Score!! Winter Stuff in Extended Sizes

I've written before about the difficulties I've encountered finding good rain gear and winter coats in extended plus sizes.  It's a problem that frustrates me no end.  I'm a chronically cold person (even when my hypothyroidism is well-controlled), and I get cold far more easily than anyone around me.  I need good warm clothing, sweaters, raincoats, and winter coats. 

We discussed before that my best sources so far were Junonia (women's sizes to 4x, sometimes 5-6x), and sometimes Land's End (women's sizes to 3x, men's sizes to some 4-5x) and L.L. Bean (some women's sizes to 3x, men's sizes mostly to 2x but a few 3x).  I can sometimes get outstanding stuff in these companies, but not always. 

The quality at Junonia really varies; some stuff is great, and some stuff isn't, either in fit or in quality. I got a ski jacket from them that was a huge disappointment, and a fleece jacket that was only so-so. And while they have some of the QuickWik-type materials and some ski wear, the stuff I've gotten from them in these have not been of the quality my kids get at REI or other major sports labels.  There's really a noticeable difference in terms of high-tech gear that helps wick away moisture or helps hold in the heat etc.  And as I see my kids with the really good stuff, I think ─ why can't I have that stuff too?

Land's End and L.L. Bean usually have some good stuff, and I got a couple of really great moderate-cold coats from them last year.  I also got a great wool sweater (not scratchy at all) from L.L. Bean that I use for keeping warm inside.  But the problem is that LL Bean stuff typically only goes up to a 2x in men's. Both LL Bean and Land's End only go to 3x in women's (not quite big enough in the boobs for me).  So, not always the best match for me.

Well, now I have a new source: Columbia Sportswear.  I knew about this company before, but last time I checked they didn't have women's coats anywhere close to my size.  My husband bought me a men's extended size coat from them 12 years ago, but it wasn't that great.  So I never really considered shopping for myself there.

But recently, a friend of mine gave me a "friends and family" pass (major discounts!) to Columbia's online store. My oldest son needed a bigger ski jacket, so I was hoping to use the pass to get a really good ski jacket for him at a halfway decent price.

When I went online to shop, though, I discovered that Columbia now carries extended sizes.  Score!!!

As is so typical these days, they only carry women's sizes to a 3x, which is almost but not quite enough for me....BUT they had men's sizes to 4x and 5x at times.  Whoohooo!

While it ticks me off majorly that more accommodation is made for men of size than for women of size (i.e., men are "allowed" to be fatter than women, and "allowed" to have more functional and quality clothing in extended sizes), I had to take a deep breath and move on.  At least they had some stuff in 4x, and I hoped the men's 4x might fit me. (Men's plus sizes are shaped differently ─ bigger in the belly and smaller in the chest and hips than I am ─ so it wasn't a sure thing). 

Because I had this one-time pass for a major discount, I took a risk and ordered a whole BUNCH of things from Columbia.com in 4x, crossing my fingers that they would work.  

Well, I got my package this week and IT WORKED!!!  I am so stoked.  I got a moisture-wicking shirt for workouts, a couple of full-zip or half-zip light jackets/fleeces, a high-tech wicking half-zip for layering warmth, a rain jacket (with special lining for more warmth), a soft-shell jacket (fleece on the inside, waterproof on the outside), and a full-on ski parka. 

I tried them all on and they all worked.  And the quality was way better than the stuff I ordered via Junonia, Land's End, or L.L. Bean.  Whoohooo!

I almost bought a pair of hiking pants too, but I decided not to risk buying pants at this point.  Men and women's shapes are too different and I've not had good luck buying men's pants in the past, so I didn't want to waste money on something I couldn't try on in person. 

But to get such ultra-warm, high-quality coats in my size?  Freakin' awesome when you consider I've been looking for years for quality stuff like this. 

Oh, and my son?  Got an AMAZING ski jacket ($260 retail!) for $90, plus some fitness shirts, hiking shirts, rain pants, and ski pants.  All very high-quality materials and workmanship, and they will keep him well-equipped for skiing, snow caving, wilderness survival, fencing, and Boy Scout hikes. 

