On the post about vanity and physical fitness, Delores asked a question about weight loss:
what do you think is the sequence for losing weight? Not accepting your body, so you change it; or accepting who you are and then from that acceptance just 'loving' yourself enough to change.
I replied that I didn't think body acceptance was all that relevant:
I would say that dressing properly requires accepting the truth about your body. You should dress the body you have, not the body you wish you had or the body you fear you might have.
But for me, losing weight required accepting the truth about my behavior, not my body. Accepting or not accepting my body was sort of irrelevant.
I read that over a few times, and I am pretty sure that it's true. But, I had to think for a while to be sure that statement wasn't reading back the story I'd like to tell into the past.
But did you notice my vocabulary sleight-of-hand there?
I'm not really happy with the vocabulary surrounding the debate about "acceptance." Should people accept their bodies as they are? Is the fat-acceptance movement healthy or not? The reason I don't like it is that the words "accept" and "acceptance" are kind of weaselly -- they are chosen and used because they have positive connotations (who will come out against "acceptance?") but more information is needed before you can pin down the meaning precisely.
First of all, "to accept" needs an object to make any sense at all. One doesn't merely "accept," one accepts a thing -- or a person, or a place, or an idea. A writer who understands this property of the verb "to accept" won't make the error of describing a person as "very accepting." It says nothing of substance, only imparts a glow of positivity, until the writer specifies: Exactly what does she accept?
Second, the verb morphs its meaning depending on what the object is. Watch this:
"I accepted the job" = "I agreed to the terms of the offer of employment."
"I accepted the gift" = "I agreed to receive the gift and I received it."
"The college accepted me" = "The college permitted me to enroll as a student."
"I accepted that fact" = "I acknowledged that fact as true."
"The restaurant accepts credit cards" = "The restaurant will receive payment in the form of credit cards"
"The employees accepted the poor working conditions" = "The employees endured the poor working conditions without complaining"
What all these threads of meaning have in common is the notion of receiving willingly or agreeably. A thing which is "accepted" is received, along with all its consequences, whether they be good or bad, with the assent of the will in some way. But notice the necessity of the concept of "receiving" -- something is grasped, or taken, or taken on, that was not grasped before.
So when you're talking about "accepting a person" the meaning is perfectly clear if that person has undergone a sort of a change, has been "received." When a college accepts a student or a team accepts an athlete, the meaning is that a person has newly become a member of a group because the group has agreed to admit him. When a son's new bride is accepted as part of the family, that means that -- even though the other family members didn't get to choose her -- the family nevertheless willingly extends "membership privileges," treating her as they would a family member. When we Catholics in our wedding vows agree that we "will accept children lovingly from God" we mean that we promise to welcome children that we don't yet have. All of these cases involve an act of will, but also an act of receiving. Even if the receiving isn't our choice (as in the case of the in-laws, or sometimes in the case of the children!), the act of will that turns it from merely "receiving" to "receiving willingly" -- to "accepting" -- is a choice. That act of will may happen much later than the act of receiving (perhaps the in-laws take some time to "accept" the bride) but the receiving is still implied.
So -- here's a question -- how can one "accept one's body?" "I receive my body willingly?" That doesn't really work, unless personhood and will precede embodiment, a belief that I'm betting few or none of my readers subscribe to. I have been embodied since my beginning. I cannot "accept" it in any literal sense, because I never "received" it. I can accept someone else's body (as a woman, I do, repeatedly in marriage and temporarily in pregnancy; as a Catholic, I do, repeatedly, in the Eucharist) but it's nonsense to say I accept my own.
So when we say something like "body acceptance," meaning one's own body, we must be using "body" as a euphemism or as shorthand for the real object of acceptance.
One possibility is that we accept a physical condition that our body is in. This has a connotation of "endure without complaining" -- in the way one might accept a privation, or a punishment, or the "poor working conditions" mentioned above, or a disease.
But even this isn't really specific enough to say whether such "acceptance" is healthy or unhealthy. What's going on inside? The term doesn't specify whether the attitude is one of I'll-prove-I-can-withstand-this, or looking-on-the-bright-side, or uniting-my-suffering-to-the-suffering-of-Christ, or complaining-won't-help-so-why-bother. Any of these will do to be described as "accepting the conditions." But I think you'll agree that which one is meant makes a very big difference to the spirit.
Another possibility is that we accept some idea or truth or statement about our body. This means, simply, "we believe" that idea or truth. In that case, whether it's healthy to "accept" the truth or idea hinges on whether the truth is true! "I accept that this morning I weighed 205 pounds" is a lot different from "I accept that I will always weigh more than 200 pounds." "I accept that my physical condition increases my risk of developing diabetes" is a lot different from "I accept that I will develop diabetes." "I accept that I wear a size 16" is a lot different from "I accept that I have to wear big baggy clothes to hide my ugly hips." "I accept that it's very difficult to exercise" is a lot different from "I accept that I am not able to exercise."
So, to return to Delores's question,
what do you think is the sequence for losing weight? Not accepting your body, so you change it; or accepting who you are and then from that acceptance just 'loving' yourself enough to change.
Does she mean "enduring" a body-condition, or does she mean "believing" a body-truth? I think the question becomes logical if we frame it as follows:
"What do you think is the sequence for losing weight?
- First, not accepting the proposition "Changing your body is impossible or undesirable." (In other words, accepting the proposition "Changing your body is possible and desirable.") Then, you change your body.
- Or accepting the relevant facts about yourself: that your body is in a certain condition, and that you live under certain constraints, and that you have certain tendencies and desires; and then with the power that comes from that knowledge, just willingly making sacrifices or acts of will that create good changes."
Wow! When you phrase it that way, it's stunningly obvious that this is not an either-or choice!
1. Understand and believe the relevant facts.
2. From those facts, judge whether a change offers benefits.
3. If a change offers benefits, judge from the facts whether they are possible to attain.
4. If there are benefits that are possible to attain, determine from the facts how they could be attained.
5. Decide whether you want to expend the effort to attain them.
That's the order of operations, without using the word "acceptance."
Thank you!! I really needed the motivation to get out of the "but it's Easter!" trap I'd fallen in with my body-change project. I kept to a very difficult diet and learned a LOT about my relationship to gluttony all during Lent, but once Easter Sunday hit I allowed myself to feast and never stopped. Your formulation at the bottom of this post will be printed and posted to my bathroom mirror. :-) I want to find a more sustainable way to keep up the weight loss, but I have to "accept" that that means sacrifice, albeit of a different sort than my Lenten project.
Posted by: Becca Balmes | 06 May 2011 at 11:49 AM