By Logan Sachon
Care and Feeding is Slate鈥檚 parenting advice column. Have a question for Care and Feeding? Submit it here.
Dear Care and Feeding,
My spouse and I have two kids, ages 2 and almost 5. This summer, for financial reasons, we鈥檙e relocating from the city where we met to the small town where my spouse grew up. My spouse has several family members, including a sibling, who live in very large bodies and have severely limited mobility.
Before this move was kind of forced on us, we always agreed to raise our kids with principles of body positivity: intuitive eating, there鈥檚 no such thing as bad or too much food, all bodies are beautiful, etc. But now we鈥檙e finding ourselves disagreeing on how to talk to them about these family members and other people like them, who we rarely see where we currently live, but will more commonly see where we鈥檙e moving.
My spouse feels there needs to be a limit to body positivity鈥攖hat no one has to fit the beauty standard, but becoming so large that it affects your health and mobility is to be avoided if possible. I have real trouble agreeing with this.
I鈥檓 leaning toward telling our kids these people are disabled for reasons that have nothing to do with their size, but my spouse insists that鈥檚 not true. I don鈥檛 want to make this move until we can agree on a united position. Any help?
鈥擳rying to Be Body Positive
Dear Trying,
I鈥檝e always found 鈥渂ody positivity鈥 to be kind of opaque. I prefer a clearer motto: 鈥淎ll bodies are good, and all bodies deserve dignity and respect.鈥 I鈥檝e cribbed that exact phrasing from writer Virginia Sole-Smith鈥檚 guide to kids and anti-fat bias. Her work has rewired my brain. Especailly her book Fat Talk. I think you鈥檒l really get a lot out of reading it鈥攅ventually. Come back to it in due course, when your family is not in the middle of moving to your in-laws鈥 hometown for financial reasons (a stressful sentence to even type).
You avoided using the word fat, but I鈥檓 not going to, because it鈥檚 not a bad word or a bad thing to be. Fat is a descriptor: Your spouse鈥檚 parents are fat. Your spouse鈥檚 sibling is fat. Part of raising your kids to believe that 鈥渁ll bodies are beautiful鈥 has to include using the word fat as a neutral descriptor and not as a pejorative criticism. Fat bodies deserve dignity and respect. Fat bodies are good.
It sounds like your spouse may bristle at that. Let them; I don鈥檛 think trying to change their mind on this issue is going to be an effective use of your time or energy right now. (Eventually, leave Fat Talk lying around for them to find.) Instead, I鈥檇 try to get them on board with 鈥渁ll bodies are good bodies鈥 as an age-appropriate messaging choice for your toddler and 5-year-old.
You鈥檙e right that your spouse鈥檚 proposed lesson sucks: 鈥淣o one has to fit the beauty standard, but becoming so large it affects your health and mobility is to be avoided if possible.鈥 It downplays bias against fat and disabled people. It鈥檚 presumptive about the correlation between weight and health. It frames health outcomes solely as the result of an individual鈥檚 lifestyle choices. Wrong, wrong, wrong! But table all that for now.
The relevant feedback for your spouse right now is that their proposed amendment is far too complex for your tiny kids. Your spouse thinks they鈥檙e being nuanced, but by introducing the possibility of 鈥渢oo big,鈥 your spouse is actually telling your kids that some bodies are bad. This does not work. This muddies the messaging. If all bodies are good, all bodies are good. Fat bodies, disabled bodies, sick bodies鈥攁ll good bodies.
And here鈥檚 why: Your kids鈥 bodies are good and will always be good. Nothing can happen to their bodies that would make their bodies bad. If they become fat, their fat bodies will be good bodies. If they become disabled, their disabled bodies will be good bodies. If they get sick, their sick bodies will be good bodies. You want them to really believe that, not just now, but in a future when they are fat or disabled or sick. And so the messaging to your kids has to be that all bodies are good, with no exceptions.
As for talking to your kids about the why鈥檚 of your in-laws鈥 disabilities: The answer to, 鈥淲hy can鈥檛 Grandma run around?鈥 is the simple truth: Some people can鈥檛 run around. But their bodies are good bodies. Grandma鈥檚 body is a good body. Super clear messaging. Your kids don鈥檛 need more that this. (Also, presuming they have not handed you their medical charts, you don鈥檛 really know why your in-laws are disabled, and neither does your spouse.)
If your spouse is still worried that your kids might hear this and decide that they really want to be fat when they grow up, you can assure them that they will be exposed to ample countermessaging in an unending barrage throughout their lives. On a practical level, there is simply no need for a parent to also deploy that messaging. The healthiest thing the two of you can do for your kids will be to show them that you will love and value them no matter their weight, size, or abilities. You got this.
More Parenting Advice From Slate
鈥淏ecky鈥 is in sixth grade and goes to school with my daughter 鈥淐arrie.鈥 Becky doesn鈥檛 really have friends. She eats lunch alone most of the time, and she rarely gets invited to parties. Becky鈥檚 mom believes that this is the result of mean-girl behavior at school. It鈥檚 true that kids do avoid Becky. But it鈥檚 not because she wears the wrong clothes or likes the wrong bands, it鈥檚 that Becky is not a nice kid.