I'm way poor now but it was worth it!  All in all, an excellent find!  http://www.columbia.com/.  They don't go to 4-5x in everything, alas, and they are quite pricey without the discount pass ─ but they had quite a few choices in coats, at far better quality than most other sources. Worth the price if you are needing a really good winter coat.

Too Out Of Shape For Birth?

Here's another little gem from the blog, My OB Said What?.  It covers the common misperception among obstetric caregivers that fat women are too "out of shape" to give birth vaginally and/or naturally. 

“You are quite overweight and you need to be healthy to naturally birth a baby. You wouldn’t make it because you would get puffed out and tired.”

-OB to overweight mom who wanted a natural birth

This is a very common belief among many people, both lay and medical.  The idea is that you have to be in great athletic shape in order to give birth naturally. 

There are two problems with this. 

First is the common assumption that "overweight" and "obese" women never get any exercise and therefore this mother couldn't possibly be in decent shape. (The corollary, of course, is that all average-sized women obviously do get exercise and are always more fit than fat folk.)  Neither is true.

Second is the assumption that you have to be fit in order to give birth naturally, that labor and birth is like running a marathon and only the most fit and tough can do it naturally.  Baloney.  Fitness helps, but it's no guarantee either way.

Assumption: "Obese" Women Never Exercise And Aren't In Shape

Many doctors and laypeople assume that fat people never exercise and can't possibly be in decent shape.

This is nonsense.  Many fat women do exercise and of course, many skinny ones do not.  You can't tell by looking at body size who gets exercise and who does not. 

It goes back to that common societal belief that if you are fat, it must be because you don't eat well and don't exercise at all.  Anyone who made any real effort at it would obviously be "normal-sized" or pretty darn close to it.  Therefore, in that mode of thinking, all fat people are, by definition, not fit.

I would agree that it's possible that fat people, on average, may be less fit than average-sized people....certainly fatness can be more physically challenging in some ways (especially as we age), there are many barriers to exercise for people of size, and some fat people really are sedentary....but you just cannot make assumptions about individuals based on size.  I know "overweight" and "obese" people who run, bike, and hike regularly and are very fit.  I also know ones who are not.  But you can't really tell by looking.

This doctor should not be making assumptions about fitness level based simply on the mother's size.

Assumption: Only The Most Fit Can Birth Naturally

Although I think it's true that it helps to be reasonably fit for pregnancy and birth, it's certainly not a requirement for normal vaginal birth.  The uterus is a muscle and works independently of the fitness of the rest of the person. 

I mean, for heaven's sake, there have been cases on record where paralyzed women have given birth vaginally.  If a person who cannot actively help push out her baby can birth vaginally, then obviously fitness is not an absolute pre-requisite for giving birth vaginally. The uterus can do it on its own, if the baby is well-positioned.

That said, pregnancy is wearing on the body and labor is certainly not a walk in the park.  I do think that folks who get regular exercise in pregnancy tend to have fewer complications in pregnancy (less gestational diabetes and perhaps less pre-eclampsia), and it may help them have an easier birth.  It also helps to have some endurance on board if the labor is hard or long. 

However, fitness and athleticism are not an absolute requirement for having a vaginal birth or a med-free childbirth.  I know plenty of very fit, very athletic women who have had cesareans, and plenty of not-very-fit women who have had vaginal births (and natural, unmedicated vaginal births at that). 

My Experience

In my own life, I exercised quite a bit in pregnancies #2 and #3, but because of coincidental life issues, not as much with #1 and #4.  (I was "morbidly obese" and of similar weight with each, so that was not a relevant variable on its own.)

I had very little exercise and a cesarean with the first, exercised a lot with #2 but still had a cesarean, exercised a lot with #3 but had a vaginal birth, and exercised not-a-lot with #4 and still had a vaginal birth (a completely natural, unmedicated birth in the water to boot). 

I did notice a difference in how I tolerated pregnancy; I definitely was most comfortable in the pregnancies in which I exercised regularly.  So I'm a big fan of promoting exercise for pregnant women of all sizes.  But not getting as much exercise in my last pregnancy didn't prevent me from having a vaginal birth. 

I absolutely encourage women (and especially women of size) to exercise regularly in pregnancy because it really does help you feel better, lowers your risk for complications, may help you during labor, and will help your body recover faster afterwards.

