Comments on: Wall-E accused of Fascism. Um, I mean Fattism.

Pro-obesity groups are up in arms about the depiction of humanity as slobbish in the highly successful Pixar movie.

[bawkbawkboo1]

If she hasn't seen the movie, I'm not listening to her opinion. You can't pass judgment on a movie with any credibility without having seen it. I saw the movie yesterday and thought that there might be a bad response from the politically correct. On the surface you could say that it's just about environmental stewardship, but really it was just using that to get across the larger concept of human responsibility.

***SPOILER ALERT***

Plus it showed the captain of the Axiom [a fat guy] doing the right thing, getting rid of his complacency and fighting the autopiliot, and eventually leading humans back to earth to do the right thing. While it showed humans at first as just sickening, resource-consuming blobs, the scene where the captain stood up and fought showed that they still had their humanity beneath the stereotype.

***END SPOILER***

[moscafish]

" 'WALL-E specifically singles out and targets obese people as the primary cause of mankind's demise,' she wrote."

It's a difficult charge to answer, considering the movie doesn't do this at all. In the movie, mankind's demise is not brought about by obese people, it is brought about by complacency and the subversive affects of dependency. (In this case, on excessive automation.) Sloth and gluttony are deadly sins, after all. Take a society that consumes without limit and has every action short of thinking and speaking taken care of by robots, and what do you get?

Disclaimer: Not all who are overweight are sloths, or gluttons, or both... of course. (It's absurd I even have to say so, but these are the times.) Not are sloths are overweight. Not all gluttons are overweight. But if you combine the two, well... The deadly sins all grow from the same source: Pride. Watch the movie Ms. Wann, and pay attention. Check your pride at the door, and you'll see the movie is not about you.

[jasonbryanmiller]

I have no problem with the movie being anti-fat. Obesity is unhealthy - it should not be accepted. It is part of a wider theme of overconsumption, which wall-e appropriately blasts. While it certainly is not charitable to make fun of obese people, let's get this straight - obesity should NOT be accepted. Acceptance of obesity is relativism and political correctness gone awry.

[erzzr]

This movie is a social commentary how humans continued to ruin the environment, though it may be of over-consumption, it is surely not due to the over-consumption of food, the sky is an unnatural color, petroleum-based products probably did that. When they are on the ship after 700 years all they do is sit in floating chairs, and consume food, I can't think of a better way to become obese, sure obesity is reflected as bad for your health, but you must realize, IT IS. Man kind's demise was caused by human carelessness, the ultimate result was people becoming obese. These people are not reflected as bad people, quite the opposite they are quick to support WALL-E and company and quick to rebuild earth at the end of the movie.
Obese people are shown as good people in the WALL-E movie, but I guess that there is no other way to get noticed. There is clearly an error in this person's logic, and above all, watch the movie, then i will listen to your opinions

[rachelar]

I find it ironic that writer Chris Matyszczyk's column is named "Technically Incorrect" because apparently, the quotes attribution in this article are also incorrect. The quotes Matyszczyk attributes to fat activist Marilyn Wann are not the words of Wann, but taken from my blog at www.the-f-word.org. For the record, Chris, my name is Rachel Richardson and I am not associated in any way with NAAFA nor have I spoken with the Telegraph. I run an eating disorders awareness and education site.

Furthermore, these comments were made in the fall, and were based upon the reviews of critics Pixar permitted to view the then unfinished version of the film. From what I read and understand, Pixar has considerably toned down the discriminatory characterizations of fat people in the final version released to the public. I posted an addendum on the original post noting the date discrepancies, which you apparently ignored. So, the comments you cite above and erroneously attribute to Marilyn Wann are also cited out of context.

It seems not only are humans lazy, but so too are some bloggers and journalists. Be sure to do your homework next time.

[ChrisMatyszczyk]

Ms. Richardson,
The post is amended accordingly.
However, I would be really interested to see what you actually thought of the movie. As would quite a few of the readers here.

[rachelar]

Sheesh... you didn't even spell Marilyn Wann's name correctly!

[Januss331]

There's such a thing as the NAAFA? Oh boy...you know, if Americans had a better education about health awareness in general, and eating habits, they wouldn't be in this situation. There are a lot of problems with this country, and obesity is one of them. Get off your high horse before you start attacking me and look at the cost of health care for people who are obese. I'm a med student, and I shudder every time I see an obese family shovelling McDonalds (what else) down their kids throats. Health awareness people. Nutrition. Those are good words!

[ChrisMatyszczyk]

My apologies to Ms. Wann and Ms Richardson. The Telegraph piece unfortunately led me astray as it attributed the words to Ms. Wann.

I quote their words: "Miss Wann said the film company would never have considered stereotyping black people "dancing a jig" in the way they have done so with fat people.

She added: "Pixar should be out of business for portraying this level of prejudicial bigotry-mongering. These are 19th-century hatreds repackaged in modern animation. It's amazing."

