Women's
Health:
A Woman’s
View of Eating and Weight Problems
Author
Unknown
Women
with eating and weight difficulties are obsessed with weight, scales, and mirrors.
But the oppressive treatment of women over the course of history has undeniably
contributed to the modern fad of self-destructive dieting. It is predominantly
a woman’s problem - statistics dictate as much. Meanwhile, inasmuch as society
has created the problem, society bears the responsibility for eradicating it.
Otherwise it risks losing some of its best and brightest young women to a tenacious,
maddening, and sometimes fatal treadmill.
The
old adage holds true...
History
repeats itself. The 20th century may boast remarkable strides toward equitable
treatment for women; nevertheless, eating disorders thrive, the most recent in
a long line of "women’s illnesses". Some researchers view eating disorders
as akin to the fasting of medieval women saints, most notably Catherine of Siena.
More closely related, though, are chlorosis, neurasthenia, and hysteria, illnesses
afflicting women from the Victorian period onward. Though the names change over
time, the symptoms of these "women’s diseases" remain notably constant:
depression, anxiety, headaches, amenorrhea, and disordered eating. Victorian patients
were also described by their physicians as "slender,” "trying to be
slender,” and "noncurvaceous". Since chlorosis, etc. were categorised
as mere nervous disorders, it is difficult to know for certain that they are in
fact the predecessors to modern eating disorders. Then, as now, gender roles were
in flux, and success was generally modelled by the father, domesticity by the
mother.
Popular
Victorian thinking held that women were "slaves of their bodily appetites,”
an attitude long asserted by the Church. Moreover, food and sex were inextricably
linked in the feminine psyche: "appetite was regarded as a barometer of sexuality".
Aesthetes like Saint Catherine modelled the stringent standards held for women
in the 19th century, when the ideal was "a physique that symbolised rejection
of all carnal appetites". The same is true today - people, especially women,
are judged based on their appearance, and obesity is equated with a lack of self-control.
So today and yesterday it has been incumbent upon women to control their appetite
in order to encode their body with the correct social messages. And what is that
message? Women are expected to be the custodians and embodiments of virtue. Appetite,
be it hunger or lust, is socially unacceptable in a woman - "their body as
repository of appetite fills them with shame". Girth is an undeniable testament
that one’s appetite, for food at least, has been gratified.
The
Curse of Eve Myth
Appropriately
enough, a magazine survey found that a majority of women were ashamed of their
stomachs, hips and thighs - parts of the body that contribute to female shapes.
Roberta Seid wrote, "Our female ideal violates the natural anthropomorphic
reality of the average female body... is more like the body of a male than a female.
The goal is to suppress female secondary sexual characteristics". This goal
is in keeping with our culture’s "curse of Eve" myth.
If
the female body causes men to sin, then it must be modified accordingly. Many
eating disordered women exhibit extremely ambivalent feelings toward sexuality,
which could easily be a result of the blame for sexual lasciviousness assigned
them. Hornbacher supports this, writing that the seeming prudishness of anorectics
is "less related to [their] own fear of sex -I personally was not afraid
of sex, merely ashamed that it so fascinated me - than to a fear that other people
will see them, and judge them, as sexual.” Again, women are given clear messages
from girlhood that their sexual appetites should be a source of shame. Denial
of one’s secondary sexual traits translates to a denial of one’s sexual nature.
In
light of this extreme sexual pessimism it is perhaps ironic that men, who have
controlled the means of representing women in art throughout history, have so
focused on the female form: the flesh, the body. The fashion industry has always
been dictated by men, which has often meant beauty norms that immobilise women
such as corsets, foot binding, and modern thinness. Several have also noted the
20th century’s extreme interest in the nude female form, in fashion as well as
in the media. Roberta Seid points out that, fashionably garbed, a woman "virtually
became wholly exposed." Hence clothing is no longer enough; a woman must
manipulate her very being to be fashionable nowadays. The representation of women
in the media has become increasingly pornographic. Such pornoographic images are
usually of curvaceous, voluptuous women. But beneath the seeming implication that
sexuality is becoming more socially acceptable is an uncomfortable double bind:
"the "fat" pornographic images present a female body without a
mind, without subjectivity. The fashion models in women’s magazines are meant
to represent women with minds to acknowledge and appeal to female objectivity,
but they have no bodies". Women who have noticeably female bodies become
objects in cultural consciousness. They are reduced to sex and sex alone, and
are not allowed any sense of physio-spiritual integrity. If a woman wants to be
taken seriously, she cannot be a sexual being and so, cannot be "fat".
