Reclaiming language: Dismantling weight stigma and the pathologization of bodies
When discussing weight stigma, language plays a crucial role. Unfortunately, the weight loss industry has long muddied the waters, manipulating language to serve its financial interests while perpetuating stigma.
Take, for instance, the origins of the terms “obese” and “overweight.” Many believe these are neutral, scientific, or medical terms, but they were, in fact, created to pathologize bodies based solely on size rather than shared symptoms or cardiometabolic profiles—criteria we would expect for a legitimate disease diagnosis. The term “overweight” inherently implies there is a correct weight and labels anyone above it as abnormal or excessive. Similarly, “obese” is derived from a Latin term meaning “to eat oneself fat,” reflecting stereotypes rather than science. There is, of course, no shame in having a disease diagnosis of any kind, but existing in a higher-weight body does not inherently meet the criteria of disease.
In recent years, the weight loss industry has doubled down on stigma with person-first language, promoting phrases like “person with overweight” or “person affected by obesity.” These shifts, often pushed by patient advocacy groups that are heavily funded by the weight loss industry, are marketed as stigma-reducing but, in reality, deepen the stigma. They frame higher-weight people as fundamentally different, requiring separate and medicalized terminology. Consider: When was the last time you heard someone refer to a “person with tallness” or a “person affected by brunetteness”?
This language does little to shield higher-weight people from the violent rhetoric of the war on obesity, which promotes harmful notions of eradicating obesity, tackling it, or framing it as a dangerous epidemic. When we swap “obesity” for what it truly represents—a body size—the stigma becomes glaringly obvious: We must do everything in our power to eradicate higher-weight people existing.
To reduce stigma, we need language that respects and affirms higher-weight people without medicalizing or pathologizing their bodies. Neutral and descriptive terms such as higher-weight, larger-bodied, people of size, or individuals on the higher end of the weight spectrum are examples of affirming language.
Additionally, many higher-weight individuals, including myself, reclaim the word “fat” as a neutral or positive descriptor. While this term has complexities, it can be empowering when used intentionally. It is critical, however, to honor how someone identifies and avoid correcting them with dismissive phrases like “You’re not fat!” when they describe themselves as such.
Ultimately, addressing weight stigma isn’t just about language—it’s about dismantling the systemic pathologization of higher-weight people. The constructs of “obesity” and being “overweight” generate massive profits for the weight loss industry while harming higher-weight individuals, especially those at the highest weights and those possessing other marginalized identities (re: Fatphobia is deeply rooted in racism and anti-Blackness.)
When it comes to weight and health, we need to move beyond flawed proxies and reject the weight loss industry’s outsized influence. It’s time to adopt not just better language, but an entirely different paradigm—one where weight is not used as shorthand for health, where bodies are respected as they are, and where we choose terms that affirm people rather than pathologize them.
To learn more about the intersection of anti-fatness and anti-Blackness, check out these reads:
Fearing the Black Body: The Racial Origins of Fat Phobia by Sabrina Strings
Belly of the Beast: The Politics of Anti-Fatness as Anti-Blackness by Da’Shaun Harrison
