Woman aims for 1,000 pound weight goal

[Soft*Silver]

yes....I just didnt state it clear enough. There are some people who would think that people with MS could not take care of their children. But, having MS is not reason for taking children away from them. One's physical ability does not make someone a bad parent. There are ways for that care to happen. A caregiver, another parent, a family member, etc...

Originally Posted by Daywalker

Ok, so maybe I read this part all wrong?

[Gemme]

Originally Posted by Words

http://www.closeronline.co.uk/RealLi...y-to-72st.aspx

This woman is selfish. She obviously cares way more about getting her rocks off -which, to me, seems to be what it's all about - than she does about spending time with her children, and given the fact that she already has health issues directly related to her weight, she obviously doesn't care a shit about their future.

As to the working to pay for her food excuse, - I don't care how many hours a day she 'has' to work, the simple truth is that she obviously enjoys doing it rather than spending time with her daughter as otherwise, she wouldn't be doing what she's doing and wouldn't be relying on poor old Phillipe to 'do the things she can't' - what about the cost of her medical treatment, past and present, who's been paying/going to be paying for that? Again, she doesn't seem to care.

So, would I take her kid/s away from her? In a heartbeat. Womyn the world over have no choice but to work long hours in order to support their families. This woman works long hours simply because she wants to get her name in a record book and be famous, even if doing so means depriving her children of a mother? Please.

Words

Wow. Oh wow. Just......wow.

It's worse than I initially thought.

Originally Posted by Bit

Gemme said, "So, anyone who has the money should just hire a nanny and not have that one on one quality time with their children?"

*puzzled look* What is quality time? How do we define it? Is one required to dress a child for school in order to have quality time? Is one required to cook for that child to have quality time? What if one spends the time they have reading to a child, or helping a child with their spelling, or any of a hundred other things which show love but do not require physical activity?

Believe me, I remember the times my mother read to me WAY more fondly than the times she went shrieking and slamming through the house doing housework, and by kindergarten we were all perfectly capable of taking our own baths and dressing ourselves.

After reading both articles posted here for us, I have to honestly say that, at 1000 lbs, this woman is barely going to be able to BREATHE, much less read anyone a story. Even though there is another adult in their lives (thank goodness!), I don't think it's fair to rob the children of a mother. This woman will not be shrieking or slamming or reading to anyone. She will, at 1000 lbs, be bedridden and hugely troubled by physical issues or she will be dead. Period.

She weighs three times that. How did she get there? Surely she has the same hormonal imbalances that plague anyone who weighs three or four hundred pounds, right? Nobody gets that big just by eating; your hormones have to be out of whack for that kind of weight.

This was addressed earlier, but I appreciate you thinking of other alternatives other than personal gratification that would explain this woman's size and goal.

I have a very uncomfortable feeling that it's because she's visible. I have a very uncomfortable feeling that it's because she's trespassing on our culture's strongly-held stereotypes of proper womanhood, proper motherhood.

She's visible because SHE contacted the media. She announced her goal. No one else.

We do not actually know that her children are or will be unhappy or neglected in any way.

True. It is good that they have another trusted adult in their lives, even if he is an enabler to their mother.

Originally Posted by IrishGrrl

I find it interesting that the people who dont see how destructive this is for the children, are people who dont HAVE children.

(non judgy..just an observation)

*raises hand*

I haven't any children either.

Originally Posted by Braedon

Now I know that I'm not the healthiest eater in the world, and I often eat too much, but just thinking that one person could eat this much in a typical day makes Me sick (I mean physically nauseated)

How can you eat that much in one day, seriously?

She didn't just wake up and eat thousands of calories in one day. She ate more and more, expanding her stomach and her appetite, until she reached where she is now. If she actually begins on this journey, and eats 12,000 calories per day, she will be eating per day what I eat in 9.28 days.

Originally Posted by apocalipstic

It freaks me out to think that we would want the government to take away her kids.

While there have been a few who mentioned the removal of the children, the vast majority of responses have not said that. I think that no one wants that to happen, but it is a possibilty if she didn't have Phillippe in her life. I think he, as the father of the toddler, will be able to help the kids. Hopefully, he will be strong enough to be the only parent, if she continues to attempt to reach her goal.

I like that they mentioned she feeds her daughter a healthy diet, so she does know the difference. As it's been pointed out several times, this is this woman's CHOICE. So sad.

Originally Posted by Medusa

I like the parallel that you draw between what this person is doing and a drug addict.
If we view her choice to eat this much (or the attention that she gets from eating this much?) as an addiction, would we view her husband as an enabler? (this one seems like a no brainer)
Would we view the feeder/gainer community that she is part of as culpable in helping her maintain her addiction? Is there a culture in the feeder/gainer community that celebrates this addiction?

Absolutely! He's a major enabler in a long line of them.

Good questions. I haven't known many Gainers, but those that I do and have known always kept their health in mind. They did eat for others' pleasure, but never to that extent. They still wanted to be able to "Get out and experience LIFE!"...direct quote...as well as their fetish.

