Can I petition MFP users to use the terms "more ideal" and "less ideal" instead of good/bad foods?
Replies
-
Oh no....agggh...now we have a "kinder gentler" food naming convention. Eeeks, forbid we offend someone with the words good or bad. Too funny.0
-
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
Maybe I'm crazy, but I think the thread title was a joke. (I think the "more ideal" thing was an obvious tipoff.)
The discussion here and in the "bad" food thread (which I can't find, was it deleted?) seem to me to be about a more significant question--how do we create a nutritious diet.
Is it by labeling foods "bad" and "good" and eating only the "good" ones (and beating ourselves up if we eat "bad" ones)? Or is it by actually thinking about what should be included in a healthy diet and eating those things in a sensible amount depending on what they are (plus other foods we enjoy that fit).
I vote for the latter.
0 -
that's a bingo.lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
Maybe I'm crazy, but I think the thread title was a joke. (I think the "more ideal" thing was an obvious tipoff.)
The discussion here and in the "bad" food thread (which I can't find, was it deleted?) seem to me to be about a more significant question--how do we create a nutritious diet.
Is it by labeling foods "bad" and "good" and eating only the "good" ones (and beating ourselves up if we eat "bad" ones)? Or is it by actually thinking about what should be included in a healthy diet and eating those things in a sensible amount depending on what they are (plus other foods we enjoy that fit).
I vote for the latter.
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
Maybe I'm crazy, but I think the thread title was a joke. (I think the "more ideal" thing was an obvious tipoff.)
The discussion here and in the "bad" food thread (which I can't find, was it deleted?) seem to me to be about a more significant question--how do we create a nutritious diet.
Is it by labeling foods "bad" and "good" and eating only the "good" ones (and beating ourselves up if we eat "bad" ones)? Or is it by actually thinking about what should be included in a healthy diet and eating those things in a sensible amount depending on what they are (plus other foods we enjoy that fit).
I vote for the latter.
Yeah, I got it was a joke. My post was also in jest.
I would vote for a world where everyone is free to call food what they want, without their motives being questioned or derogated.0 -
Expressing an opinion on what someone else says is as essential a part of freedom of speech as the original statement.
Not that freedom of speech applies here, of course, but I never get the argument that it's wrong to comment on what others say, which is what you seem to be arguing. If I think it's dumb to call white rice a "bad" food, why shouldn't I be able to say that, just as others can say white rice is "bad" if that floats their boat. (Of course, it's weird it does.)0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
Maybe I'm crazy, but I think the thread title was a joke. (I think the "more ideal" thing was an obvious tipoff.)
The discussion here and in the "bad" food thread (which I can't find, was it deleted?) seem to me to be about a more significant question--how do we create a nutritious diet.
Is it by labeling foods "bad" and "good" and eating only the "good" ones (and beating ourselves up if we eat "bad" ones)? Or is it by actually thinking about what should be included in a healthy diet and eating those things in a sensible amount depending on what they are (plus other foods we enjoy that fit).
I vote for the latter.
Yeah, I got it was a joke. My post was also in jest.
I would vote for a world where everyone is free to call food what they want, without their motives being questioned or derogated.
I would be fine with that if there wasn't this hierarchy of what is "crap" or bad food to people that I've seen get expressed almost as gospel.
I've seen it get it up to all these:
any dairy
any animal products
cooked vegetables
legumes
and EVERY one of those has a lot to offer besides calories (contrary to the aforementioned Oreo in the other thread).0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Expressing an opinion on what someone else says is as essential a part of freedom of speech as the original statement.
Not that freedom of speech applies here, of course, but I never get the argument that it's wrong to comment on what others say, which is what you seem to be arguing. If I think it's dumb to call white rice a "bad" food, why shouldn't I be able to say that, just as others can say white rice is "bad" if that floats their boat. (Of course, it's weird it does.)
You are able to say that, of course. Feel free.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »I've changed my behavior in the past based on risks I'm sufficiently convinced about--it's why I don't eat trans fats or much fried food (not saying anyone should come to the same conclusions I have, and the fried thing has as much to do with calories).
Are you saying foods high in trans fats are bad?
Answered fully in the other thread (following me taking a moment to sort out my thoughts). If you didn't read it and want me to answer here (assuming I'm not the only one unable to find that thread), let me know.
On the other hand, if you replied to my response, I'm interested.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
Maybe I'm crazy, but I think the thread title was a joke. (I think the "more ideal" thing was an obvious tipoff.)
The discussion here and in the "bad" food thread (which I can't find, was it deleted?) seem to me to be about a more significant question--how do we create a nutritious diet.
Is it by labeling foods "bad" and "good" and eating only the "good" ones (and beating ourselves up if we eat "bad" ones)? Or is it by actually thinking about what should be included in a healthy diet and eating those things in a sensible amount depending on what they are (plus other foods we enjoy that fit).
I vote for the latter.
Yeah, I got it was a joke. My post was also in jest.
I would vote for a world where everyone is free to call food what they want, without their motives being questioned or derogated.
I would be fine with that if there wasn't this hierarchy of what is "crap" or bad food to people that I've seen get expressed almost as gospel.
I've seen it get it up to all these:
any dairy
any animal products
cooked vegetables
legumes
and EVERY one of those has a lot to offer besides calories (contrary to the aforementioned Oreo in the other thread).
