‘Fit Facebook Mom’ Account Deleted By Facebook Censors Over ‘Anti-Obese Hate Speech’

21st Century Wire says…


Some of you may not be aware, but the world’s biggest virtual nation, Facebook, has been completely overrun by politically correct ‘communitarian’ censorship mobs online.

The definition of what pc mobs refer to as ‘Hate speech’ is elastic and ever-expanding. This is the threat which political correctness poses to society – it’s growing, and growing. It will not stop until it reaches its own Zeitgeist as the dominating paradigm – as police, jury and judge, to shut-down all free speech in the name of “progress”.

‘Fit Facebook Mom’ Maria Kang has been accused by the communitarians and censorship gods of broadcasting ‘Hate speech’ over Facebook. We’ve been dragged a long way down the path to pc hell, when this woman’s benign comments (see below) can be equated with Nazi-esque language. In reality, the politically correct communitarians and censors are now playing the real Nazi role as they try to mold the way society speaks, thinks and ultimately (with the invisible hand of social engineering) … change everyone’s behaviour. This is what your government ‘agents of change” refer to behind their curtain as Applied Behavioural Psychology.

So who are these communitarians? At present, they are allowed to roam the web anonymously, watching everyone else, reporting everyone’s online posts and what’s worse, cowards who run the social network censorship nodes are also faceless – making the whole process opaque.

See for yourself…

1-Fit-Facebook-Mom
Greatist

Many readers may remember Maria Kang, the mom of three who sparked outrage across the Internet last month when she wrote on Facebook that no one has an “excuse” for not working out. Kang, who has struggled with bulimia in the past, is a former pageant queen and fitness competitor who founded the nonprofit Fitness Without Borders in 2007.

The “fit Facebook mom” (Left Photo: Facebook) was back in the news again this week, after she posted more provocative opinions about obesity on Facebook. Responding to a Daily Mail article about plus-size women posing in lingerie, Kang wrote:


“The popular and unrelenting support received to those who are borderline obese (not just 30 to 40 lbs overweight) frustrates me as a fitness advocate who intimately understands how poor health negatively effects [sic] a family, a community and a nation.”

The post quickly went viral. But within hours of publishing the comments, Facebook removed the post and de-activated Kang’s account, claiming that her remarks constituted hate speech. Since then, Facebook has said restricting Kang’s access was an error. And while they can’t reinstate the post, the company encouraged Kang to republish it. On Facebook, Kang wrote she was “sorry but not sorry” for offending people with her perspective; on her personal website Kang says we make a mistake when we “normalize being unhealthy.”

At a time when movements such as fat acceptance and “health at every size” are growing in popularity, the debate around Kang’s comments is especially relevant. It raises important questions about how society perceives people of every size, and what “good health” really means.

Do you think there’s any truth behind Kang’s comments about societal perceptions of obese and overweight people? Or is she totally off-base and guilty of hate speech? Weigh in below and let us know where you stand in the controversy.



READ MORE US NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire 

-



facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterest




  • JJNYC

    Jealous B’s. Ms. Kang is pointing out the obvious.

  • Colin W Proctor

    The ptb want to normalize obesity as their food and drugs are a big contributory factor ….if its not ok to be obese then that threatens them as organic food, exercise and natural cures are more inclined to make slimmer and healthier body.

  • Paul Prichard

    Galileo saying he could prove the world was not flat would be labelled ‘anti-flat hate speech’.

  • Paul Prichard

    How long before stating a fact will be labelled ‘hate speech’ ?

    • Dr. Jonzz

      Now, apparently.

  • Paul Prichard

    The highest law of the USA says no abridging the freedom of speech so I have two words for these Nazis and the second one is ‘off’.

    • DerekaGrandon

      • Godwin’s Law

      There is a concept called ‘Godwin’s Law.’ It observes that virtually every debate regarding public policy will ultimately degrade to evoking Hitler or Nazis as a means to discredit the opposing view.

      “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches.” (Godwin’s Law)

      http://en.wikipedia(DOT)org/wiki/Godwin's_law

      • Predrag J. Maranovic

        LOL. I think that you invoking “Godwin’s Law’, you’re trying to shut down this debate.

        Political correctness is the stuff of Nazis. Let’s not all be in denial of the real liberalist tyranny at play here.