I think that it's up to the gainer to determine what is right for them. I believe they have the ultimate control. It's their fetish, their body, their lives. But, I do believe that if it crosses over from the enjoyment of a fetish to a full blown addiction, I believe that that would not happen without the prodding of a feeder. It could easily be a shared addiction, like a shared hallucination. Both parties would feel like nothing was wrong, but the push and pull of their addiction would be out of control.

Originally Posted by apocalipstic

Are people who buy the Guiness Book of World Records or support the types of magazines and websites she is making money from culpable?

Not at all. There are thousands and thousands and thousands of records in those books. No one is going to buy one book at, what?, $50 bucks for one little entry.

I do agree that the media and enterprises through the media have some responsibility. It would surprise me greatly and impress the Hell out of me if the Guiness Book turned her down. Unlikely though.

Originally Posted by apocalipstic

I think as long as we as a society continue to be fascinated with people like this and continue to buy the books, we are encouraging people like her.

*nods*

Originally Posted by June

To me, this is no different than Foot Binding (Making the woman reliant upon a man for everything AND unable to escape) which was also fetishized. See the correlation? Except this is now 2010 and the world has produced yet another woman who thinks she needs to subjugate her needs and those of her children for MEN.

OKAY! Maybe I just took that a bit too far, however, even in these times there are lots of religious sects who still espouse having lots of children and it's the womans job to take care of them, as though all of her worth poured out of her pussy till she's spent, then you know, just get another wife.

Women: We're disposable to others and unfortunately in this womans case, she seems to believe she is as well.

And hormones? Uh, yeah, I'm fat because I've got a "glandular problem". No, I'm fat because (pick some) I have mobility issues, I eat too much, I excercise too little, I can't help it, my body doesn't process carbs in the regular way... This woman is CHOOSING! She is saying I WANT THIS! She is stating very clearly WHY.

I have never been a binge eater, but I have at different times in my life been a purger. Many of us suffer from eating disorders of one kind or another, many of us have complicated relationships with food. MOST of us would NEVER CHOOSE to have a goal of completely disabling ourselves. She might be a food addict who is being heinously enabled, but I'm not a Doctor, I just play one online.

As far as being a mom? I'm in it to win it. Once I decided to bring my child into the world, he became my number one priority. This doesn't mean I didn't live my life the way I needed to, but it does mean that everything, including coming out was thoughtfully considered as to how it might affect him. Even now that he's an adult, I consider him and luckily, because of the way I raised him, he considers me too.

And also, if my child was younger and I was disabled to the point where I could not take care of him, I would want him in the care of someone else. Motherhood is not selfish, or it shouldn't be. I'm not saying it wouldn't be heartwrenching or devastating, but it would probably be the right thing, and hopefully, if I knew what was down the pike, I would make arrangements ahead of time to ensure he was cared for by someone I knew and trusted rather than leaving it up to strangers. If I was an addict of any kind, my actions would severely limit my choice in the matter.

I love this whole post, but the underlined part is my view of motherhood as well.

Originally Posted by DapperButch

P.S. Gemme, thanks for throwing out there what you thought I was saying since I couldn't post until now....you were right!

Thanks!

[Cyclopea]

She's a model. Period. Because models are marketing their physical body they may do any number of things the average person would not do (some of which are unhealthy) to modify their asset and enhance its profitability. Same with anyone else whose body is their business- athletes, bodybuilders, laborers, etc. Laborers who work in hot environments may pop sodium tablets like candy. Professional wrestlers may take narcotics to enable them to work when badly injured. Bodybuilders may inject steroids. Athletes- all of the above and more. Should a Barry Bonds have his children removed from him because his steroid cocktails may eventually render him disabled?

Obese women working as models -and making a very nice living doing so- is nothing new and has been going on for hundreds, if not thousands of years. And there has always been a sexualized aspect to the marketability of fat women. There is no equivalent history of fat men being marketable.

What happened here is that an offhand comment Donna made -part of her sales pitch/fantasy creation- was reported and took off like wildfire. The reason is that the meme of "willfully fat" is one that provokes pleasing self-righteous outrage from not only thin people, but "less fat" people, and "struggling to lose weight" people who can all enjoy a nice round of bonding and reassurance over putting down the willfully fat addict gluttonous "not like us" freak.
Ms. Simpson just so happens to be astute enough to know how to cash in on this widespread social fantasy of "Not Fat Like Us". And people are willing to pay for this modeling of otherness. Big time. If society wasn't extremely invested in this fantasy, this meme would die a quick death in the "Guy In Indiana Smokes Four Packs A Day" file.

The funny thing is that Ms. Simpson's statements and her truth no longer matters, because the meme of "willful fatty" is much more marketable than her little truth. Millions will be made off it. I only hope she is smart enough to play along and get a few pennies herself for her troubles.
-------------------------------------------------------------
600-pound NJ mom Donna Simpson's quest to be heaviest woman on Earth just 'a fantasy for fans'

BY Maria Fugate
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Wednesday, March 17th 2010, 7:50 PM

Hungry size 4 fashion models, eat your hearts out.

