Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Forbidden vs not wanting
Options
Replies
-
They're two completely different things to me.
Something that I don't want is simply something I don't want. Like liver. Don't really want that. Or just simply something I'm not in the mood for.
Forbidden means disallowing myself something that I ALWAYS want, eg. nachos. ... nachos....... because I will go crazy on nachos. They only come into the house at times that my willpower is strong.
But I did ALWAYS want them...I had trouble walking past the liquor store, or Starbucks every day.
ETA: I'm not saying that cutting those things out will work for you, just that it does work for many people. Being different from you does not mean we are wrong or lying or confused about the definition of words.3 -
eveandqsmom wrote: »They're two completely different things to me.
Something that I don't want is simply something I don't want. Like liver. Don't really want that. Or just simply something I'm not in the mood for.
Forbidden means disallowing myself something that I ALWAYS want, eg. nachos. ... nachos....... because I will go crazy on nachos. They only come into the house at times that my willpower is strong.
But I did ALWAYS want them...I had trouble walking past the liquor store, or Starbucks every day.
ETA: I'm not saying that cutting those things out will work for you, just that it does work for many people. Being different from you does not mean we are wrong or lying or confused about the definition of words.
Right! Forbidding foods isn't a character flaw.3 -
if you do not want it fine; however, dont try and tell someone else that it is bad or going to make them die because it is, in their opinion, dirty, processed, etc....
in my experience, forbidding something makes one want it more....kinda like the whole forbidden fruit in the garden of eden thing...2 -
if you do not want it fine; however, dont try and tell someone else that it is bad or going to make them die because it is, in their opinion, dirty, processed, etc....
in my experience, forbidding something makes one want it more....kinda like the whole forbidden fruit in the garden of eden thing...
No. It makes you want it more. It makes many people want it less.
I agree that people shouldn't post that certain foods should be denied to everyone, that's ridiculous, but it's equally ridiculous to tell people not to restrict anything from their diet because that is what works for you.7 -
The difference between an item being forbidden and not wanting something is much more than simple semantics.
When something is forbidden, it is implied that one can not consider to have the item in question, that there is no choice in the matter. In the case of food, the vast majority of the time, that is not the case. To say that food is forbidden is in virtually all cases a lie that one tells one's self to justify not having the item so that the person does not have to accept responsibility for the decision of not having the item in question, making you a victim of the circumstance being created.
When one says that they do not want something, it implies that the person has a choice in the matter that something being forbidden does not allow the opportunity to entertain. It is the exercising of free will to either want something or not want something that decides whether or not one has that item. You can want something that is forbidden by statute....just can't have it legally. Alcohol prior to the age of 21 in some states for some people comes to mind for that example. Illicit drugs are another example. That in and of itself shows how something forbidden and something not wanted are completely different things. You can want something that is not forbidden, which is virtually all things related to food, drink, calories, etc.
The choice, and the power to make the decision to either want or not want rest within all of us. For me I am not forbidden to consume anything. If I want something bad enough, I will find a way to get it, regardless of consequence. It is understood within all things that there are consequences that I choose to either risk having or not risk having. I choose not to want to consume items that I know will hurt me, whether physically or any other way. I choose not to place myself at risk for such items. Hope this helps.
0 -
eveandqsmom wrote: »if you do not want it fine; however, dont try and tell someone else that it is bad or going to make them die because it is, in their opinion, dirty, processed, etc....
in my experience, forbidding something makes one want it more....kinda like the whole forbidden fruit in the garden of eden thing...
No. It makes you want it more. It makes many people want it less.
I agree that people shouldn't post that certain foods should be denied to everyone, that's ridiculous, but it's equally ridiculous to tell people not to restrict anything from their diet because that is what works for you.
that is why I said "in my experience"....
if you read through the forums enough you will see that restricting tends to lead to binging which leads to feelings of guilt, and then the whole process starts over again ..
3 -
eveandqsmom wrote: »
but what I'm saying that many don't seem to be able to either understand or believe is that one can lead to the other.Alluminati wrote: »1. Forbidden foods = foods I want but am denying myself = causes lots of effort and misery on my part.
2. Not wanting foods= foods I don't want= no effort at all to avoid, easy.
Two different things, imo.
This comes into play when people say they are miserable because of #1. It has nothing at all to do with #2.You see so many people spouting that nothing is forbidden & no foods should be excluded.
I haven't decided that Starbucks chocolate chunk cookies aren't the most delicious cookies in the world or that I never liked them. I just realized that I can live a happy and complete life without them...happier and MORE complete in fact.
...just like cigarettes.
Do you have any examples? I don't see anyone arguing this on the forums. If someone doesn't like a food regardless of how they got to that point , I don't see anyone challenging that.
What I do see is people coming on the forums complaining that they are struggling to adhere to whatever food restrictive diet they are on. In which case the suggestion of not restricting any foods comes up
Not wanting a food has no bearing on the discussions.1 -
A) you said in your opinion it works that way for everyone (the use of the word "one" instead of "me")
B ) a boatload of posts I've read about binges were started by people attempting to eat moderately and not being able to stop.1 -
Alluminati wrote: »eveandqsmom wrote: »
but what I'm saying that many don't seem to be able to either understand or believe is that one can lead to the other.Alluminati wrote: »1. Forbidden foods = foods I want but am denying myself = causes lots of effort and misery on my part.
