It’s the simplest of formulas – put X number of people united by one common factor and differing in almost all other respects in front of cameras and let what will be be – but when it works, it really works.
In Who Are You Calling Fat? (BBC Two) it is the turn of nine people living with obesity to be brought together under one Oxfordshire roof for a month to examine attitudes to fatness. At one end of the spectrum is gastric-banded 57-year-old Del, who was previously 25st, and had many health issues, together with side-effects from the drug he takes to control them. At the other end of the spectrum is Victoria, a fat-positive advocate and activist who calls bariatric surgery “stomach amputation” and considers “overweight” and “obese” to be offensive terms that carry unnecessary moral implications by suggesting there is a weight you “should” be. The rest fall between them, with civil servant Babs at the most conflicted midpoint: she hates … let’s call it “the amount of adipose tissue she carries” and herself for having accumulated it. But after a life of futile dieting and covering up on the beach, she wishes she could find a way for her size not to matter to her – or at least not to dominate her life.
All nine seem mentally robust enough to preclude the accusations of exploitation commonly made against this kind of thing – your mileage may vary, of course. They articulate their own life experiences and their responses to the various positions held by those in the house.
Victoria is the primary catalyst for discussions, reappraisals and/or retrenchments among the group. Watching 25-year-old Jack, who has overhauled his lifestyle since being diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, swimming in the outdoor pool she notes that society distinguishes between “good fatties, who work out, performing to show that they’re worthy” while “bad fatties eat pizza”. She is “an intuitive eater” who believes that when nothing is forbidden, the craving for the (socioculturally) sinful goes away. Jack “thinks it’s all a load of bollocks, to be honest” and carries on swimming, weight-training and running.
He also invites a Diabetes UK volunteer, Colin, who lost his leg and suffered in various other ways from complications of the disease, to talk about the impact of his obesity (Colin and Jack have no problem with the word). Victoria, Miranda and David cluster in a room afterwards, seeking solace in their shared outrage at his use of shaming and fatphobic language. Others, including Jed, decide to head to the doctor for the first time in years. They disagree with Victoria that “the science is bogus” and do not find the same comfort Miranda does in her assertion that “skinny people can be unhealthy too”.
There is the emotional set piece mandated by all reality documentaries – here, a blindfolded Victoria, Courtney and eventually Babs stripping down in a busy high street and inviting people to write supportive messages on their skin – but the real substance lies in the rest. Watching Victoria at work is to be visited by endless important questions. Where does truth give way to conspiracy theorising? Is the fat positivity movement a necessary corrective to fat people’s unquestionable marginalisation, or a damaging cult? Does the fact that medical advice is often too unthinkingly mixed with prejudice and acceptance of social norms actually mean that “health is a social construct” and that there is no such thing as a healthy weight? Does self-love mean indulging every appetite to its fullest, heedless of others’ opinions or likely consequences for yourself, or is there a better definition to be had? At one point, interspersed with shots of Colin struggling to move around the house and off sofas, the unseen interviewer asks Victoria if she wouldn’t prefer to have her body than Colin’s. She contends that: “If you are asking ‘Would I prefer to have mobility?’ – that’s an ableist question.” Language itself buckles under the weight it has to bear.
From there we are easily into broader questions, such as what evangelism offers the preacher and the preached to, when silent tolerance of others’ beliefs becomes irresponsible, and what the limits can/are/should/should not be on matters of self-identification. Where do we end up if there are no such things as facts? Wholly liberated, or constrained by the uncertainty of the shifting sands about us? Discuss, long into the night.
Altogether it is a programme that carries an unexpected heft, and carries it well.
