ana quotes in order to serve your own purposes.

Oh no -- what the PPs are implicitly saying is that the only way to be a woke, empowered woman is to be a size 6 or above. Anyone who is smaller than that is obviously a victim of disordered eating.

NP. STFU, because no one has said or implied anything of the kind.

[Anonymous]

I’m also thinner than cake twirler but do not share her views and as a single woman my pick up ableness is more of a liability than an asset. I’m much easier to kidnap than someone her size.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m also thinner than cake twirler but do not share her views and as a single woman my pick up ableness is more of a liability than an asset. I’m much easier to kidnap than someone her size.

OP's new Thinspo mantra: "Be the kind of girl who's easy to kidnap..."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m also thinner than cake twirler but do not share her views and as a single woman my pick up ableness is more of a liability than an asset. I’m much easier to kidnap than someone her size.

Love the direction this has taken. Think eating cake is a valid kidnap-avoidance strategy? Not chips because not everyone likes those so the chip-averse would be unfairly discriminated against for kidnapping.

[Anonymous]

Wow, this is a good old fashioned DCUM slug fest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m also thinner than cake twirler but do not share her views and as a single woman my pick up ableness is more of a liability than an asset. I’m much easier to kidnap than someone her size.

Love the direction this has taken. Think eating cake is a valid kidnap-avoidance strategy? Not chips because not everyone likes those so the chip-averse would be unfairly discriminated against for kidnapping.

Cake twirler here. Thanks for the nickname! I like it.

The issue is I can run faster than people who are heavier. I can also hide in small spaces. Factors to consider when determining how to avoid being kidnapped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m also thinner than cake twirler but do not share her views and as a single woman my pick up ableness is more of a liability than an asset. I’m much easier to kidnap than someone her size.

Love the direction this has taken. Think eating cake is a valid kidnap-avoidance strategy? Not chips because not everyone likes those so the chip-averse would be unfairly discriminated against for kidnapping.

Who would even bother kidnapping someone who didn’t like potato chips? How can Stockholm’ syndrome really occur without bonding over low class nasty potato chips?

It rubs the lotion on its skin......

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m also thinner than cake twirler but do not share her views and as a single woman my pick up ableness is more of a liability than an asset. I’m much easier to kidnap than someone her size.

Love the direction this has taken. Think eating cake is a valid kidnap-avoidance strategy? Not chips because not everyone likes those so the chip-averse would be unfairly discriminated against for kidnapping.

Cake twirler here. Thanks for the nickname! I like it.

The issue is I can run faster than people who are heavier. I can also hide in small spaces. Factors to consider when determining how to avoid being kidnapped.

Except...you know you can’t actually state you run faster than anyone heavier than you right!? I’m not sure you do know that hut it’s bound to be true regardless.

[Anonymous]

So if I’m 110 and run a 3 hour marathon where might you hide?

You’ll be too busy running to help bring down the kidnapper or shooter- so you’ve really un caked your way directly into danger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m also thinner than cake twirler but do not share her views and as a single woman my pick up ableness is more of a liability than an asset. I’m much easier to kidnap than someone her size.

Love the direction this has taken. Think eating cake is a valid kidnap-avoidance strategy? Not chips because not everyone likes those so the chip-averse would be unfairly discriminated against for kidnapping.

Cake twirler here. Thanks for the nickname! I like it.

The issue is I can run faster than people who are heavier. I can also hide in small spaces. Factors to consider when determining how to avoid being kidnapped.

Except...you know you can’t actually state you run faster than anyone heavier than you right!? I’m not sure you do know that hut it’s bound to be true regardless.

I can likely run faster than someone heavier than me who is also out of shape. Of course there are people who are heavier than me who are athletes. They can undoubtedly run faster than me.

[Anonymous]

So based on that your weight has relatively nothing to do with ones ability to run.

What was your point again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thoughts?

That it is a phrase commonly used on Pro-Ana and other eating disorder “help” sites. It was there back in the 90’s when we all had Geocities and dial-up and it’s still there now hiding in Tumbler and Reddit and Insta and other places young girls find their “thinspiration”. Sure it doesn’t feel good to be fat, but it does feel good to not have my life revolve around weigh grams of food, exercising compulsively and staring at photos of lollipop head models all day.