But do you have to be skinny or an athlete to have a vaginal birth?  Of course not.  Just read the comments on the My OB Said What? page.  Many were from fat women who birthed vaginally and all naturally just fine, with or without regular exercise.  And I have birth stories on my website from fat women, even supersized women, who have had natural vaginal births without problems.

Yes, fat women have more cesareans.  But is that really only because of their fatness, or because of a combination of more complications, an extremely high rate of induction in fat women, the extremely interventive way that fat women's labors are managed, a higher rate of malpositions, and a very low threshold for surgery for fat patients among their OBs?

Conclusion

Focusing on fitness/exercise as a requirement for natural birth is just another argument that doctors (and sometimes midwives, alas) use to convince fat women that they:

• will "need" a cesarean
• couldn't possibly push out a baby because they are too unfit or too fat
• couldn't possibly push out a baby without help from forceps or vacuum extractor because they aren't strong enough to push hard enough
• are too weak to endure labor without drugs
• won't produce strong-enough contractions on their own and will definitely "need" pitocin
• couldn't possibly have a vaginal birth without losing tons of weight or taking up marathons beforehand

(Yeah, those are all real things that have been told to women of size.)

Let's be clear. Fat women can and often do exercise.  Just because you are fat doesn't mean you don't exercise.  Could many fat women exercise more?  You betcha.  Could many average-sized women exercise more?  Yes. You simply cannot make assumptions about exercise habits and fitness based on a person's size.

Second, exercise and fitness is NOT necessarily a pre-requisite for birthing vaginally.  It definitely helps, and women should definitely be encouraged to be active in pregnancy....but the story is much more complex than that.  There are far more factors than fitness and athleticism at work in birth.

So is fitness an absolute requirement for birthing vaginally or without medications? Heck no.

And can fat women, fit or unfit, birth vaginally? Hell yes.

The Scarlet Letter F: A College Requirement?

Several folks on the fatosphere have already commented on Lincoln University story. Now, normally I wouldn't beat the topic to death in a "me too" chorus. However, this one really bugs me, so I feel compelled to add in my 2 cents also. And yeah, I'm going to SHOUT a little bit here and there because this one hits a couple of hot buttons for me.

As most of you have heard by now, the press picked up the story recently that Lincoln University in Pennsylvania requires all their students to be weighed and measured, and if their BMI is over 30 ("obese") then they are required to take a Fitness For Life course at some point before graduating. No Fitness For Life course, no graduation....but only for the fatties. (You skinny folks, you obviously don't need any fitness courses.)

This offends me on so many levels I can't even tell you....but I'm going to try.

1. First and foremost, it is not the college's business. THEIR FOCUS SHOULD BE ON LEARNING, PERIOD. They are an institute of higher learning, not a institute of higher fascism. Whether I'm fat or not has nothing to do with my academic abilities or accomplishments and should have nothing to do with whether or not I get a college degree. College is about learning, it's about academics, it's about hard work and accomplishment. The work I have done during college should dictate whether or not I get my college degree. Whether I'm fat and whether or not I exercise is completely irrelevant and should have no bearing. GAH!


2. This policy assumes that all thin folk are perfectly fit and have no poor eating or exercise habits. This is absurd, as others have pointed out. BMI is no marker for good eating or exercise habits. We all know people who are thin but who eat crappy and rarely exercise. They are simply blessed with skinny genes, but that doesn't make them healthy, for heaven's sake! And there are a lot of fat people who eat a lot healthier than a lot of thin people, but because of differing genetics, they'll never be thin. That doesn't mean they need re-education camps or drastic measures. BMI is a lousy marker for habits, period.


3. If their objective is to promote fitness for life, THEN THE REQUIREMENT SHOULD BE FOR ALL STUDENTS, WHATEVER THEIR SIZE. People of all sizes can benefit from a greater emphasis on fitness if it's properly done. I don't really object to the idea of a P.E. requirement for college because exercise is a good counterbalance to the mind exercise of academics, but if it's going to be part of graduation requirements, it should be required for all. Singling out only the fat students is wrong, and no one needs a scarlet letter F on their transcript. It's shaming and has potentially long-lasting discriminatory effects.


