Gabourey Sidibe lost weight. Then she was criticized. It says a lot about our world.

'It's been a 30-year thing of other people putting their own stuff on my body. But it's mine, so I will police it, thank you.'

In May 2016, actor Gabourey Sidibe had weight loss surgery.

As Sidibe explained to People magazine, the decision to go through with the procedure was both difficult and personal.

Photo by Bryan Bedder/Getty Images for Hulu.


Now, a year after the surgery, Sidibe is opening up about the reactions she's gotten for her visibly smaller size.

While you might think that losing weight would earn her nothing but praise from the thin-obsessed world we live in, it turns out people's reactions haven't been too great.

As Sidibe explained to NPR, before the surgery, people liked to tell her that she needed to lose weight. Now that she's had the surgery, people have felt compelled to warn her not to lose too much. It's literally a lose-lose.

No matter what her body looks like, she's noticed, people feel they have a right to tell her what to do with it.

As the actor explained:

"It's important because I don't happen to have the kind of body that we usually see on television and in films. I am plus-size, I have dark skin, and I am 100% beautiful, but I get a lot of flak. 'Oh, you should lose weight.' And now that I have lost weight — I lost weight for health reasons — I get, 'You look good, but don't lose too much weight because your face is starting to sink in.'"

Sidibe also noted the awkward comments she'll get from others celebrating her weight loss for the wrong reasons:

"Literally someone said, 'Congratulations, I see you lost weight. Congratulations.' And I say, 'That's a weird thing to congratulate me on because this is my body.'"

Photo by Valerie Macon/AFP/Getty Images.

Sidibe's experiences exemplify the impossible beauty standards women face and why — when it comes to weight — you really should "mind your own body."

All of us (but particularly women) are relentlessly pressured to adhere to absurd standards when it comes to appearance. These expectations are ridiculous when it comes to defining "real" beauty, of course, but they're also ridiculous when it comes to defining our health.

A person's weight, generally speaking, really doesn't tell you all that much about their health, many experts say. And even if it could, what someone else does with their body is their business and their business alone. A person's weight, in and of itself, is not something to be congratulated for.

Photo by Richard Shotwell/Invision/AP.

Every body looks differently, works differently, and serves the person who inhabits it differently. And that's important to remember if we're considering the size or shape of someone else — or ourselves.

Sidibe gets it.

"This has been my body since I was 5-ish, you know?" she told NPR. "It's been a 30-year thing of other people putting their own stuff on my body. But it's mine, so I will police it, thank you."

Family

The 2013 documentary "Blackfish" shined a light on the cruelty that orcas face in captivity has created a sea change in the public's perception of SeaWorld and other marine life parks.

This "Blackfish" backlash nearly deep-sixed SeaWorld and led Canada to pass a law that bans oceanariums from breeding whales and dolphins or holding them in captivity. Animals currently being held in Canada's marine parks are allowed to remain as well as those taken in for rehabilitation.

Podcaster and MMA announcer Joe Rogan saluted Canada's decision on a recent episode.

"First of all, what assholes are we that we have those goddman things in captivity? A big fucking shout out to Canada because [they] mostly through the noise that my friend Phil Demers has created in trying to get MarineLand shut down," Rogan told his guest, economist and mathematician Eric Weinstein.

Keep Reading Show less
Planet
Youtube

Should a man lose his home because the grass in his yard grew higher than 10 inches? The city of Dunedin, Florida seems to think so.

According to the Institute of Justice, which is representing Jim Ficken, he had a very good reason for not mowing his lawn – and tried to rectify the situation as best he could.

In 2014, Jim's mom became ill and he visited her often in South Carolina to help her out. When he was away, his grass grew too long and he was cited by a code office; he cut the grass and wasn't fined.

France has started forcing supermarkets to donate food instead of throwing it away.

But several years later, this one infraction would come back to haunt him after he left to take care of him's mom's affairs after she died. The arrangements he made to have his grass cut fell through (his friend who he asked to help him out passed away unexpectedly) and that set off a chain reaction that may result in him losing his home.

The 69-year-old retiree now faces a $29,833.50 fine plus interest. Watch the video to find out just what Jim is having to deal with.

Mow Your Lawn or Lose Your House! www.youtube.com

Cities

I'm staring at my screen watching the President of the United States speak before a stadium full of people in North Carolina. He launches into a lie-laced attack on Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, and the crowd boos. Soon they start chanting, "Send her back! Send her back! Send her back!"

The President does nothing. Says nothing. He just stands there and waits for the crowd to finish their outburst.

WATCH: Trump rally crowd chants 'send her back' after he criticizes Rep. Ilhan Omar www.youtube.com

My mind flashes to another President of the United States speaking to a stadium full of people in North Carolina in 2016. A heckler in the crowd—an old man in uniform holding up a TRUMP sign—starts shouting, disrupting the speech. The crowd boos. Soon they start chanting, "Hillary! Hillary! Hillary!"

Keep Reading Show less
Recommended
via EarthFix / Flickr

What will future generations never believe that we tolerated in 2019?

Dolphin and orca captivity, for sure. They'll probably shake their heads at how people died because they couldn't afford healthcare. And, they'll be completely mystified at the amount of food some people waste while others go starving.

According to Biological Diversity, "An estimated 40 percent of the food produced in the United States is wasted every year, costing households, businesses and farms about $218 billion annually."

There are so many things wrong with this.

First of all it's a waste of money for the households who throw out good food. Second, it's a waste of all of the resources that went into growing the food, including the animals who gave their lives for the meal. Third, there's something very wrong with throwing out food when one in eight Americans struggle with hunger.

Supermarkets are just as guilty of this unnecessary waste as consumers. About 10% of all food waste are supermarket products thrown out before they've reached their expiration date.

Three years ago, France took big steps to combat food waste by making a law that bans grocery stores from throwing away edible food.According to the new ordinance, stores can be fined for up to $4,500 for each infraction.

Previously, the French threw out 7.1 million tons of food. Sixty-seven percent of which was tossed by consumers, 15% by restaurants, and 11% by grocery stores.

This has created a network of over 5,000 charities that accept the food from supermarkets and donate them to charity. The law also struck down agreements between supermarkets and manufacturers that prohibited the stores from donating food to charities.

"There was one food manufacturer that was not authorized to donate the sandwiches it made for a particular supermarket brand. But now, we get 30,000 sandwiches a month from them — sandwiches that used to be thrown away," Jacques Bailet, head of the French network of food banks known as Banques Alimentaires, told NPR.

It's expected that similar laws may spread through Europe, but people are a lot less confident at it happening in the United States. The USDA believes that the biggest barrier to such a program would be cost to the charities and or supermarkets.

"The logistics of getting safe, wholesome, edible food from anywhere to people that can use it is really difficult," the organization said according to Gizmodo. "If you're having to set up a really expensive system to recover marginal amounts of food, that's not good for anybody."

Plus, the idea may seem a little too "socialist" for the average American's appetite.

"The French version is quite socialist, but I would say in a great way because you're providing a way where they [supermarkets] have to do the beneficial things not only for the environment, but from an ethical standpoint of getting healthy food to those who need it and minimizing some of the harmful greenhouse gas emissions that come when food ends up in a landfill," Jonathan Bloom, the author of American Wasteland, told NPR.

However, just because something may be socialist doesn't mean it's wrong. The greater wrong is the insane waste of money, damage to the environment, and devastation caused by hunger that can easily be avoided.

Planet