Six-hundred-pound Donna Simpson, 42, isn't what most people picture when they think of modeling, but that's exactly how the New Jersey mom makes
big money these days, according to ABC News.

The pale brunette with curly slicked-back hair is a successful model on Supersizedbombsells.com, a Web site for men who worship big women, ABC
News reports.

"I have fans who send me baklava and cheesecake and everything else you can imagine," says Simpson . "I'm heavy, and I wouldn't mind being heavier."

Simpson made headlines this week after the British newspaper Daily Mail reported that she was on a quest to gain 400 pounds and be named Guinness
World Records' fattest woman on Earth.

But Simpson, stay-at-home mom of a 3-year-old girl, says the Mail got it twisted, ABC News reported.

"The whole thing about the 1,000 pounds is a fantasy I provide to my fans," she tells ABCNews.com, irked about the story.

Still, at more than a quarter of a ton, she's a heavyweight any way you slice it — and her husband, Phillippe Gouamba, told ABC News.com he
stands behind her.

"I support her because I enjoy it," he said.

He's hardly alone. Plus-size models all around the world are getting a noticably bigger share of the pie these days — proudly appearing everywhere from designer rundays to print and TV ads and proving there's a market for much more than one skinny size fits all.

And you only have to look up BBW -- big beautiful women -- online to find a wide range of sites celebrating curvier examples of female beauty.

Though Simpson is not shooting for a record and insists she's healthy as she is, many plus-size women acknowledge they face health significant risks, ABC News.com reports.

Obesity increases the likelihood of heart disease, diabetes, hypertension and some types of cancers, the government says; First Lady Michelle Obama
recently announced she will make a battle against childhood obesity in the nation her top priority this year.

But Mikey Garcia, who owns Mikey's BBW (Big Beautiful Women) Club in Waterford, Mich., notes there are many unhealthy thin women too because
they are constantly dieting or smoking.

"Just because a woman is a bigger size doesn't mean she's not healthy," Garcia said, according to ABC News.com.

The women of Supersized Bombshells, many of whom were mercilessly ridiculed as children in school and still shunned by some, bask in the positive attention.

Priscilla Bell, 26, who tips the scales at a hearty 355 pounds, says modeling for men lets her to be herself — a self-confident young mom, ABC News.
com reported.

She says she gets hundreds of e-mails from appreciative fans every day, and makes about $600 a month from her postings.

"There are men who look at me and say I'm as beautiful as Tyra Banks or Heidi Klum," says Bell, whose best-selling video shows her cooking in the
buff.

Sounds like a lot more fun than a daily diet of spring water and undressed salad.

[Bit]

Originally Posted by Cyclopea

BY Maria Fugate
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Wednesday, March 17th 2010, 7:50 PM

...........But Simpson, stay-at-home mom of a 3-year-old girl, says the Mail got it twisted, ABC News reported.

"The whole thing about the 1,000 pounds is a fantasy I provide to my fans," she tells ABCNews.com, irked about the story.

So it's just a tempest in a teapot, then? We've been going on for pages because the Daily Mail skewed the story to sensationalism?

Sheesh.

(Here's a link to the story Cyclopea posted, in case anyone wants it.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/03/17/2010-03-17_plusplus_models_the_next_big_thing.html )

[Gemme]

Originally Posted by Bit

So it's just a tempest in a teapot, then? We've been going on for pages because the Daily Mail skewed the story to sensationalism?

Sheesh.

(Here's a link to the story Cyclopea posted, in case anyone wants it.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/03/17/2010-03-17_plusplus_models_the_next_big_thing.html )

Maybe yes, maybe no. She wouldn't have 'people' for the media to go to if she wasn't somewhat responsible for it, I'd think.

Wouldn't be the first time, though, would it?

*wry grin*

Just as a few (myself included) said something about media and what it jumps on....we do the same....but I think the discussion has been good. It looks like everyone seems to be more concerned with the care of the children than anything, which is the most important thing to me.

[Rockinonahigh]

Every sence I have been readnig about this women who, imho,is seriously sick to be doing the things she dose.what she is doing to her health,her kids..now and in the future,is so irrisponsable.Just so she can tody up to a bunch of guys who are about as sick as she is.I gess she is getting something out of all thais but she has a very low opinion of herself to be doing this,wich is another thing the kids will be liveing with when they get older..I wonder if this will haveing them doing the same thing?

[Random]

Originally Posted by Rockinonahigh

Every sence I have been readnig about this women who, imho,is seriously sick to be doing the things she dose.what she is doing to her health,her kids..now and in the future,is so irrisponsable.Just so she can tody up to a bunch of guys who are about as sick as she is.I gess she is getting something out of all thais but she has a very low opinion of herself to be doing this,wich is another thing the kids will be liveing with when they get older..I wonder if this will haveing them doing the same thing?

Ummm.. why is this any different than any sex worker setting up a webcam and making her living letting people watch her?

Why is it sick? Just because I don't agree with a kink, doesn't mean it's sick...