4. If they are going to have a PE/fitness requirement, then it should only be about fitness and health (not weight judgments), and it needs to be accessible for people of different abilities. It needs to be a class that people of varying athletic talents can be successful at. If your objective is for people to want to exercise their whole life and thus be more healthy, they need something they feel successful at and can do joyfully. A fitness class in which students are lectured at negatively, shamed, or forced to do activities unsuitable to them or that they are really bad at is not going to acheive that objective. They need to seriously look at their objectives and see if their activities really dovetail to them.


5. This course has great potential to backfire. College is a hotbed of eating disorders and this kind of approach may well worsen that. Is that really the kind of healthy outcome they are looking for? Is there a way for them to track whether they are achieving their objectives in the long-term, or whether they are actually making things worse?


6. They assume that more exercise will automatically result in weight loss and less obesity. But as the wonderful Marilyn Wann pointed out (comment #32 in this article), "Science shows that regular physical activity magically makes people healthier; it does not turn fat people into thin people." I think many of us who have tried the exercise "cure" can attest to this. We should exercise because of the health benefits it can bring, but to promote exercise as a sure-fire way to weight loss is misleading and a good way to turn people off to exercising when it doesn't magically succeed in keeping all that weight off.


7. Fat people face enough discrimination as it is. There are enough barriers in place to our success; we don't need to add more. Fat people of color face even more barriers. Do you really want to make it more intimidating for fat folk to go to college? Don't you think that a requirement like this would be humiliating enough to keep some people away from college? Think through the possible implications this class might have.


8. This policy sets a precedent for other schools and you know that other fitness fascists at other schools are going to say, "Ahhh, what a great idea!" Now, some folks point out that if you don't like this college's policies, don't go there. But the problem is the precedent. Let it be "okay" in one place and soon enough all the colleges will have policies like this---or harsher. Taken far enough (and you know there are health fascists out there who would like to do this), this could lead to policies that might well keep a whole class of people---fat people---from access to higher education degrees or to a certain quality of university. Discrimination is discrimination and it shouldn't be in place anywhere. And especially not in a place of higher learning where the emphasis should be on academics.

My Fitness Course Experience

My college had a PE requirement for graduation, but at least it was for all students, not just the fatties. I was still in my dieting years, so instead of the fun stuff like dancing, I took a fitness course in order to try and halt the strong weight gain I was experiencing (from PCOS and undiagnosed hypothyroidism, but that's another story).

The course was probably much like this course would be. The emphasis was on improving fitness and getting lots of exercise with a view towards encouraging life-long exercise. They didn't mandate losing weight, but we were weighed at the beginning and end of the class as part of their tracking of our progress.

I exercised more in that class than I ever did in my life (and I was not a sedentary child). We ran laps, ran up and down stadium steps like crazy, swam laps, biked, lifted weights, you name it. I was worse than my peers at things like running and stairs, but I was significantly better than most of my peers at things like bench press and swimming. Basically, I did OK.

All this time, I was also going to Weight Watchers in an effort to rein in my weight gain. But by the end of the semester, I had gained 25 pounds, all while doing a huge amount of exercising and being on Weight Watchers. (And no, it wasn't from muscle gain either.) The coach was so incredibly disappointed in me; I could see in his face that he thought I was lying about food and must have been binge eating like crazy. But no, I wasn't; not at all.

That was beginning of the end for me in terms of dieting. I still dieted for several more years, mind, but it was the beginning of the end of my belief in the validity of the formula of calories in/calories out, that if I just exercised more and ate less I could lose weight, and that it was all about habits, period.

I did pass the class, but thank God I took the thing pass/fail. If I hadn't, it would have messed up my GPA and might have lost me my magna cum laude status. I completed all the assignments and did everything they asked....but because I couldn't match some of the benchmarks of the skinnier people and because I gained weight instead of losing it, my grade was docked.

(Thank goodness the university let people take this PE stuff pass/fail! That way it couldn't ruin my college GPA the way it torpedoed my 4.0 GPA in high school.)

