An open letter to foodies... stop labelling things as "guilt free"
Replies
-
chivalryder wrote: »I feel sorry to people who feel compelled to write open letters to a group of people who will never read the letter, or if they do, wouldn't give tow poops about it.
I'm sorry you wasted so much of your time writing it. I hope you can sleep a bit better tonight.
do you even irony?
I'm feeling the 1 minute I've lost from my life. However, the point was clearly missed.0 -
0
-
RibStabsHeart wrote: »Bugs me too -- good post, OP. I have to deal with the guilt of always wanting sweets and sometimes struggle with the feeling of throwing in the towel sometimes when I go off the beaten path and over my calorie limit. I'm working on this (and myself) every day, and the idea that some candy bar is entirely devoid of guilt because it has 20% less fat (and the same amount of calories) is ridiculous. It's a passing fad, but the idea that some company/blogger thinks that they can decide what I feel guilty about is insulting to say the least.
I can take or leave gluten free recipes, but I would never go out of my way to make them since I've yet to try anything that tasted better or was cheaper when I modified it with gluten free ingredients. Even though I have friends with legitimate need for a gluten free diet (they have celiac disease/allergies to gluten), I see it as more of a dietary choice like vegetarianism 90% of the time.
What people need to be talking about more is raising awareness of how many calories your body needs in a day, and how easy it is to blow past that # if you eat the wrong things. A large milkshake or nutrient-dense smoothie can easily be 80% of your daily calorie intake, yet some people gobble them down and wonder why they're ballooning up. It's amazing how much weighing and logging everything you eat will open your eyes to the realities of food.
This is a good point, but I believe it was overlooked. It is about basic knowledge of food, nutrition, and calories. Based on facts and not opinions about what is good, bad, or guilt-free, etc.0 -
punkrockgoth wrote: »But food is food and a healthful diet includes everything in moderation.
I avoid most foods.
So do you.
0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »I disagree. It's labels like "clean," "guilt-free," "junk food," "healthy," etc., that make people so confused these days about nutrition and overeating.
I disagree. The labels aren't a cause, they're a symptom.
The real cause is the large proportion of people would rather over-eat while searching for a magic cure than not over-eating - labels indulge that instinct.
0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
I like studying royalty, does that make me a dukie?0 -
My main gripe with that label is that it's often not even accurate. Just because something has less fat than the original doesn't mean it still doesn't have a crazy amount of calories. Sometimes I look at what people call 'guilt free' and just shake my head. 20% less calories is just not worth losing so much taste most of the time.
Yup, pretty much this.
And while some food bloggers and whatnot may truly feel that people ought to feel guilty for eating certain foods/dishes, and virtuous for eating other foods/dishes, I'm not convinced that the use of "guilt-free" to describe a recipe implies anything deeper or more philosophical than "this recipe's design is to be lower in calories/fat/etc".
Like describing an rich recipe as "sinful" doesn't mean you really ought to find a priest and seek absolution if you indulge. It just prepares the reader that this recipe is rich.
But I agree with the general sentiment about not categorizing foods into good and bad, I'm just not convinced that bloggers using terms like "guilt-free" gives us any real insight into their food philosophy.
0 -
redheaddee wrote: »Can I add to this
"I'm a foodie- I love food- let me cook for you and share the love"
I hate when people tell people that, as if I eat cardboard and hate real food just because I'm fit.
<rollseyes> I can't even with you people. Grump.
FIFY. That's how I roll anyway. Fully admit to being a foodie, but not a food snob. I love to cook and cook for others. I love to eat at fine restaurants because new and exciting foods.
Don't get me wrong though...I also love me some Hardee's burgers.
I don't have a problem with that.
<nods> Love when People who love food- cook food- usually it's delicious food.
I love food. I love delicious food- my world practically revolves around food- okay no- it's the gym... dance- then food.
But they are all pretty "even" up there- rather than one out ranking the other- and it's at most insulting to to me- or at the least annoying that people use "foodie" as an excuse.
Which- now that I have blabbed- that is probably the thing- it's like an excuse- and it insinuates I DON'T like food... or anyone who has reached a certain physique level doesn't like food- or has bad taste in food.
It's just... an excuse and simultaneously an insult. LOL0 -
redheaddee wrote: »Can I add to this
"I'm a foodie- I love food- let me cook for you and share the love"
I hate when people tell people that, as if I eat cardboard and hate real food just because I'm fit.
<rollseyes> I can't even with you people. Grump.
FIFY. That's how I roll anyway. Fully admit to being a foodie, but not a food snob. I love to cook and cook for others. I love to eat at fine restaurants because new and exciting foods.
Don't get me wrong though...I also love me some Hardee's burgers.
I don't have a problem with that.
<nods> Love when People who love food- cook food- usually it's delicious food.
I love food. I love delicious food- my world practically revolves around food- okay no- it's the gym... dance- then food.
But they are all pretty "even" up there- rather than one out ranking the other- and it's at most insulting to to me- or at the least annoying that people use "foodie" as an excuse.
Which- now that I have blabbed- that is probably the thing- it's like an excuse- and it insinuates I DON'T like food... or anyone who has reached a certain physique level doesn't like food- or has bad taste in food.
It's just... an excuse and simultaneously an insult. LOL
I've noticed this as well. Very strange to hear what some people say when I go out to eat with them or for family gatherings. Huge assumptions about what I do and do not eat and even more hugely inaccurate. I just shrug it off and find it entertaining because clearly the ones making the comments are misinformed and generally do not want to hear facts.0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »It's just a label. Perhaps you are reading too much into it.
I disagree. It's labels like "clean," "guilt-free," "junk food," "healthy," etc., that make people so confused these days about nutrition and overeating. If people weren't thrown so many terms all the time about what they eat, and understood calories and how they relate to their bodies, people might not find it so difficult to eat in moderation.
Food is food, and I think that glamourizing and demonizing different types of foods is contributing to the obesity epidemic by overcomplicating things.
I disagree. Labels aren't making us fat.
Exactly. It's lack of knowledge or desire to learn what we need to do to take care of ourselves. This labeling is just yet another marketing ploy and we all need to be smart enough to see past it.
Yep.
This is basically what I said, yet you agree with her and disagree with me.
Starting to think you like to argue just for the sake of arguing.
It is indeed a marketing ploy that overcomplicates nutrition. Nutrition is not complicated, and if the population would realize that instead of labeling foods as good or bad, we might could actually overcome this obesity "epidemic." Although it's really more of an ignorance epidemic, IMO.
*edit - changed him to her, I didn't see the original poster of the quoted response, sorry!
Arguing requires more than one person. I argue for the same reason as others.
You can't teach common sense with a label. Anyone that thinks "guilt free" on a label is nutrition information is not using commong sense.
What I meant was you are arguing with me and agreeing with someone else that is making the same point that I was making. Which is pointless.
And it may be common sense on MFP, but not if you look at the population as a whole. None of my Facebook friends has any clue about nutrition. They're always talking about the latest fad diets and pinning their disgusting cauliflower recipes and cheering each other on about how "good" they're being. They sell their wraps and peddle their shakes. It's ridiculous.
Labels do not literally make us fat, but they complicate things for the general, uneducated (about nutrition) populace. Which is why I and many others do not like them.
Maybe it's more of a case of placing blame? Some people blame the labels and the marketers for the general ignorance regarding nutrition, but I (and I believe Need2Exerc1se) blame the people who believe the labels and don't take the time to learn facts.
Oh trust me, I am 100% for personal accountability - I do not advocate making excuses or blaming other people or one's surroundings for being obese. People get fat because they eat more than they burn. I think someone further down the thread nailed it when they said labeling foods can be more of a symptom of the ignorance of nutrition than a cause. However, I feel like people who write informational blog posts on subjects which they know nothing about in turn contribute back to the ignorance that started it all in the first place. It's like a snake trying to eat its tail, if that makes sense.
Ignorant people fueling everyone else's ignorance and people validating each other's biases. The labels should never have been created in the first place, as they were created from a place of ignorance.
*I wanted to add that I have friends who will read these blogs and watch shows like Dr. Oz and others and *think* that they are educating themselves, when they're stuffing their brains full of fluff and sales pitches. Some of these people actually want to learn, but they get their education from the sleek-looking blog with the interesting click bait. Then they go and spew this misinformation to other people thinking that they're doing a good thing and helping others "learn," too. It's not the blog's fault for existing, but it's frustrating that the information presented became mainstream in the first place.0 -
All of that being said above, I do not believe that labeling foods (good/bad, clean, guilt-free, etc.) is helpful whatsoever, and that doing so comes from a place of ignorance.0
-
This is a good point, but I believe it was overlooked. It is about basic knowledge of food, nutrition, and calories. Based on facts and not opinions about what is good, bad, or guilt-free, etc.
Thank you for reading
I think what bugs me the most about when Dr. Oz or other tabloid magazines advertise their "guilt free" dishes or snacks is that, to me, they're implying that you can eat as much as you want without any ramifications whatsoever. If you eat 6 pieces of guilt-free, no-bake cheesecake, believe me: you'll feel it later. This kind of faulty logic is particularly dangerous to those "fad dieters" who are constantly grasping at straws and searching for quick-fixes for YEARS of unhealthy eating. You didn't put it on overnight -- don't expect a pill or a grapefruit to take it off in a week either.
Sorry, now I'm starting to rant. If you'll excuse me, I'm going to go repent to my treadmill God for all of the cookie dough I had this weekend.0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »It's just a label. Perhaps you are reading too much into it.
I disagree. It's labels like "clean," "guilt-free," "junk food," "healthy," etc., that make people so confused these days about nutrition and overeating. If people weren't thrown so many terms all the time about what they eat, and understood calories and how they relate to their bodies, people might not find it so difficult to eat in moderation.
Food is food, and I think that glamourizing and demonizing different types of foods is contributing to the obesity epidemic by overcomplicating things.
I disagree. Labels aren't making us fat.
Exactly. It's lack of knowledge or desire to learn what we need to do to take care of ourselves. This labeling is just yet another marketing ploy and we all need to be smart enough to see past it.
Yep.
This is basically what I said, yet you agree with her and disagree with me.
Starting to think you like to argue just for the sake of arguing.
It is indeed a marketing ploy that overcomplicates nutrition. Nutrition is not complicated, and if the population would realize that instead of labeling foods as good or bad, we might could actually overcome this obesity "epidemic." Although it's really more of an ignorance epidemic, IMO.
*edit - changed him to her, I didn't see the original poster of the quoted response, sorry!
Arguing requires more than one person. I argue for the same reason as others.
You can't teach common sense with a label. Anyone that thinks "guilt free" on a label is nutrition information is not using commong sense.
What I meant was you are arguing with me and agreeing with someone else that is making the same point that I was making. Which is pointless.
And it may be common sense on MFP, but not if you look at the population as a whole. None of my Facebook friends has any clue about nutrition. They're always talking about the latest fad diets and pinning their disgusting cauliflower recipes and cheering each other on about how "good" they're being. They sell their wraps and peddle their shakes. It's ridiculous.
Labels do not literally make us fat, but they complicate things for the general, uneducated (about nutrition) populace. Which is why I and many others do not like them.
Maybe it's more of a case of placing blame? Some people blame the labels and the marketers for the general ignorance regarding nutrition, but I (and I believe Need2Exerc1se) blame the people who believe the labels and don't take the time to learn facts.
Oh trust me, I am 100% for personal accountability - I do not advocate making excuses or blaming other people or one's surroundings for being obese. People get fat because they eat more than they burn. I think someone further down the thread nailed it when they said labeling foods can be more of a symptom of the ignorance of nutrition than a cause. However, I feel like people who write informational blog posts on subjects which they know nothing about in turn contribute back to the ignorance that started it all in the first place. It's like a snake trying to eat its tail, if that makes sense.
Ignorant people fueling everyone else's ignorance and people validating each other's biases. The labels should never have been created in the first place, as they were created from a place of ignorance.
*I wanted to add that I have friends who will read these blogs and watch shows like Dr. Oz and others and *think* that they are educating themselves, when they're stuffing their brains full of fluff and sales pitches. Some of these people actually want to learn, but they get their education from the sleek-looking blog with the interesting click bait. Then they go and spew this misinformation to other people thinking that they're doing a good thing and helping others "learn," too. It's not the blog's fault for existing, but it's frustrating that the information presented became mainstream in the first place.
I very much agree with you!0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
Not everyone, or even most people, or even most food bloggers, is on the 'everything in moderation' diet. Most prefer to focus on eating foods that have more nutrition for the calorie buck. It doesn't mean they eat the whole low-cal cheesecake, but they eat a slice and don't have to log calories all day because they're eating mostly low calorie density foods and human satiety kicks in. It works for many.0
-
Labeling certain things such as "Atkins" plans as guilt free. I think that where we're going here. "Oh sure, I can eat this three pounds of bacon, as long as j drink grapefruit juice. It's Atkins approved and I can eat as much as I want and lose 8 lbs in a week!"
"I can eat all the pickles and apples and grapes I wanna in weight watchers, they're zero points!" (Side note: I think WW can be helpful when done properly.). The only "free" food is that you get with a coupon
Those pretty boxes of 100 calorie chips and cookies and what not.
"Eat Special K only for the next two weeks and lose five pounds!"
"Amy's burritos are organic so they're healthy for you!"
By no means am I saying any of these foods are bad for you. They're all good. They're FOOD. ENERGY.
People that are misinformed regarding nutrition will see these shiny promises and believe them. It doesn't help when dr oz says so, too, lol.
The labels don't make us fat, we make us fat by not allowing ourselves to be educated. Someone with no knowledge will buy into it, and eat 3,000 calories of bacon, popcorn, and "free" fruit, and wonder why they gained. Majority of us bought into some fad at some point, I'm sure.. I no longer waste my money on the "healthy guilt free" 100 calorie packs of cookies. If I want a cookie, I have it, if it fits. 0 -
lthames0810 wrote: »
samesies. when someone says they are a foodie, I take that to mean they are stuck up and pretentious about their food choices. I love food too you know, and my food doesnt have to be gourmet or expensive to be satisfying and delicious.0 -
melimomTARDIS wrote: »lthames0810 wrote: »
samesies. when someone says they are a foodie, I take that to mean they are stuck up and pretentious about their food choices. I love food too you know, and my food doesnt have to be gourmet or expensive to be satisfying and delicious.
Amen. Sometimes, that Taco Bell mexican pizza just hits the spot! Lol0 -
Don't blame 'foodies'. We don't care about calories, fat, or sugar... as long as it tastes beautiful! I think your blame needs to go to fad dieters and clean eaters!0
-
Don't blame 'foodies'. We don't care about calories, fat, or sugar... as long as it tastes beautiful! I think your blame needs to go to fad dieters and clean eaters!
Yep, I think it's fitness community food bloggers that are responsible for this. Not the foodies, well not in the way I understand foodies anyway.
I don't have a problem per say with making a more nutrient dense, higher protein or less calorie dense version or a particular food. I think the issue with labelling foods as "clean" or "guilt-free" is that it reinforces the other side of the coin, i.e. that the other version of these foods should somehow be associated with guilt or shame. Delicious food should never be associated with guilt or shame, it should simply be savoured slowly and in moderation as part of an overall healthy diet.
0 -
All the foodies I know are chubby.0
-
seltzermint555 wrote: »lthames0810 wrote: »
I do, too, and that's why this whole thread is very confusing to me.
I like OP's intentions though.
Agreed.
Food snobs can certainly be annoying (I suspect I have some tendencies that way, and that they are annoying, although I occasionally try to be self-aware), but I don't think they normally talk about stuff being guilt free. I separate out "foodie" food blogger types from "low cal" food blogger types from still other kinds of "healthy eating" or "certain ways of eating" food blogger types.
But yes, I like the intentions.
I mentioned the Matt Fitzgerald Diet Cults book in another thread today and one thing I liked about it is that he points out that eating a generally healthy diet is really quite simple and something we all know how to do (and not inconsistent with some splurging that might satisfy other needs, like pure enjoyment). Making it super complicated or about guilt vs. not or the like is something else, and I tend to agree with the posters who say that focusing on that is what takes something that should be pretty simple and non loaded and makes it into a minefield, with negative results for many.0 -
Lourdesong wrote: »But I agree with the general sentiment about not categorizing foods into good and bad, I'm just not convinced that bloggers using terms like "guilt-free" gives us any real insight into their food philosophy.
Probably true, but I do think it's interesting and not irrelevant how often religious and guilt-based language gets used in the food context.
I read some analysis once of the use of economic/legal language in Christianity, and you could certainly do such an analysis with religious language in food talk.
0 -
Don't blame 'foodies'. We don't care about calories, fat, or sugar... as long as it tastes beautiful! I think your blame needs to go to fad dieters and clean eaters!
Yep, I think it's fitness community food bloggers that are responsible for this. Not the foodies, well not in the way I understand foodies anyway.
I don't have a problem per say with making a more nutrient dense, higher protein or less calorie dense version or a particular food. I think the issue with labelling foods as "clean" or "guilt-free" is that it reinforces the other side of the coin, i.e. that the other version of these foods should somehow be associated with guilt or shame. Delicious food should never be associated with guilt or shame, it should simply be savoured slowly and in moderation as part of an overall healthy diet.
The elephant in the room, it's very specific to diabetic and gluten-free bloggers. The thing is, when you single them out, 9 times out of 10 you're dealing with someone who has a diabetic or celiac kid or has it herself, so blowing it off as "fad" is pretty rude. They're the ones who have a vested interest in starting those blogs more than anyone else, because it's only recently they had grocery store resources available at all. Even diabetic friendly foods were a lot more scarce, and what was out there was pretty rancid. It's probably a lot more convenient to call it a "foodie" stereotype than admit it's really about looking up a recipe and having to skip over ones that have carb or gluten alternatives in them.0 -
I ate a snickers today. I didn't realize the calorie count was for half the bar. sweet.0
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »Lourdesong wrote: »But I agree with the general sentiment about not categorizing foods into good and bad, I'm just not convinced that bloggers using terms like "guilt-free" gives us any real insight into their food philosophy.
Probably true, but I do think it's interesting and not irrelevant how often religious and guilt-based language gets used in the food context.
I read some analysis once of the use of economic/legal language in Christianity, and you could certainly do such an analysis with religious language in food talk.
I think it's interesting too.
0 -
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions