The Sunday Times – The obese want to have their equality cake and eat it too, by India Knight

Whatever else may or may not have gone on with the fat family — and social services seem to be indicating that weight is only one component — being so irresponsible that you make your children obese is absolutely reprehensible and deserving of punishment. It’s a form of child abuse. Being fat, or a smoker, or a drug-taker, or a drunk oneself is one thing: we all bear responsibility for what, as adults, we choose to do with ourselves. But it’s not okay to force the nicotine or the drugs or the whisky onto your children — and nor is it okay to feed them so much, or so badly, that they develop weight issues when they’re barely out of nappies. I’d have taken the children away too. …

[So a bunch of fat people protested outside Boris' office wanting laws passed to make fattism a hate crime as it is, evidently, in San Francisco, where it's illegal for a doctor to suggest weightloss for the good of one's health, if one doesn't want to address one's fattiness, and one of these protestors said,] “This is a very common event — someone being beaten up should be a crime. It is not about who you are or what you have done, it is just about the way you look. You are allowed to shame us just because of the way we look.”

She seems to be completely missing the point that people are beaten up all the time because they can’t help the way they look or the impression they give. A 62-year-old gay man, Ian Baynham, was beaten up by three teenagers in Trafalgar Square a month ago. He suffered brain damage and died on October 13. This story makes me so incandescent that I can barely type. I can find no way at all of seeing how it is even a little bit like someone shouting “get out of the way, fatty” or being greeted with raised eyebrows when you go to a job interview and don’t fit on the chair.

So, I find myself slightly convinced. I mean, I need no convincing that being morbidly obese is unnatural and one’s heart just can’t take it. So if it’s empirically unhealthy, then isn’t making one’s kids unhealthy bad? And can’t it be compared to pouring booze down their throat (not, in and of itself, unhealthy; see: the human race pre-1950s)?

Anyway, I feel like I should instinctively abhor the idea but I’m kind of coming around to it. So I’ll just reach out for a little instinct-burnishing. Or maybe I’m right to be convinced?

The second item in the column is about Samantha Cameron’s stupid Marks & Spencer dress. You’d think that a politician’s stylist would realize that no matter how good the PR would be to put his wife in a certain off-the-rack dress, once she’s had to send the politician in to beg it from the company’s chairman who in turn has to get company designers to get their seamstresses to do one up to-order for the politician’s wife, that the stylist would realize that it’s sort of undone any potential PR wins and maybe she should just try Talbots (viz. Michelle Obama). But this stood out:

Also, talk about unenterprising: I know for a fact that eBay was awash with the M&S dress in a variety of sizes for weeks leading up to conference. Leader’s wife on eBay: now that really would be something.

So, once again it is proved that people who create shortages in order to sell the crap on eBay are once again ruining everything for everyone including, apparently, the future geopolitical and economic stability of the world.