Sadly, the long-term legacy of the class was all negative. I went away with an increased hatred of exercise. I exercised less after that class rather than more. I went away with shin splints and some significant pain, and a real distaste for athletic trainers and gyms and everything associated with them because of their judgmental attitude. It had the opposite effect than they wanted and to this day, I still struggle with negative attitudes towards exercising. Even as I read all the research on the benefits of exercise and knowing I feel better when I exercise, I struggle with actually doing it sometimes.

So while I'm sure the coaches and administration of Lincoln University have the best of intentions, I'm afraid they may end up having quite the opposite effect they intended. Is that really a productive use of this course?

It's an alarming policy, no matter which way you look at it.

Cold and Wet Weather Gear

This past weekend, I took my kids to their soccer games as I usually do on weekends in the fall. It was a total Mud Bowl. Yuck.

Personally, I hate soccer in November because the weather is invariably nasty---rain, wind, cold, or worse.

Saturday was all of those....plus the worse. As in thunder and lightning. The ref wouldn't call the game at first because they only heard thunder. (Well, duh, if there's thunder then there must be lightning somewhere nearby as well! Potential safety issue, anyone?)

Finally, in the second half of the game, in the TORRENTIAL rain, winds blowing like crazy, and wind chill near freezing, there's a clear flash of lightning and a crash of thunder soon after. So finally, the game was called.

One more week of soccer to go. Hopefully it won't snow at next week's game, but I'm not holding my breath.

Ugh. I've got to get some new cold-weather clothing.

Why I Need Cold-Weather Gear More Than Most

First, you should know that I'm a VERY cold person....as in, I hate the cold and I get cold very very easily.

I think it's part of my hypothyroidism---I have a very narrow range of temperature in which I am comfortable, and a real tendency towards being cold, even when others around me are okay. Even though (with medication), my TSH and other readings are in the "ideal" range now, I still feel cold with very little provocation. And when I'm cold, I'm miserable.

My family laughs about how cold I am. I went RV camping a couple of years ago and sleeping beside me, my toddler was wearing a diaper and nothing else and was on top of the comforter....and she was fine. My DH had on only shorts and a t-shirt and he was fine. I was wearing full WARM clothes with mittens and was under a down comforter....and I was still freezing.

I just have very poor temperature regulation, for whatever reason, even with supposedly "well-treated" hypothyroidism. So when I say I need good gear for cold weather, I mean it.

Items That Work For Me

This summer I was talking with my nephews (who are avid hikers) and they recommended "Smartwool." So I got some Smartwool socks and gloves when I was at REI, buying fitness clothes for my kids.

Saturday was my first real chance to use them. They were awesome. I had thought, wool....ugh. But really, they were very comfortable and not itchy at all. And they did keep me noticeably warmer than cotton or fleece. It wasn't a cure-all---my hands still got cold by the end---but it was definitely better than what I already had, while being less bulky to boot.

Unfortunately, some of the best cold gear doesn't come in plus sizes. When I saw all the nice stuff available at REI for my kids, I really was struck by the difference in what's available in "regular" sizes and what's available in "plus" sizes. Additionally, I was frustrated at just how inferior a lot of the stuff available in plus sizes is, especially the higher range of plus sizes. Frustrating!!!

For example, Junonia is where I usually go when I want something for sports, fitness, or outdoors in my size. I typically wear about a 4x or 26/28 (anything from 3x to 5x, depending on the company, but I like things loose and I've got a 'rack,' so I prefer to be generous in sizing) and Junonia is one of the few places where I can get that kind of gear in my size, not just the "tweenie" sizes.

Junonia carries a lot of great stuff in many ways, so I do generally recommend them as a company----but I've also been disappointed by some of their stuff before. Many things have been fine, but I've ordered more than a few things from them that really disappointed me...which is bad cause they are not cheap. And just when I find a type of swimsuit or fitness pant that I do really like from them, they discontinue it. Augh!

However, I had a revelation this fall. I realized that a number of companies carry good outdoor gear in MEN'S plus sizes, often up to 2-4x (generously sized), and because MEN'S plus-sizes run larger than women's plus sizes, it's one way to find gear in extended sizes for me.