I have amended this post accordingly.

[AnnieMcPhee]

Januss, I shudder every time I think of yet another nasty bigot going into the medical profession. Please tell me you're not going to treat actual *human beings* with that horrible attitude! Please tell me you meant veterinarian school or something. It was only recently the news reported on the appalling percentage of doctors who are "repulsed" by their fat patients, only eclipsed by the percentage of nurses who loathe them even more so. This bigotry is, literally, killing people. http://fathealth.wordpress.com/ In a variety of ways. Oh, and as a fat person who doesn't like McDonald's (except once a year at St. Patrick's time) with a muscular, fit, thin son that loves the stuff and eats it regularly, I would like to say *stuff* that ridiculous characterization. No one, but no one, has to "shovel" McDonald's down children's throats. I guess you don't get disgusted by all the thin people that eat there, though - only fat people. They don't deserve to eat.

Jasonbryanmiller, you're in for a pretty miserable life if you have decided that you simply will. not. accept. fat. Fat people have always existed, they continue to exist, and no amount of handwringing on your part or the part of the media has managed to eradicate them yet. Barring internment camps, we aren't going anywhere. Your choice if you want to live in misery, because so far as I can tell, you're going to keep seeing us everywhere you go. It might be a good idea to get used to it. I think it's called "tolerance." Have you heard a word like that before? I know it's a rough concept, but you should consider it.

As to the health, start googling "Obesity Paradox." It's a real eye-opener. In fact, for crying out loud, educate yourself instead of just mouthing what you hear like a ventriloquist's dummy.

By the way, no one has ever figured out a way to make thin people permanently fat, any more than they have figured out a way to make fat people thin. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/08/health/08fat.html Actual studies help here. See? It's just that simple.

[ChrisMatyszczyk]

Annie,

Thank you for your comment. There are screaming voices on both sides. Which is not necessarily a good thing.

However, I'd be really interested to know whether you've seen this particular Pixar movie and whether you think it makes the situation worse. Is it 'nasty bigotry'?

[rachelar]

Thank you for clarifying your erroneous attribution of quotes, Chris. A simple lookover of my site would clearly indicate that I am not Marilyn Wann. As for your comment here:

"'Pixar should be out of business for portraying this level of prejudicial bigotry-mongering. These are 19th-century hatreds repackaged in modern animation. It's amazing.'

In fact, these words have been now claimed by Ms. Richardson."

If you had bothered to read further, you will also know that I am not claiming anything of the sort nor do my comments on the film that has been released to the public indicate a boycott of Pixar or even that Pixar has done any wrong here. I fully admit that I have not seen the film and I specifically state that I will withhold my personal judgment on the version that has been released to the public until after I have seen it. In the meantime, I offered a link to a review on Slate.com from someone who has seen the film for my readers and then invite their comments and perspectives. In fact, I even go on to extol my love for Pixar and its films, and my advocacy of the environmental messages I see emanating from the film.

Please choose your own words more carefully and please do not put words into mine. I find it very unsettling that this kind of "journalism" is coming from a site owned by CBS, an otherwise reputable news organization of high ethics and integrity.

[ChrisMatyszczyk]

And thank you for calling me 'Chris', Rachel.

All that 'Mr. Matyszczyk' was not making me feel good at all.

I really wish you would go see the movie, though.

As I think it would extremely valuable to hear about how it made you FEEL, rather than what the stuff you've heard about it makes you think.

I hope I have now attributed all the right quotes to the right people.

[AnnieMcPhee]

No, I haven't seen the movie yet - I might when it's out on DVD but I almost never go to the theater. And the last couple Pixar movies didn't really interest me. So I can't say whether or not the movie is nasty bigotry. It was said that Shallow Hal was nasty bigotry, but it wasn't, so I will take it with a grain of salt. The comments I referenced, however, were pretty clearly hateful.

Whether a movie makes things worse? It's possible, in that it can contribute to an atmosphere of hatred and solidify people's prejudices. But like I pointed out, there really are people dying, people having their children taken away, the media blames the fat for global warming (no, seriously) and the government in the US has declared "obesity" a greater threat than terrorism...honestly, I don't know how much movies had to do with getting us to this point, but I really doubt they're going to make much difference one way or the other. So I'd probably say it's possible the movie is nastily bigoted, but I'm not sure how much it matters. I might complain about it if it is, but I guess I'd try to keep it in perspective. As I'm quite sure Rachel did, by the way.

[dbowker3D]

Sometimes the truth hurts... I saw Wall-E for the second time today, and it is indeed damning of over consumption and the relentless modern push towards convenience and "ease". The obesity depicted however is a by-product of those elements, not the direct cause per se. However, it ends (spoiler alert) on a hopeful note and sees the people take responsibility to reclaim the Earth and themselves. I just hope we don't have to wait 700 years until we start taking care of ourselves and the planet that sustains us.