Positioning of Weight Bias: Moving towards Social Justice

Abstract

Weight bias is a form of stigma with detrimental effects on the health and wellness of individuals with large bodies. Researchers from various disciplines have recognized weight bias as an important topic for public health and for professional practice. To date, researchers from various areas have approached weight bias from independent perspectives and from differing theoretical orientations. In this paper, we examined the similarities and differences between three perspectives (i.e., weight-centric, non-weight-centric (health-centric), and health at every size) used to understand weight bias and approach weight bias research with regard to (a) language about people with large bodies, (b) theoretical position, (c) identified consequences of weight bias, and (d) identified influences on weight-based social inequity. We suggest that, despite differences, each perspective acknowledges the negative influences that position weight as being within individual control and the negative consequences of weight bias. We call for recognition and discussion of weight bias as a social justice issue in order to change the discourse and professional practices extended towards individuals with large bodies. We advocate for an emphasis on social justice as a uniting framework for interdisciplinary research on weight bias.

Weight Bias: A Systematic Review of Characteristics and Psychometric Properties of Self-Report Questionnaires

“…Terminology preferences have been the subject of much debate in recent years [16,17]: whereas the Obesity Society in 2014 called for ‘people-first language' [18], some groups have advocated for the use of neutral terminology (e.g., ‘higher weight'), and individuals in the fat acceptance community have sought to reclaim the term ‘fat' as a neutral descriptor [19]. Because many scales included in our review were developed before terminology preferences became a topic of considerable debate, questionnaire items have employed terminology that may now be considered pejorative by some.…”

Being active when living within a large body: experiences during lifestyle intervention

“…Obesity grade III, i.e., ≥40 kg/m 2 is referred to as severe obesity in this study. This is chosen to use an ontological-based language rather than the bio-medical term "morbid obesity" (Nutter et al, 2016).…”

A critical analysis of obesity prevention policies and strategies

“…23 Similarly, our health promotion background helped us to critically consider the determinants of obesity and to shift our thinking towards social justice for everyone regardless of their weight or size. We also drew on non-obesity perspectives such as fat studies and feminist studies, 24 which challenged us to focus on health, not weight or size, and to consider the power relations that can come about through our obesity policies and practices. Critical fat studies perspectives have, for example, helped us to critically reflect on biased assumptions we have about weight, body size, obesity and health.…”

“…Unfortunately, these perspectives are almost completely segregated, making it difficult to foster interdisciplinary research to address weight bias. 24 As public health scholars, we draw on all of these different research areas in hopes of contributing to reflective public health research and practice. We do not feel that these weight bias perspectives are mutually exclusive; rather, we must work together to reduce weight bias and improve population health.…”