This is a decent way to fill in the gap, I've discovered. Women's plus sizes often end at XL or 2x if you're lucky, but a Woman's 2x is a lot smaller than a Man's 2x. Some Men's 2x sizes fit me (depends on the company), whereas a Woman's 2x usually won't.

And oftentimes, the Men's plus-size range extends into larger sizes than the Women's plus sizes. So Men's plus sizes can be a great way to get decent cold-gear stuff in extended sizes for women who need a little extra room.

For example, L.L. Bean carries a lot of great outdoorsy stuff....but most of their women's stuff ends at an XL, or about a size 18. However, their men's stuff mostly ends at a 2x, some of which fits me (a Woman's 4x).

At Lands' End, women's sizes go to 3x in some limited items, with a couple of new 4x and 5x items (but their size chart only goes to 3x, so it's hard to tell what their "4x" and "5x" really means in real life). BUT men's sizes at Lands End go to 4x, and it's likely that their 4x is much bigger than the equivalent in women's sizes.

But isn't it maddening that men's plus sizes are readily available in a much wider range of sizes than women's plus sizes are? And particularly in practical stuff like cold and fitness gear?

Another sign of the double standard out there....it's okay for MEN to be plus-sized and even very plus-sized....but not for women. Women are only allowed to be a little bit plus-sized, if at all.

And of course, why bother to supply cold or fitness gear for very plus-sized women because we all know they can't be doing any activities that require such gear, right? But on the other hand, we all know that very plus-sized men do need this sort of thing....just not the chicks. Ugh!!! (Fashion Pet Peeve #548 and #549, I guess.)

So anyhow, I took a chance and ordered a wool long underwear/sweater from L.L. Bean in a Men's 2x. I didn't think it would fit me but it did. A little snugger across the behind than I prefer but definitely workable. It's been GREAT.

I also ordered a really nice Men's hoodie coat, lined with a special fleece, from L.L. Bean. I was looking for something for that "in between" weather----don't quite need a full-on winter coat, but a light jacket just won't cut it. But this works great for in between weather and even into light winter weather. I'm loving this jacket more and more each day, and just discovered that they have an even more insulated version of the same coat, so I'm thinking about getting that too.

Footgear - A Special Problem

Footgear is a particular problem for me because I have abnormally large legs, probably from lipedema. Most people have never heard of lipedema, and most fat people don't have it....but lucky me, I probably do. Here's a definition from biglegwoman's blog:

Lipedema -- sometimes spelled lipodema or lipoedema -- is a hereditary condition which causes patients (almost always women) to store excess fat in the lower body, particularly the lower legs.

This is not the same as lymphedema, mind. In lipedema, the size is from excess fat being deposited there, not a malfunction of the lymph glands as in lymphedema (although lymphedema can sometimes be a side effect of lipedema). Also, lipedema is bilateral (on both legs) and lymphedema usually is not.

Anyhow, that's another post. The relevance here is that it's hard for me, with my very large-sized calves (and cankles, I haz dem too), to get boots for wet or cold weather. Impossible, in fact---at least so far. Even the places I've found online that cater to boots for wide calves don't go up to my size. Not even the ones that specialize in super-wide calves. I could have a pair custom-made, but that's prohibitively expensive.

So I have yet to find boots to wear to keep my chronically-cold tootsies warm and dry.

Instead, I try to buy warm footwear that ends at the ankle.

In the past I've used Duck Shoes, but find they tend to cut off the circulation in my feet. Wore them to one soccer game this fall and didn't feel my pinky toe on one foot for most of the rest of the day. Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.

So I went to Lands End recently to see if there were any men's or women's shoes for winter weather and found these. I wore them with my Smartwool socks this weekend and my feet did indeed stay warm and dry, despite the Mud Bowl conditions. Huzzah!!

If I were walking in deep puddles or got really splashed, I'd still get wet and cold, but hey, I'd get the same with the duck shoes and at least I don't lose feeling in my feet in these shoes.

What I Still Need

One thing I forgot to wear this weekend was long underwear on my legs so they'd stay warmer. I do have a pair from L.L. Bean---so next time, I'm definitely going to remember to try them out.

But my pants to totally wet last weekend because the wind was blowing the rain so hard. So I've decided that I have to get some rain pants, preferably some that keep you warm too.

I'm contemplating buying these or these from Junonia, so if you have feedback on either, I'd like to hear it.

I'd also like to know if there are any other choices out there. Men's clothing isn't really an option here because I'm really short, more curvy in the hip than most men, and I'm not handy enough with a needle to hem or size them properly.

So does anyone have any fabulous options or recommendations for wind/rain/cold weather gear for the higher range of plus sizes? Especially rain pants?

Are there any other decent companies out there that specialize in sports, fitness, or cold-weather gear for women and have extended plus sizes? (I'm not talking about Lane Bryant or Roaman's or Just My Size, I mean companies that specialize in this type of item.) I'd love to have some more options to choose from.

Let me know what you've used that works for you, and any other resources you find. Share it in the comments section so others will know about it too.

And send me some warm, dry thoughts for Saturday! (And tonight too, I have an outdoor activity going tonight as well.)

Plus-Sized Heroes

I took my kids swimming the other night. My Scout had some swimming tests to take (he aced them) and my other kids and I went along to burn some energy and have some fun.

While we were there, it was extremely crowded so I didn't have much chance for any meaningful swimming, alas. When things started to thin out a little, I struck out across the little kids' warm pool (it does have a semi-deep end where you can actually swim a bit) and just stretched my legs a bit.

On the way back from one of those "laps," I saw the life-guard, definitely a plus-sized girl, looking intently at a kid in the water just ahead. I looked closer, but wasn't sure what I was seeing. No one was underwater and drowning, but it looked to me like there was a kid there having trouble staying afloat in water too deep for him to touch bottom. He was trying to tread water but was working awfully hard and looking very stressed.

I was debating whether to grab him, just in case he was in trouble, but since he wasn't facing me straight on, I wasn't sure if he really was in trouble or not. I didn't want to just grab a kid I didn't know out of the blue for no reason, you know? Might freak him out. So I hadn't grabbed him yet, but I was going to ask him if he was okay.

Before I could, though, the lifeguard jumps in the pool and comes for the boy, gets him out of the pool and into the back area, out of sight. From the reaction of her co-workers afterwards, it does look like the boy was in real trouble and she just got to him before it got to the true emergency stage.

I was sorry I had hesitated in grabbing him; shouldn't have second-guessed my instincts. But really, I don't know if I realistically could have gotten to him first anyhow. Maybe, maybe not. Either way, the good news is that the kid was fine. Whew.

I saw the lifeguard in the staff's glass-walled supervision room after the crisis was over, sobbing her heart out. I think she was having the classic post-adrenaline reaction after a life-threatening crisis....you handle everything fine in the moment (while your mind is thinking ohmygodohmygodohmygodohmygod....) and then later, when the crisis is over, your body does the ohmygodohmygodohmygod thing too.

The supervising lifeguard, an older woman, spent quite a bit of time helping her through this. From another friend of mine (whose lifeguard daughter actually saved a drowning, under-the-water-about-to-die child), I gather this is a really common, normal reaction, especially the first time you save someone.

At the end of the "free swim" time, the lifeguard was back to clean-up duties etc. I made a point to go over to her and tell her what a good job she did and give her lots of kudos. She blushed but I think she was glad to have someone acknowledge her. She confirmed it was her first save and I told her that her reaction was very normal. She thanked me, we commiserated, and then we both went about our business.

But all night I was thinking about how proud I was of her, not only as a guard but also as a woman of size. You don't see a lot of plus-sized lifeguards....I've seen a few, but never any as plus-sized as she was (only mid-sized, but still bigger than your average guard by quite a bit). Obviously she was very fit ("despite" her size, I'm sure in some people's minds) and had passed all the qualifying stuff with flying colors because that swim center has its pick of guards who train there.

I was proud of her for not listening to the usual nonsense about fatness and fitness and letting it keep her from this line of work and from saving a life. And I was proud of her boss, for seeing beyond stereotypes and hiring whomever was most qualified without regard to size.

I'm sure most people, looking at her on the street, would not think she was fit enough to be an athlete, let alone save a life, but she was, and she did a great job. Brava to her!

And bravo to all the fathletes everywhere who don't let the naysayers keep them down.