Yes! I was so infuriated I almost wrote Virginia a thank you/my sympathies note. (To be clear, weтАЩve never met.) i was rolling my eyes so hard at the subheading тАЬan argument about butter.тАЭ And the Penelope gotcha at the end was predictably disappointing. The whole piece was an argument for why this space is neededтАФit didnтАЩt take seriously that an anti-diet framework is also feminist and anti-racist. IтАЩll never read an nyt profile with credulity again.
100% agree. So frustrating. I was scratching my chin when I read this quote: "Sole-Smith does not dispute that in some cases, excess fat may contribute to disease..." Um, actually Virginia wrote a whole best-selling book questioning that premise? Also, this: "Still, decades of research demonstrates a strong association between excess fat and increased risk of five of the top 10 leading causes of death in the United States..." Just drop that there and leave completely unexamined the reasons why that research is biased, problematic, and often shoddy? Ugh. Shaking my head. Unfortunately this is what I've come to expect from the NY Times.
re the framing: aaaaaaaaagggggggggrrrrrreeeeeeeee. FEELINGS.
RIIIIIIIIGHT? They left so many worthwhile layers unexamined and focused on....letting Penelope lick a dinner plate?!
I тАж.. didnтАЩt love that either. Nor all the quote marks тАЬdiet cultureтАЭ etc. Perfectly put, thank you!
also the quote marks around fat!!!!!!!!
will never get over the quote marks around fat. Just, why.
And a *plastic* dinner plate at that!! At times I was like, is this what happens when Regina George goes into journalism?
Yes! I was so infuriated I almost wrote Virginia a thank you/my sympathies note. (To be clear, weтАЩve never met.) i was rolling my eyes so hard at the subheading тАЬan argument about butter.тАЭ And the Penelope gotcha at the end was predictably disappointing. The whole piece was an argument for why this space is neededтАФit didnтАЩt take seriously that an anti-diet framework is also feminist and anti-racist. IтАЩll never read an nyt profile with credulity again.
100% agree. So frustrating. I was scratching my chin when I read this quote: "Sole-Smith does not dispute that in some cases, excess fat may contribute to disease..." Um, actually Virginia wrote a whole best-selling book questioning that premise? Also, this: "Still, decades of research demonstrates a strong association between excess fat and increased risk of five of the top 10 leading causes of death in the United States..." Just drop that there and leave completely unexamined the reasons why that research is biased, problematic, and often shoddy? Ugh. Shaking my head. Unfortunately this is what I've come to expect from the NY Times.