PDA

View Full Version : Women and food: a grotesque relationship


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums

Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!



Demi
Fri, Oct-12-07, 05:28
The Times
London, UK
12 October, 2007


Women and food: a grotesque relationship

Jane Shilling

My name is Jane Shilling. I eat three cooked meals and drink half a bottle of wine every day. I am 5ft 7in tall and weigh 8½ stone (119lbs). I have never knowingly consumed skimmed milk, margarine or low-fat anything. I have never described any foodstuff as “naughty” or “indulgent” before putting it in my mouth. I have never been on a diet in my life.

Very nice for you, I’m sure (I hear you say). But why are you telling us this? Well, because I’ve been feeling awfully lonely lately, and I thought it might help to set up a support group for British women who have a normal relationship with food. There must be a couple of you out there.

Hmm. And would you like to explain what has suddenly brought this on?

Thank you for asking. It was the sight of an article in Monday’s Times, headlined, “ ‘Intelligent’ shopping trolley is new front in battle against obesity (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=351148)” in which our consumer editor explained that technology experts (having presumably despaired of finding any sign of intelligent life in supermarket shoppers) have come up instead with an “intelligent” trolley that will alert customers when items of junk food are dropped into it.

The trolley story coincided with the new Vogue, which contains a brilliant piece on women, food and body image by Alex Bilmes, the features editor of GQ. The moderate and affectionate tone of his article – he is evidently a man who likes women – imperfectly conceals a bemused horror at the grotesque relationship between the female half of the population and what it puts in its mouth. “Grotesque” is my word, not Bilmes’s, but I use it advisedly. What other word is adequate to describe the mental state of a population in which there is raging simultaneously a crisis of obesity and a crisis of excessive dieting – the latter heralded twice yearly with grave ministerial diktats as to the body mass of the teenage starvelings who are to model the new season’s collections.

The bleak truth is that among British women the disconnection between food and body image is so absolute that it is pointless to talk of a “normal” body shape. Polarised by the twin crises of thinness and fatness, what used to be the median dress sizes – 8, 10, 12, 14 – are now regarded by half the female population as signifying obesity, and by the other half as unattainable ideals of thinness.

In Britain (following, as always, the lead of the US) abnormal relationships with food have become the female norm. The anecdotal evidence of this is widespread and bizarre: impossible to open the plethora of women’s magazines without encountering a dire monotone discussion of body shape. Bad enough, you might think, that the obsession with body image impoverishes the intellectual landscape of women who might be thinking about all sorts of more interesting things.

Bad enough, as Alex Bilmes persuasively argues, that thinness – both the state and the aspiration – are categorically not sexy, so the object of all this fussing about food is pure egotism, not even a generous notion of trying to please someone else. Bad enough that the preparation of food, which ought to be an act of domestic creativity and love, should have become a battleground.

But for the worst results of our dysfunctional relationship with food we can turn from the anecdotal evidence to early statistics from the Department of Health, which is conducting a study of childhood obesity.

The full results will be released next spring, but the early indications are that one in four children is overweight when they enter primary school, a figure rising in some areas to a third of children at age 11. The consequences, says Dr Colin Waine, chairman of the National Obesity Forum, are “type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and certain cancers”.

This, too, is a female problem, since women still take primary responsibility for family food shopping and preparation. It may not be fair – we haven’t space here to discuss the ethics. But the reality is that, as things are at the moment, a great many women perceive as “normal” a relationship with food that involves boring their lovers and damaging their children. In any other realm of social behaviour this kind of selfishness would be described as mad (or, more modishly, “abusive”). But because body image is implicated with fashion, media and other commercial interests, including the vastly lucrative diet-and-treat-ment industry, the “madness” continues to be treated as an idiosyncratic indulgence, like a taste for couture frocks or expensive facials.

The origins of our pathological relationship with food are too complicated to unpick here. The secret of getting over it, however, is not. I know it, which is how I come to weigh the same in my late forties as I did at 18. And I am happy to share it with you. Free. No gimmicks are involved, no fancy treatments, no calorie-counting, no McKeithian analysis of turds in surgical containers. Are you ready? Here goes.

Step 1. Eat three proper meals a day, made from fresh ingredients. Eat nothing else in between. You are not hungry. You are bored. Go for a walk or have a glass of water. While you’re at it, think about people who are properly hungry and feel ashamed. 2. At mealtimes, stop eating when you are full. We’re not on the ration now, it is fine not to finish your plateful. 3. Walk briskly around the park in your lunch hour (or walk to work, or walk the dog after work, or whatever). Take the family with you and save the money the gym would have cost you to go out for supper and a movie. Er, that’s it. Now, please can I have my own telly series?