This
sense of objectification goes beyond what women see and informs their very realities.
Inundated with pornographic images, women are aware of an audience whose members
believe it is their birthright to look at women’s bodies. It is clearly no coincidence
that between one- and two-thirds of all women with eating disorders have been
sexually abused. Both of these conditions relate to an inability to see one’s
body as one’s own -- sexual abuse as cause, eating disorder effect. Furthermore,
the androgynisation of one’s body via extreme restrictive dieting may be a method
of warding off more unwanted sexual attention. That androgyny has become the ideal
presents an unavoidable challenge to women in this culture, where feminine beauty
remains a form of currency. Fatness in women is associated with downward social
mobility. Meanwhile, marriage is still a viable way for women to achieve upward
mobility, and the more beautiful a woman is (by society’s standards), the more
likely it is that she will marry well. Marriage remains so valuable to women economically
because "men earn more than women in nearly every job." Appropriately,
the exceptions to this rule are the professions in which women’s bodies are most
literally currency: modeling and prostitution. Physical beauty affects a woman’s
potential for success in all venues: women’s self-image, their social and economic
success, and even their survival can still be determined largely by their beauty
and by the men it allows them to attract. By so limiting a woman’s potential for
financial independence, society makes it very clear that beauty equals success.
And thinness equals beauty. And androgyny equals thinness.
Eating
Disroders Not Just for the White Rich
That
eating disorders are a rich, white, heterosexual disease is a myth. It emphasises
the interplay of thinness with a sense of assimilation and belonging for minority
women. According to one homosexual woman, being successful heterosexually depended
upon being thin. One immigrant from Panama to the USA recalls, "she [my mother]
was preparing me to become American... that meant slender. And that meant diet".
These experiences and reactions support the "thinness as currency" theory.
The
prominence of eating disorders amongst women seems incongruous with the liberation
they are supposed to have experienced in this century. Aren’t modern women fortunate,
to have grown up with role models like Betty Friedan and her contemporaries? Are
we squandering the gifts they fought so hard to bestow on us? There was a similar
trend toward women’s rights in the Victorian era. Authorities at that time misattributed
contemporaneous and possibly related illnesses to "the stress placed upon
the nervous systems of pubescent women attempting to "overeducate" themselves."
It is obvious that even the modern Women’s Movement did not and could not completely
eradicate the centuries of gender-specific cultural baggage. The result is increased
confusion about one’s role as a woman; there are pulls toward career and family,
independence and sensuality, that are irreconcilable within the current system.
Kim
Chernin, focusing on women, defines eating disorders as the answer to "silent
questions about the legitimacy of female development.” She points out the dichotomous
nature of this answer as "tailoring ourselves to the specifications of this
world we are so eager to enter" and "stripping ourselves of everything
we have traditionally been as women.” Finally she writes, "Women today, because
they cannot bring their natural body into culture without shame and apology, are
driven to attack and destroy that body...there are no indications that the female
body has been invited to enter culture". Basically, she speaks to the tug-of-war
that has defined the feminine experience since the Women’s Movement. While women
have been asked to join the world of work (if somewhat reluctantly), they are
still expected to fulfill their traditional role as objects. They are told that
they must adhere to beauty standards in order to be successful, which cheapens
any strides toward that success. Meanwhile, that modern standard of beauty is
the androgynous form, an affirmation of male superiority.
Is
it mere coincidence that androgyny has come into vogue at a time when women are
making great strides toward asserting their intrinsic worth? Writer Naomi Wolf
thinks not: "redefining a woman’s womanly shape as by definition "too
fat"... countered the historical groundswell of female success with a mass
conviction of female failure, a failure defined as implicit in womanhood itself".
In other words, as women have become increasingly visible in our culture, their
natural bodies have come to be seen as an insult to cultural sensibilities. Notably,
the modern ideal female form is significantly smaller than is natural. Dieting
is, after all, a way to shrink. Physical characteristics of dominance include
increased size and use of space, yet women are expected to reduce weight and take
up less space. Thompson writes, "discrimination against fat women reflects
a society hostile to women who take up space and refuse to put boundaries around
their hunger.” Society deems it prudent to deny women every appetite: for food,
for success, for power, for a voice... The cult of thinness is a stern rebuke
to a woman’s request for affirmation, reflecting "an obsession with female
obedience". Men, who control the standards of beauty, have probably idealised
thinness for women as a reaction to feminine assertion. After all, the ideal feminine
form is pre-pubescent and child-like, and "there is something less disturbing
about the vulnerability and helplessness of a child, and something truly disturbing
about the body and mind of a mature woman". A mature woman has the strength
to fight for her rights, whereas a child may comply willingly with authority.
Eating disorders, so detrimental to one’s physical well being, do in fact render
most absolutely helpless.
It
is estimated that one in four college women struggles with an eating disorder.
The times at which women are struck down by eating disorders reveal how they have
internalised the cultural ambivalence described above. Often onset of an eating
disorder coincides with an underlying developmental crisis. Rather than facing
the overwhelming dilemma of defining oneself within culture’s conflicted attitudes
toward women, a woman may simply opt out. She can forge an identity on the much
smaller plain of her own body. The whole identity is placed on my weight. In a
society where every decision a woman makes has such tremendous weight, an eating
disorder becomes something entirely private, a silent proclamation that one’s
body is one’s own to control. Unfortunately, what masquerades as a freely chosen
method of communicating and asserting power is really a way to self-destruct.
Eating disorders are never freely chosen; they are submission to the cultural
dictates for a woman’s appearance and behaviour.
The
desire for control that helps define eating disorders is accompanied by seemingly
contradictory dynamics. For one thing, many eating disordered persons claim that
they do not deserve to eat. History teaches that women should suffer to attain
an ideal, whether it be gender-specific beauty or the more general ideals of salvation,
subjectivity, or autonomy. The self-sacrificing woman remains an idol; consider
the Catholic pre-occupation with Mary and with female aesthetes. This is reflected
in the portions of food that women feel comfortable eating, which testify to and
reinforce their sense of social inferiority. According to Wolf, women "do
not feel entitled to enough food because [they] have been taught to go with less
than [they] need since birth". This lesson easily translates to a low sense
of self-worth. The physiological experience of an eating disorder is similar to
that of starving, but the starvation is self-imposed. Is it a great leap, then,
to view an eating disorder as a slow suicide? As one woman eloquently states,
"Eating disorders are the most socially acceptable way to self-destruct".
Conflict
without, conflict within. As a result, women with eating disorders often feel
confused and don’t know what to do with their lives. They have little sense of
who they are or what they believe. Again, an eating disorder becomes an identity,
complete with society’s stamp of approval.
Unfortunately,
popular understanding often focuses on the individual experience of an eating
disorder without taking into account the cultural context that helps spawn the
illness. The portrayal of eating disorders in the media during the 1980’s, has
its emphasis on the "bizarre symptomatology" and its failure to recognise
that the women involved in this behaviour often abandon their careers and their
studies... return home, become extremely dependent on their parents, that their
growth and development as human beings virtually comes to an end. Eating disorders
prevent one from growing up and entering the world as an independent being. The
focus on an eating disorder’s bizarre symptoms keeps it at the level of individual
pathology. When the media portrays eating disorders as mental illness, entirely
individual and without cultural referents, it gives us all permission to be apathetic.
We can ignore the plight of women in society, ignore the fact that the psyche
of an eating disordered woman is an embodiment of society’s ambivalence toward
women: their human potential as well as their physical form.
A
troubled relation to food is one of the principal ways the problems of female
being come to expression in women’s lives. It is hard being a woman today; our
reality borders on the schizoid at times.
Most
of the women with whom I am acquainted count calories and fat grammes, talk about
their bodies with loathing, stare into mirrors with horror, exercise with the
express purpose of losing weight, binge and fast, and exhibit other behaviours
that may belie an eating disorder. We all understand that issues of appearance
are essentially currency for women’s access to power in this country, and thinness
is a critical component. We want simultaneously to appear strong and non-threatening,
attractive and self-sufficient, smart and sexy. Thinness seems to embody all this
and more.
Somehow,
women have never received the message that their bodies are valuable simply because
they are in them.
Click
Here to
share this page with your friends, website visitors, ezine readers, social followers
and other online contacts.
Disclaimer:
Throughout this website, statements are made pertaining to the properties and/or
functions of food and/or nutritional products. These statements have not been
evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration and these materials and products
are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.