2. Not wanting foods= foods I don't want= no effort at all to avoid, easy.
Two different things, imo.
This comes into play when people say they are miserable because of #1. It has nothing at all to do with #2.You see so many people spouting that nothing is forbidden & no foods should be excluded.
I haven't decided that Starbucks chocolate chunk cookies aren't the most delicious cookies in the world or that I never liked them. I just realized that I can live a happy and complete life without them...happier and MORE complete in fact.
...just like cigarettes.
Do you have any examples? I don't see anyone arguing this on the forums. If someone doesn't like a food regardless of how they got to that point , I don't see anyone challenging that.
What I do see is people coming on the forums complaining that they are struggling to adhere to whatever food restrictive diet they are on. In which case the suggestion of not restricting any foods comes up
Not wanting a food has no bearing on the discussions.
For the 4th time:
My favourite foods/calories were pop, cookies, red wine ...after a difficult period of restricting them, NOW I have realized not that they aren't delicious but that I am happier without them. This is common with people who prefer this method to attempting to eat their trigger foods in moderation.3 -
eveandqsmom wrote: »Alluminati wrote: »eveandqsmom wrote: »
but what I'm saying that many don't seem to be able to either understand or believe is that one can lead to the other.Alluminati wrote: »1. Forbidden foods = foods I want but am denying myself = causes lots of effort and misery on my part.
2. Not wanting foods= foods I don't want= no effort at all to avoid, easy.
Two different things, imo.
This comes into play when people say they are miserable because of #1. It has nothing at all to do with #2.You see so many people spouting that nothing is forbidden & no foods should be excluded.
I haven't decided that Starbucks chocolate chunk cookies aren't the most delicious cookies in the world or that I never liked them. I just realized that I can live a happy and complete life without them...happier and MORE complete in fact.
...just like cigarettes.
Do you have any examples? I don't see anyone arguing this on the forums. If someone doesn't like a food regardless of how they got to that point , I don't see anyone challenging that.
What I do see is people coming on the forums complaining that they are struggling to adhere to whatever food restrictive diet they are on. In which case the suggestion of not restricting any foods comes up
Not wanting a food has no bearing on the discussions.
For the 4th time:
My favourite foods/calories were pop, cookies, red wine ...after a difficult period of restricting them, NOW I have realized not that they aren't delicious but that I am happier without them. This is common with people who prefer this method to attempting to eat their trigger foods in moderation.
So point me to examples that people dispute holding off on trigger food.0 -
Does this simple change in semantics & mindset make a difference? You see so many people spouting that nothing is forbidden & no foods should be excluded. What if you simply choose not to eat something any longer because you just don't want to? Does the reason matter?
It might make a difference to some people what words they use and how they think about food.
Some people approach dieting by saying they can't ever eat food xyz and lose weight (usually untrue)... they unnessarily restrict too much and then binge and feel bad repeatedly. They might be better off fixing their thoughts and words and how they use food.
I think it is silly to use the word forbidden about food so I wouldn't use it. I would say something doesn't fit my goals, I don't want it today, or it isn't worth using my calories/money on most days. I don't feel guilty if I eat something I wanted because I didn't call anything bad.
I would advise people to eat in a way they can realistically sustain long term. Learn to eat the foods you like in moderate amounts.
0 -
eveandqsmom wrote: »A) you said in your opinion it works that way for everyone (the use of the word "one" instead of "me")
B ) a boatload of posts I've read about binges were started by people attempting to eat moderately and not being able to stop.
that is not what I said at all, go back and read it and try to understand it. In my experience means me and not extrapolating to anyone else..If I said "everyone does that" then that would be generalizing to the whole population..
to your second point, I have seen someone say "I moderated my intake and I binged...."
0 -
Alluminati wrote: »eveandqsmom wrote: »
but what I'm saying that many don't seem to be able to either understand or believe is that one can lead to the other.Alluminati wrote: »1. Forbidden foods = foods I want but am denying myself = causes lots of effort and misery on my part.
2. Not wanting foods= foods I don't want= no effort at all to avoid, easy.
Two different things, imo.
This comes into play when people say they are miserable because of #1. It has nothing at all to do with #2.You see so many people spouting that nothing is forbidden & no foods should be excluded.
I haven't decided that Starbucks chocolate chunk cookies aren't the most delicious cookies in the world or that I never liked them. I just realized that I can live a happy and complete life without them...happier and MORE complete in fact.
...just like cigarettes.
Do you have any examples? I don't see anyone arguing this on the forums. If someone doesn't like a food regardless of how they got to that point , I don't see anyone challenging that.
What I do see is people coming on the forums complaining that they are struggling to adhere to whatever food restrictive diet they are on. In which case the suggestion of not restricting any foods comes up
Not wanting a food has no bearing on the discussions.
pretty much this0 -
if you do not want it fine; however, dont try and tell someone else that it is bad or going to make them die because it is, in their opinion, dirty, processed, etc....
in my experience, forbidding something makes one want it more....kinda like the whole forbidden fruit in the garden of eden thing...
There were 2 people in the garden of eden, only one ate the apple.1 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »if you do not want it fine; however, dont try and tell someone else that it is bad or going to make them die because it is, in their opinion, dirty, processed, etc....
in my experience, forbidding something makes one want it more....kinda like the whole forbidden fruit in the garden of eden thing...
There were 2 people in the garden of eden, only one ate the apple.
Actually they both ate it.4 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »To lose weight you must eat less than you have previously. Isn't that true for all? You have to restrict something. Portions and/or specific foods. There is commonality with both forbidding and moderating.
It's not true for all. For some people a deficit may be created by upping activity without changing diet.
But they are still restricting to their previous intake. Exercise makes me hungrier. If I were to use exercise as a means of creating a deficit I would have to be very careful not to eat back those calories... I would be restricting.
1 -
Alluminati wrote: »1. Forbidden foods = foods I want but am denying myself = causes lots of effort and misery on my part.
2. Not wanting foods= foods I don't want= no effort at all to avoid, easy.
Two different things, imo.
This comes into play when people say they are miserable because of #1. It has nothing at all to do with #2.You see so many people spouting that nothing is forbidden & no foods should be excluded.
Seems you're jumping to conclusions with #1. Just because you want something, but choose to deny yourself that thing, doesn't necessarily equal lots of effort and misery. Maybe it's hard at first (cutting back on portions is hard at first too!), but if you find that after you haven't had it in a while, you no longer feel so strongly about it, that means it takes less and less effort to not have it. Not everyone ends up there, but some of us do. I used to love bread, especially freshly baked, hommade bread. I stopped eating it, missed it for a while, then after a while I didn't care. I won't say I don't like it anymore, but I don't want it nearly as much and it doesn't take any effort, and certainly no misery, to avoid eating it.
1 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »Alluminati wrote: »1. Forbidden foods = foods I want but am denying myself = causes lots of effort and misery on my part.
2. Not wanting foods= foods I don't want= no effort at all to avoid, easy.
Two different things, imo.
This comes into play when people say they are miserable because of #1. It has nothing at all to do with #2.You see so many people spouting that nothing is forbidden & no foods should be excluded.
Seems you're jumping to conclusions with #1. Just because you want something, but choose to deny yourself that thing, doesn't necessarily equal lots of effort and misery. Maybe it's hard at first (cutting back on portions is hard at first too!), but if you find that after you haven't had it in a while, you no longer feel so strongly about it, that means it takes less and less effort to not have it. Not everyone ends up there, but some of us do. I used to love bread, especially freshly baked, hommade bread. I stopped eating it, missed it for a while, then after a while I didn't care. I won't say I don't like it anymore, but I don't want it nearly as much and it doesn't take any effort, and certainly no misery, to avoid eating it.
I missed where I was asking for advice.1 -
For me, the semantics matter. If I told myself I could never have another beer, you best believe that I would be craving it. I have however, chosen not to drink beer in 6 months, because the calories for the stuff I like aren't worth it to me. I have a sip of my hub's beer once in a while, other than that I don't miss it. It's all in my head and I'm ok with that.0
-
For me sometimes semantics are important, but it's not so much forbidden vs not wanting but forbidden vs choosing not to. I always WANT what I can't have, but I can want something and choose not to have it. Not eating my trigger foods frees me from obsessing over them and gives me the power to choose not to eat them. WHen I eat them the craving for more is so overwhelming that I am crazy until i get more and then make myself sick eating them. I realize for me that certain foods are addictive physically and psychologically. That is not the case for everyone. The way I see it, there are normal eaters, emotional eaters, and addicted eaters.
For me, when I conceptualize my cravings for sugar and refined carbs as an addiction, like alcoholism, I am much more successful staying away from them because i tell myself i can have them and be miserable or get the support I need to choose not to have them one day or one moment at a time. Like with recovery for alcoholism, I tell myself I am choosing not to eat those food just for today or just for this moment and leave the option open for tomorrow, but then try to put it off another day until the craving is really gone. I am fully aware that it is semantics and I am kind of tricking myself into never eating them but it is less overwhelming to think of choosing not to eat something just today and not think about not eating it forever.
I know that for some people this is not what they need to do. They can eat things with sugar and flour and other refined carbs in moderation and not get the same phenomenon of craving that I get. But I am writing my experience in case someone is like me and can't figure out why they can't moderate certain foods.
There is research showing that some people who binge on simple carbohydrates and can't control it have the same genetic markers as drug addicts and alcoholics, even people who are not otherwise addicted but binge eat. Not everyone has this, but some of us do. For us, successful healthy eating depends on not triggering that addiction.
It felt like a huge sacrifice giving up sugar, bread and pasta in my diet, but once I did and got through the detox cravings I found I was much freer to choose not to eat it and to enjoy eating healthy. But, like I said, I didn't forbid those things, I chose not to eat them each day. Semantics, I know, but I am just sharing what worked for me.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 916 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions