Another book by a comedian, this time much more subject-focused than autobiographical, but while it was heartfelt, it was reminiscent of one of those climate change arguments that cherry picks studies, then concludes that well, even if it is happening, we'd be better off adapting to the inevitable than changing our behaviour.
There are two main elements to the book, arguing fat discrimination exists, and how this should be changed. Some aspects of the former are undeniable, and the story of the doctor finding that Hagen's blood pressure was normal, then refusing to give her medication due to the health risk for those with high blood pressure, was disgraceful. But it is only 'legal to discriminate against fat people' in the same way you can discriminate against eye colour or haircut, it's just not codified in law. It's not as though you can be sacked for being fat, and anyway, how would you define fat? It can't be BMI, because BMI is deeply outdated according to a later chapter.
Like so many Guardian articles, capitalism gets the blame. And it's not all wrong, companies do prey on making you feel unworthy and offering their product as a cure. But the lack of massive clothes sizes in stores is not a capitalist conspiracy, it's just that there are not enough morbidly obese customers to make such product lines profitable, just as if a man has size 14 feet, very few places have shoes that fit. Beauty is not as subjective or socially constructed as Hagen would like it to be either. Babies and children look at conventionally attractive people for longer, way before manufactured standards of beauty can make an impression. If 5000 years of western society hasn't found fat people attractive (covered in the book), is that not in itself telling?
The worst section was on health, or "what society perceives as 'healthy' ". Society, or indeed tons of peer-reviewed academic studies. Hagen cites one study that was later found to conflate obesity with poor diet and activity levels, as though this was the only study that found a link between obesity and poor health. I can only assume Hagen hasn't yet found Google Scholar, because the papers' conclusions on obesity and health are fairly consistent, and are not positive. She states that activity levels matter more than fat, and that of obese people '35% are metabolically healthy'. So presumably 65% aren't, and this is meant to support your argument how? If you can't fit in a toilet cubicle, need to buy two seats on a plane, and find stairs a struggle, it is really society that has the problem?
If this book had stayed on safer ground, arguing that bullying is not nice and that telling people they need to lose weight is unhelpful, I could have respected the message a lot more. But Hagen goes too far, trying to show that there is nothing unhealthy being morbidly obese, co-opting the classic smoker's excuse that someone very old has had 40 fags a day so clearly the lung cancer and smoking statistics can be ignored. This book will get a lot of very supportive comments from the right audience, but its arguments were very flawed.