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/jane_shilling/article2638990.ece

Zuleikaa
Fri, Oct-12-07, 07:04
I love it!!!!

Nancy LC
Fri, Oct-12-07, 10:48
Here's someone with a genetic twist that allows her to eat whatever she wants and she accounts for it by her habits. Such ignorance.

bike2work
Fri, Oct-12-07, 12:05
Here's someone with a genetic twist that allows her to eat whatever she wants and she accounts for it by her habits.
Exactly. She is very dismissive of a real problem that millions struggle with. It's like saying, "I've never had cancer, so if everyone would just be more like me the cancer epidemic would simply go away." It's insulting.

pennink
Fri, Oct-12-07, 12:27
i rather get advice from someone who's walked in my shoes...

I love hearing from people on this board who have lost a big amount and maintained, not from an always-been-skinny self-proclaimed diet guru.

fujiwara
Fri, Oct-12-07, 13:17
Unless she has a very tiny, tiny frame, she probably has very little muscle mass. There's a lot of people built like that, and personally I don't think they look that great with their skin hanging off their bones with no muscle to hold it up. Good for her that she can fit into a size itty bitty, but I'd rather weigh 135 at 5'3" and be a size medium or large and have a well muscled body.

One thing I liked is her advice to eat three cooked meals a day. There's nothing quite like a hot meal to brighten your day! Overall, the article was somewhat patronizing. She's never had to see how the other half lives.

OhYeahBabe
Fri, Oct-12-07, 13:56
Perhaps she should write an article about prostate cancer since she doesn't have that condition either.

Sorry, that wasn't a very good analogy but this piece annoyed me!

kindke
Fri, Oct-12-07, 14:09
indeed her tone reeks of ignorance and arrogance.

eat 3 meals a day? who says thats best for everyone?

stop eating when your full? thats highly subjective, this is highly dependent on both the size of the persons stomach and the macro nutrient content of the meal. i could easily down a large pizza by myself in 1 meal but theres no way i could do the same for an equivalent amount of calories in just say, sirloin steaks.

walk briskly around at lunch? what so you can burn an extra 100 calories at best, then get to dinner time feeling EXTRA hungry becuase of the increased appetite from the exercise?

Zei
Fri, Oct-12-07, 20:44
How does this woman know if I'm hungry or not between meals? I think I know a little bit more about my own body than a complete stranger, and a critical one at that. I agree that she must have been lucky to get a body that doesn't naturally have weight problems but doesn't realize her good luck. I guess this could inspire the rest of us to remember to by sympathetic rather than critical of those whose problems we don't understand.

deirdra
Sat, Oct-13-07, 09:12
Actually, I agree with much of what she says. If I had never eaten junkfood or followed a low-fat low-calorie diet, I probably never would have gotten fat. Puberty hormones and a 6" in one year growth spurt seemed to drive my initial desire for carbs, and eating carbs makes you hungry & desire more. If I had not cut out fat, I would not have been hungry, perpetuating the cycle.

I am living proof that if you cut out the junk and all foods you may be intolerant of, eat only real food & don't restrict fat, you can lose weight and return to a "normal" weight and a "normal" relationship with food. As a 35-year veteran of all conceivable diets, including several LC ones (I lost well until I started cutting calories to lose the last 10 lbs and hunger drove me to binge and gain it all back), my final and only successful diet was a non-diet.

I decided as a last ditch effort to eat like I would/should be able to at my goal weight; if it didn't work I was ready to just accept being fat, so I didn't care how slowly I might lose. I started eating an average of ~65% fat and 1800 calories (theoretically what I would need to maintain my initial 150 lb goal) instead of the 1100-1400 calories I previously dieted on. I lost a pound a week, just like I did on starvation diets, but never went hungry. If I was still hungry I did not limit myself to 1800 cals, I might have 1-2T of macadamia nut butter to tide me over. Some days I would eat as much as 3000 calories of meats/poultry/fish/eggs, fat & nuts and LC veggies. But I would feel like and naturally eat less the next day. I've been using DietPower software for 7 years, but in the past 2 years I've just been using it to record (not control) what I eat to collect data to find my optimal WOE. I am now able to maintain effortlessly on an average of 1900 cals/day (70% fat, 25% protein, 5% net carbs), something I never thought would be possible. By eating real foods and plenty of fat (and no grains or soy & minimal casein since they cause me bloat, hunger & hives), I've found what I needed to regain a "normal" appetite and "normal" (1950's sort of normal) relationship with food. I'm now in my 17th month of maintenance (I never was able to maintain more than 2 months in the previous 35 years) after losing 61 lbs (I'm 53). I enjoy the decadence of the fatty foods I can eat so I never miss the ones I need to avoid.

jande2211
Sat, Oct-13-07, 09:26
I guess I don't understand why anyone would be upset with her saying to stop eating when full. Isn't that essentially what Dr. Atkins said, to stop eating when satisfied and not stuffed? Look, I'm not saying this to start an argument, but was just curious.

Nancy LC
Sat, Oct-13-07, 10:44
I wasn't upset with her saying one particular thing, it was the whole "everyone else is disordered because I do this and it works". She oversimplified and attributed her good genes or whatever else keeps her thin -- who knows, perhaps she's an undiagnosed celiac? -- to her "normal" relationship with food.
We don't know how old she is. It could be when she hits a magical age, she'll balloon up as so many of my formerly "skinny" friends have. The same friends that puzzled over how little I ate yet always struggled with my weight while they ate "normally" and never worried about what they ate.

She clearly has no concept of what causes people to gain weight, because there are a raft of reasons and even scientists who study it are pretty puzzled by it.

She kind of reminds me of Jane Brody being all holier than thou then having the very problems she thought she avoided through her virtuous behavior.

On the whole though, I do agree that the Smart Trolley is a dumb idea. :p

Koalaty
Sat, Oct-13-07, 11:54
I think some of her advice has merit. Make food from whole, fresh ingredients is good. And exercising daily is also good.

However, I know people who are stick thin in spite of the junk they eat all the time. So actually, what you eat isn't always at the heart of why you look so slim.

Also there was that article not long ago about being fat on the inside: people who are thin by their hearts and livers etc are lined with fat cells. It had to do more with where you store the fat, and the fat on the inside people could be worse off than obviously obese individuals.

Gosh, I wonder about that "smart" shopping cart. I mean, is it going to tell us that coconut oil is bad because of the fat? Or warn us against buying ground beef, butter or heavy cream? There are such diverse ideas about what is and isn't healthy.

time2doit
Sat, Oct-13-07, 12:21
She says she is in her late 40's. I hate people with this attitude of "I'm fine, why aren't you."

But I did really like that she sais skinny isn't sexy. I hope that's true!

Nancy LC
Sat, Oct-13-07, 15:03
Well, the shopping cart isn't going to be any smarter than the idiots programming it. :p

Blondie888
Sat, Oct-13-07, 15:24
My name is Jane Shilling. I eat three cooked meals and drink half a bottle of wine every day.

Drinking "half a bottle of wine every night" at 119 lbs.? Could it be possible that instead of introducing herself to readers, she should be introducing herself to members of a certain support group?

I'm being facetious here, but really, what if her "normal" isn't so normal?

That said, her ideas were okay. Don't eat when you're not hungry and move more. But simply implementing these things would not be the solution for everyone, and it's not clear if the author knows that.

ironaddict
Sat, Oct-13-07, 17:53
Why is there always some patronising skinny cow who feels that just because she got lucky, she's qualified to tell everybody else what they're doing wrong? I'm surrounded by them in everyday life. How the hell did they get this arrogant? I mean, I naturally have perfectly straight teeth, but I don't walk around thinking that makes me anything but lucky or that it qualifies me to give people orthodontic advice.

That said, I agree that it's time we all got a little more sane and less witch-hunty about diet and health, and went easier on each other over natural variations in body size and proportions.

And about the other bloke she quotes - isn't it rich to have a writer from Vogue of all places acting all bemused about women having a screwed-up relationship to food. After all, it's not like the fashion industry contributed to this in any way, no sirree.

Kary
Sun, Oct-14-07, 01:51
Oh Lord, there are just so many things wrong with this article and it pushes so many of my buttons that I could rant on and on for hours. But I will hold back and address only one issue. If losing weight and maintaining it was merely a matter of knowing what was the right thing to eat then we would all be thin. If having a cart tell me that package of cookies was junk food would cause me to put it back, I would not be fat. My relationship with food is not optimal. And I am having to do considerably more than just read a banal, smug, breezy-weezy article to fix it.
So no, Jane Shilling, you can't have your own television show. Now go away.