        • smart idiot

          Reminds me of the argument of ‘Pascal’s wager’. It’s used to try and discredit the idea that being a Christian is a safer bet since if they’re wrong they have nothing to lose, and if they’re right, people who aren’t Christian have much to lose, forever. Somehow because Pascal branded this, it’s no longer a viable argument, just like Godwin’s Law somehow makes things not Nazi anymore, even if they are. People that choose denial and ignorance are always looking for ways to dismiss.

          • James Henry Hammond

            It’s an apt analogy, in this case, because we’re facing a culture of preferential rationing, in which establishment outsiders are accused of decadence.

          • DerekaGrandon

            Actually, what I’m trying to discredit is the worn-out bromide of the never failing Hitler analogy.

            Hitler has been credited with everything from banning God from government schools to outlawing gun ownership. It should be noted that Hitler’s rise to power can be attributed to the skillful use of the media rather than violent force.

            Furthermore, Hitler was wildly popular and adored by the people in all Germany and faced very little opposition. He had no need to ban guns among the general population. The threat of armed revolution among the populace was non-existent and violent street crime, very typical in today’s America, was highly unusual among the orderly and well-behaved German culture.

            There is the often made claim that “…the Germans of the 1930s passively went along with Hitler’s regime…” and that in part is true simply because they were ecstatically happy with Hitler and the NSDAP, particularly after Hitler’s successful and fast recovery from a degenerate Weimar Republic, which had hurled the nation into a chaotic economy with rampant inflation and an abject depression that drove many Germans to suicide.

            Hitler and Roosevelt were both elected to power in 1929. In 5 years Germany was a teaming, thriving nation with ridiculously low unemployment and well on its way to become a super power again.

            Why would the German people feel the need to be defiant and revolt?

            Ironically, it was Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower who imposed confiscation of firearms in Germany. American soldiers have been faulted for absconding hordes of guns from Germans after the Allied victory and the Russians have been summarily condemned for executing Germans found with guns or bullets in their possession.

            Note, also, that The German Weapons Act (Waffengesetz) of 1972 is considered one of the most restrictive gun laws imposed by any government and was enacted several decades after the demise of Hitler and his Third Reich.

            Unlike most world leaders, Hitler toured the nation in an open vehicle, completely undeterred by the prospect of being taken out by a crazed gunman.

            The last American president who tried that was John F. Kennedy.

            While Hitler’s socialist and fascist policies are anathema to “liberty-loving conservatives”, no one can argue with his colossal success at reviving Germany’s post-war economy in jusy a few years, while Roosevelt’s grandiose socialist programs kept America under misery and abject depression for 13 years and Roosevelt’s only way out of it was to provoke Germany into a war.

            These are uncooperative facts that we never hear about Nazis or Nazi Germany for that matter.

  • joshuasweet

    yet Ms Obama can say just the same thing about being over weight and get a magazine story about it and television coverage is her face book page censored as well?

    • Predrag J. Maranovic

      EXACTLY. YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD. COMMUNITARIAN CENSORSHIP FOR US, BUT PARTY LEADERS SAY WHAT THEY LIKE…

  • http://theworld.richardvick.com/ Richard A. Vick

    Quite apart from the authoritarian behaviour of facebook, I’d question the motives of that picture of her in basically her underwear, with her three children.

    It promotes the acceptance by infants of sexualisation, which ties in neatly with the UN resolution which encourages children aged 0-4 to be taught about masturbation.

    I feel that this story is controlled opposition so facebook has the opportunity to admit they were wrong, and show how they are not really that nasty, while getting their master’s sordid imagery out to more people.

  • smart idiot

    Not sure why people still participate in that pointless (un)social crap. Just more Militant liberalism/progressive PC (political cowardice), turn the world into a giant self-esteem clinic, everyone’s a winner, ‘there’s no such thing as wrong unless we define it as such’ garbage. This country is one giant circus and lawmakers belong to the clown mafia. I’m still waiting for the loudspeakers to be propped up that play circus music all day. It would be fitting.

  • Whatsgoinon333

    Lets not tolerate cultural communists who want to dictate society norms. learn to spot cultural-marxism aka P.C shaming language and call out the would be dictators on their unacceptable behaviour.

  • http://tinyurl.com/3kurlm2 Intbel

    Not obese, just double-plus pleasingly plump ?

  • weareallhuman

    Shes beautiful and healthy with a positive message..why wouldnt the establishment try to shut her up