I agree. All have their attributes. That would not change my vote.0 -
how about ..
"bad dietary choices"0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »Can we just call it food and leave the value statements out of it?
nope, food is inherently good or evil ...its kind of like GI Joe VS Cobra0 -
I prefer "foods that will let me eat ice cream at the end of the day", vs. "foods that will have me eating raw kale or protein isolate".0
-
MB_Positif wrote: »I prefer "yummy" and "more yummy" to be honest.
So do I.0 -
I prefer "foods I want to eat" vs "foods you think I should want to eat".0
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I've changed my behavior in the past based on risks I'm sufficiently convinced about--it's why I don't eat trans fats or much fried food (not saying anyone should come to the same conclusions I have, and the fried thing has as much to do with calories).
Are you saying foods high in trans fats are bad?
Answered fully in the other thread (following me taking a moment to sort out my thoughts). If you didn't read it and want me to answer here (assuming I'm not the only one unable to find that thread), let me know.
On the other hand, if you replied to my response, I'm interested.
that thread got nuked....
so I guess we are all moving over here..0 -
hopefully, we can all agree that anything substituted with cauliflower is "bad"...0
-
-
-
I like some of the cauliflower substitute dishes, but see them as a preparation of cauliflower, not as a stand in for something else. Mashed cauliflower is yummy, but it's still mashed cauliflower. The same for the stir fried cauliflower "rice". It's very good, but I'll make it without a lot of the extras in it as a side dish, usually with just the addition of ginger, garlic, and scallions. I'm not having either stand in for mashed potatoes or fried rice. They're both a vegetable dish.
Then again, I really like cauliflower, and like variety in how I eat it.
I think I'll go way back in the thread to the Sesame Street naming conventions. Sometimes foods and always foods. Then again. You can always have SOME of something. So that gets you nowhere.0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »Can we just call it food and leave the value statements out of it?
nope, food is inherently good or evil ...its kind of like GI Joe VS Cobra
Cobra wasn't evil, just wanted order in a chaotic world, and we all know the only tool to create order from chaos.
The hammer.
OK...
I will go biblical then ..
God VS Satan ...
better ?
0 -
I'm thinking "godly/death in a pretty package"0
-
tincanonastring wrote: »Can we just call it food and leave the value statements out of it?
nope, food is inherently good or evil ...its kind of like GI Joe VS Cobra
Cobra wasn't evil, just wanted order in a chaotic world, and we all know the only tool to create order from chaos.
The hammer.
OK...
I will go biblical then ..
God VS Satan ...
better ?
nope, nope, nope...I don't want to be smited for eating dirty food.0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »Can we just call it food and leave the value statements out of it?
nope, food is inherently good or evil ...its kind of like GI Joe VS Cobra
Cobra wasn't evil, just wanted order in a chaotic world, and we all know the only tool to create order from chaos.
The hammer.
OK...
I will go biblical then ..
God VS Satan ...
better ?
Not if you are going biblical. You'd have to go angels and demons, because there is more than one of those.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I've changed my behavior in the past based on risks I'm sufficiently convinced about--it's why I don't eat trans fats or much fried food (not saying anyone should come to the same conclusions I have, and the fried thing has as much to do with calories).
Are you saying foods high in trans fats are bad?
Answered fully in the other thread (following me taking a moment to sort out my thoughts). If you didn't read it and want me to answer here (assuming I'm not the only one unable to find that thread), let me know.
On the other hand, if you replied to my response, I'm interested.
that thread got nuked....
so I guess we are all moving over here..
Good to know!0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »Can we just call it food and leave the value statements out of it?
nope, food is inherently good or evil ...its kind of like GI Joe VS Cobra
Cobra wasn't evil, just wanted order in a chaotic world, and we all know the only tool to create order from chaos.
The hammer.
OK...
I will go biblical then ..
God VS Satan ...
better ?
It's already Biblical:
1 And the LORD spake unto Moses and to Aaron, saying unto them...
4 Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.
5 And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.
6 And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.
7 And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you....
35 And the Oreo; he is unclean to you.
36 They shall be even an abomination unto you.
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I've changed my behavior in the past based on risks I'm sufficiently convinced about--it's why I don't eat trans fats or much fried food (not saying anyone should come to the same conclusions I have, and the fried thing has as much to do with calories).
Are you saying foods high in trans fats are bad?
Answered fully in the other thread (following me taking a moment to sort out my thoughts). If you didn't read it and want me to answer here (assuming I'm not the only one unable to find that thread), let me know.
On the other hand, if you replied to my response, I'm interested.
that thread got nuked....
so I guess we are all moving over here..
Welp, guess it's time to turn off notifications...0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »Can we just call it food and leave the value statements out of it?
nope, food is inherently good or evil ...its kind of like GI Joe VS Cobra
Cobra wasn't evil, just wanted order in a chaotic world, and we all know the only tool to create order from chaos.
The hammer.
OK...
I will go biblical then ..
God VS Satan ...
better ?
It's already Biblical:
1 And the LORD spake unto Moses and to Aaron, saying unto them...
4 Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.
5 And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.
6 And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.
7 And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you....
35 And the Oreo; he is unclean to you.
36 They shall be even an abomination unto you.
I'm pretty sure they found a whole passage on sugar and refined starches in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions