Last week I shared that my favorite presentation I did at an event, "Tweaking the Recipe to Create an Awesome Life," discussed my evolving philosophy on moderation for the sake of the bigger life picture. A Mark's Daily Apple reader commented that it's becoming more common to conflate morality and food choice.

Already being in the mode of the f(x) talk, this topic piqued my interest. Far beyond those quaint (and deluded) labels about fat content, today we see phrases like guilt-free, low carbon, humane, and fair trade. The grocery aisle has become a dizzying ethical landscape.

No matter how well we think we're doing in terms of responsible eating choices (e.g. grass-fed beef), somebody turns around and brags that they're eating a pastured heritage beef breed. If we're of a particularly sensitive or maybe just competitive nature, suddenly we're sucked into a Portlandia version of social shame and ethical hell. How did we exchange sanity for perfectionism, and how do we find our way back? When it comes to making simple food decisions, where do we draw the line between putting helpful knowledge into practice and putting ourselves through a moral gauntlet?

The fact is, eating isn't a simple enterprise anymore. As with many things in life these days, we can feel like we know too much. This kind of food destroys the forests. That type of food is harvested by people who live in these unjust conditions. If you buy X product, you're supporting this destructive agricultural or trade practice. And that doesn't even touch the less political, more personal shaming inherent in those heinous and blistering assumptions like "Well, if you had any respect for your body you wouldn't touch that," or "You really must not care what you look like." I'd say to avoid hanging out with these people at all costs, but the fact is, our worst critics are often ourselves.

Unfortunately, if you scrutinize long and deep enough, just about any food choice can put you on the shame train. Seriously, at some point, we have to refuse to ride anymore.

These days if you spend too much time reading, researching and listening to hype media, you'll feel the weight of the world on your shoulders with every bite or drink you take. It's easy to wish for ignorance some days. If only food - not to mention the whole agribusiness complex - weren't so complicated. If only a meal could be a freaking meal again...

Grok (Ancient man) didn't have to deal with all this mental and moral flack.. Can't I enjoy a steak without justifying my apparently selfish existence over it? Can I have a salad without feeling guilty over the dead and displaced animals who lost their homes (or lives) because of agricultural expansion? And, damn it all, can I have one cookie without the paleo police, other dietary authority or random pain-in-the-butt stranger adding his/her two cents?

I get that any dietary approach, Primal included, naturally moves us toward favoring some foods over others. We learn what certain foods do to our bodies (good and bad) because of their nutrient content, their processing, their added ingredients, etc. An approach may, as Primal does, note the conditions under which food - whether plant or animal source - is raised and even the impact certain choices have on the larger environment. To me, this is all knowledge, all information we can use the way we wish to make decisions that fit our overall needs and perhaps to shape our personal values.

Values... It can mean a thousand different things to a thousand different people. For some people, they revolve more around political principles. For others, "no/minimal harm" priorities come to mind with animal welfare or environmental concerns taking precedence. Maybe it's a serious investment in health integrity, an interest in worker rights or even a strict adherence to religious directives.

No matter what the subject, we try to live our lives in alignment with our personal values. They're priorities, but that's not the same as dogma. I personally see alignment as gravitation. We naturally gravitate toward those choices that are in alignment with our values because we experience homeostasis when we do. Our lives are generally or increasingly congruent with our priorities, and there's a certain peace in that.

For example, my values support optimizing health for the greatest number and promoting sustainability whenever reasonable. Since I have the resources to buy all my food from ethically and sustainably raised sources, I do that.. I also choose to financially back companies like Thrive Market that seek to make these healthier options available to more people. For me, that's living (and investing) close to my center as I've personally defined it.

Yet, I'm sure countless critics could find a thousand things "wrong" with me as defined by their perception of my food choices - eating certain favorite things that have to be shipped across the country if not the world, eating too much meat, having a dessert at a party two weeks ago, etc.

For the absolutist thinking of some critics (external or internal), progress is the enemy of perfection. Instead of living in gravitation to values, they would impose a guilt-ridden tyranny of shoulds, musts and failings.
We are only as good as the righteousness of our last food choice according to this approach. Our choices become our endorsements, and our identities get wrapped up in those endorsements. The "cleaner" our diet, the cleaner and more godly we are as people.

This is where the wheels come off the bus for me. I'm not joining that guilt trip, thank you very much. And, by the way, am I the only one who finds this path exhausting?

Unfortunately, many people can sometimes reject legitimate issues around food choice as a result of overwrought moralism. Crap food companies even capitalize on the aggressive pushback by promoting hedonistic, devil-may-care attitudes. The whole push and pull becomes it's own perpetual circus of crazy-making.

We can choose to live in this interminable conflict, or we can choose to live outside of it. Rather than try to compete or race to keep up or disown our desires, we can center ourselves in our values, our needs, our understanding and our circumstances. In the confluence of these, we find our center - the sanest place to live and choose from.

I highly suggest learning about your food - for your own welfare and even that of others. Yet, I also highly suggest leaving any kind of shame, comparison and justification out of the equation. Trust yourself to make decisions based on solid information and not emotional bait. It's a saner and more sustainable perspective - thoughtfully choosing your food rather than morally identifying yourself with it.

Thanks for reading. What are you thoughts on the morality of food as it's preached today?

www.marksdailyapple.com

On Thursday, May 14, 2015 at 3:11:59 PM UTC-4, ImStillMags quoted:

> Thanks for reading. What are you thoughts on the morality of food as it's preached today?
>
> www.marksdailyapple.com

It's a quintessential First-World problem. Only we have the
luxury of worrying about where our food came from; everybody
else is worrying about where their next meal will come from.


Cindy Hamilton

On Thursday, May 14, 2015 at 9:22:00 AM UTC-10, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Thursday, May 14, 2015 at 3:11:59 PM UTC-4, ImStillMags quoted:
>
> > Thanks for reading. What are you thoughts on the morality of food as it's preached today?
> >
> > www.marksdailyapple.com
>
> It's a quintessential First-World problem. Only we have the
> luxury of worrying about where our food came from; everybody
> else is worrying about where their next meal will come from.
>
>
> Cindy Hamilton

As far as problems go, it ain't that bad of a gig. :-)

"ImStillMags" > wrote in message
...
Last week I shared that my favorite presentation I did at an event,
"Tweaking the Recipe to Create an Awesome Life," discussed my evolving
philosophy on moderation for the sake of the bigger life picture. A Mark's
Daily Apple reader commented that it's becoming more common to conflate
morality and food choice.

Already being in the mode of the f(x) talk, this topic piqued my interest.
Far beyond those quaint (and deluded) labels about fat content, today we see
phrases like guilt-free, low carbon, humane, and fair trade. The grocery
aisle has become a dizzying ethical landscape.

No matter how well we think we're doing in terms of responsible eating
choices (e.g. grass-fed beef), somebody turns around and brags that they're
eating a pastured heritage beef breed. If we're of a particularly sensitive
or maybe just competitive nature, suddenly we're sucked into a Portlandia
version of social shame and ethical hell. How did we exchange sanity for
perfectionism, and how do we find our way back? When it comes to making
simple food decisions, where do we draw the line between putting helpful
knowledge into practice and putting ourselves through a moral gauntlet?

The fact is, eating isn't a simple enterprise anymore. As with many things
in life these days, we can feel like we know too much. This kind of food
destroys the forests. That type of food is harvested by people who live in
these unjust conditions. If you buy X product, you're supporting this
destructive agricultural or trade practice. And that doesn't even touch the
less political, more personal shaming inherent in those heinous and
blistering assumptions like "Well, if you had any respect for your body you
wouldn't touch that," or "You really must not care what you look like." I'd
say to avoid hanging out with these people at all costs, but the fact is,
our worst critics are often ourselves.

Unfortunately, if you scrutinize long and deep enough, just about any food
choice can put you on the shame train. Seriously, at some point, we have to
refuse to ride anymore.

These days if you spend too much time reading, researching and listening to
hype media, you'll feel the weight of the world on your shoulders with every
bite or drink you take. It's easy to wish for ignorance some days. If only
food - not to mention the whole agribusiness complex - weren't so
complicated. If only a meal could be a freaking meal again...

Grok (Ancient man) didn't have to deal with all this mental and moral flack.
Can't I enjoy a steak without justifying my apparently selfish existence
over it? Can I have a salad without feeling guilty over the dead and
displaced animals who lost their homes (or lives) because of agricultural
expansion? And, damn it all, can I have one cookie without the paleo police,
other dietary authority or random pain-in-the-butt stranger adding his/her
two cents?

I get that any dietary approach, Primal included, naturally moves us toward
favoring some foods over others. We learn what certain foods do to our
bodies (good and bad) because of their nutrient content, their processing,
their added ingredients, etc. An approach may, as Primal does, note the
conditions under which food - whether plant or animal source - is raised and
even the impact certain choices have on the larger environment. To me, this
is all knowledge, all information we can use the way we wish to make
decisions that fit our overall needs and perhaps to shape our personal
values.

Values... It can mean a thousand different things to a thousand different
people. For some people, they revolve more around political principles. For
others, "no/minimal harm" priorities come to mind with animal welfare or
environmental concerns taking precedence. Maybe it's a serious investment in
health integrity, an interest in worker rights or even a strict adherence to
religious directives.

No matter what the subject, we try to live our lives in alignment with our
personal values. They're priorities, but that's not the same as dogma. I
personally see alignment as gravitation. We naturally gravitate toward those
choices that are in alignment with our values because we experience
homeostasis when we do. Our lives are generally or increasingly congruent
with our priorities, and there's a certain peace in that.

For example, my values support optimizing health for the greatest number and
promoting sustainability whenever reasonable. Since I have the resources to
buy all my food from ethically and sustainably raised sources, I do that. I
also choose to financially back companies like Thrive Market that seek to
make these healthier options available to more people. For me, that's living
(and investing) close to my center as I've personally defined it.

Yet, I'm sure countless critics could find a thousand things "wrong" with me
as defined by their perception of my food choices - eating certain favorite
things that have to be shipped across the country if not the world, eating
too much meat, having a dessert at a party two weeks ago, etc.

For the absolutist thinking of some critics (external or internal), progress
is the enemy of perfection. Instead of living in gravitation to values, they
would impose a guilt-ridden tyranny of shoulds, musts and failings.
We are only as good as the righteousness of our last food choice according
to this approach. Our choices become our endorsements, and our identities
get wrapped up in those endorsements. The "cleaner" our diet, the cleaner
and more godly we are as people.

This is where the wheels come off the bus for me. I'm not joining that guilt
trip, thank you very much. And, by the way, am I the only one who finds this
path exhausting?

Unfortunately, many people can sometimes reject legitimate issues around
food choice as a result of overwrought moralism. Crap food companies even
capitalize on the aggressive pushback by promoting hedonistic,
devil-may-care attitudes. The whole push and pull becomes it's own perpetual
circus of crazy-making.

We can choose to live in this interminable conflict, or we can choose to
live outside of it. Rather than try to compete or race to keep up or disown
our desires, we can center ourselves in our values, our needs, our
understanding and our circumstances. In the confluence of these, we find our
center - the sanest place to live and choose from.

I highly suggest learning about your food - for your own welfare and even
that of others. Yet, I also highly suggest leaving any kind of shame,
comparison and justification out of the equation. Trust yourself to make
decisions based on solid information and not emotional bait. It's a saner
and more sustainable perspective - thoughtfully choosing your food rather
than morally identifying yourself with it.

Thanks for reading. What are you thoughts on the morality of food as it's
preached today?

www.marksdailyapple.com


-------

Don't you realize some of us eat when we are worried? Thanks for the added
worries.

On 5/14/2015 1:21 PM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Thursday, May 14, 2015 at 3:11:59 PM UTC-4, ImStillMags quoted:
>
>> Thanks for reading. What are you thoughts on the morality of food as it's preached today?
>>
>> www.marksdailyapple.com
>
> It's a quintessential First-World problem. Only we have the
> luxury of worrying about where our food came from; everybody
> else is worrying about where their next meal will come from.
>
>
> Cindy Hamilton
>
True dat.

But...since we do have a choice...why not go for ethically raised foods
and organic if possible?

On Thursday, May 14, 2015 at 4:23:22 PM UTC-4, W. Lohman wrote:
> On 5/14/2015 1:21 PM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > On Thursday, May 14, 2015 at 3:11:59 PM UTC-4, ImStillMags quoted:
> >
> >> Thanks for reading. What are you thoughts on the morality of food as it's preached today?
> >>
> >> www.marksdailyapple.com
> >
> > It's a quintessential First-World problem. Only we have the
> > luxury of worrying about where our food came from; everybody
> > else is worrying about where their next meal will come from.
> >
> >
> > Cindy Hamilton
> >
> True dat.
>
> But...since we do have a choice...why not go for ethically raised foods
> and organic if possible?

Because I don't care.

Here's where I peg the Narcissism Meter: my comfort and convenience
are of paramount importance.

Cindy Hamilton

On 5/14/2015 2:58 PM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Thursday, May 14, 2015 at 4:23:22 PM UTC-4, W. Lohman wrote:
>> On 5/14/2015 1:21 PM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>> On Thursday, May 14, 2015 at 3:11:59 PM UTC-4, ImStillMags quoted:
>>>
>>>> Thanks for reading. What are you thoughts on the morality of food as it's preached today?
>>>>
>>>> www.marksdailyapple.com
>>>
>>> It's a quintessential First-World problem. Only we have the
>>> luxury of worrying about where our food came from; everybody
>>> else is worrying about where their next meal will come from.
>>>
>>>
>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>
>> True dat.
>>
>> But...since we do have a choice...why not go for ethically raised foods
>> and organic if possible?
>
> Because I don't care.

Entirely your call!

> Here's where I peg the Narcissism Meter: my comfort and convenience
> are of paramount importance.
>
> Cindy Hamilton

Ut oh, watch out for Kuthe alert!

;-)

"Cabrito del Pendejo" socked up and trolled:

>Ut oh, watch out for Kuthe alert!

lol pendejo

On 5/14/2015 3:11 PM, Cabrito Pendejo wrote:
>
> "Cabrito del Pendejo" socked up and trolled:
>
>> Ut oh, watch out for Kuthe alert!
>
> lol pendejo
>
>
No mames.

On Thursday, May 14, 2015 at 5:29:16 PM UTC-7, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Thu, 14 May 2015 12:11:55 -0700 (PDT), ImStillMags wrote:
>
> > Thanks for reading. What are you thoughts on the morality of food as
> > it's preached today?
> >
> > www.marksdailypreaching.com
>
> I think it should be kept out of a cooking group. Cook and eat what
> you want, but do]'t go preaching to others about the morality of it.
> Shit like this is about as welcome as a pair of Jehova Witnesss
> knocking on doors on Saturday mornings.
>
> -sw

Who's preaching? Obviously you didn't read it. He looked at all the different ways others talk about the 'morality' of what we eat and basically said it's up to you. He wasn't preaching at all.

You are the only one here preaching about what should and should not be posted to this group.

It's about food.

This group is about food.

We talk all the time about what we do and don't eat.

So buzz off.

On 5/14/2015 6:29 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> I think it should be kept out of a cooking group.

So should you.

>> Omelet wrote:
>
>> He hates me 'cause I never slept with him...
>
> He hates himself because he is all he has to sleep with
> I don't know, sometimes he used to seem normal, then he went petty
> trough vindictive and now I just shun contact. I have enough crazies to
> deal with in my world without encouraging those who refuse to take their
> meds.

For the record, I never once even considered sleeping with you. And
you know that. You're the one who somehow got the idea that I was
going to move in with you - and you posted that to RFC just out of the
total blue.

After having met you twice at casual austin.food gatherings 2 or 3
years ago and not giving you any indication that there was any sort of
romantic interest in the least, you somehow twisted that into MY
MOVING IN WITH YOU?

That was just way too Psycho for me. I sat there at stared at the
screen for at least 15 minutes wondering, WTF? That was just way too
spooky. I've met weird, semi-psycho women before but you win, hands
down. Mapi of austin.general still holds the male title, but at least
he announced his psychosis right there lying on the floor of the bar
at B.D. Reilly's rather than romantically obsessing over me for 2
years.

Needless to say, you need to come to terms with what happened and why
your mind works that way and stop making up excuses for your fixation
and disappointment before we become the next Yoli and Michael. I'd
prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

And Jeremy, I was just tired of your decade of bullshit and visions of
grandeur about all these things you're "working on" or have not done
in the past. Even posting a call for meetings with imaginary people
about imaginary projects of yours at "the normal time and place", as
if you are somebody important with a life. I'm pretty sure you're
manic depressive mixed with habitual liar.

Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw

On 5/14/2015 7:39 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> Even better! <yawn>
>
> -sw

>> Omelet wrote:
>
>> He hates me 'cause I never slept with him...
>
> He hates himself because he is all he has to sleep with
> I don't know, sometimes he used to seem normal, then he went petty
> trough vindictive and now I just shun contact. I have enough crazies to
> deal with in my world without encouraging those who refuse to take their
> meds.

For the record, I never once even considered sleeping with you. And
you know that. You're the one who somehow got the idea that I was
going to move in with you - and you posted that to RFC just out of the
total blue.

After having met you twice at casual austin.food gatherings 2 or 3
years ago and not giving you any indication that there was any sort of
romantic interest in the least, you somehow twisted that into MY
MOVING IN WITH YOU?

That was just way too Psycho for me. I sat there at stared at the
screen for at least 15 minutes wondering, WTF? That was just way too
spooky. I've met weird, semi-psycho women before but you win, hands
down. Mapi of austin.general still holds the male title, but at least
he announced his psychosis right there lying on the floor of the bar
at B.D. Reilly's rather than romantically obsessing over me for 2
years.

Needless to say, you need to come to terms with what happened and why
your mind works that way and stop making up excuses for your fixation
and disappointment before we become the next Yoli and Michael. I'd
prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

And Jeremy, I was just tired of your decade of bullshit and visions of
grandeur about all these things you're "working on" or have not done
in the past. Even posting a call for meetings with imaginary people
about imaginary projects of yours at "the normal time and place", as
if you are somebody important with a life. I'm pretty sure you're
manic depressive mixed with habitual liar.

Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw

"ImStillMags" > wrote in message
news:bfb90313-dcba-401c-974d-

Thanks for reading. What are you thoughts on the morality of food as it's
preached today?

I don't listen to any of it, never have, never will.

Cheri

On Thursday, May 14, 2015 at 2:11:59 PM UTC-5, ImStillMags wrote:
>
>
> Unfortunately, if you scrutinize long and deep enough, just about any food choice can put you on the shame train. Seriously, at some point, we have to refuse to ride anymore.
>
If I were to take a newly born calf, and cut its throat, then quickly open its
chest so that I can take a bite of its still beating little heart, should I feel
shame?
>
--Bryan

On Friday, May 15, 2015 at 8:11:15 AM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:
> On Thu, 14 May 2015 13:58:41 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> > wrote:
>
> >On Thursday, May 14, 2015 at 4:23:22 PM UTC-4, W. Lohman wrote:
> >> On 5/14/2015 1:21 PM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> >> > On Thursday, May 14, 2015 at 3:11:59 PM UTC-4, ImStillMags quoted:
> >> >
> >> >> Thanks for reading. What are you thoughts on the morality of food as it's preached today?
> >> >>
> >> >> www.marksdailyapple.com
> >> >
> >> > It's a quintessential First-World problem. Only we have the
> >> > luxury of worrying about where our food came from; everybody
> >> > else is worrying about where their next meal will come from.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Cindy Hamilton
> >> >
> >> True dat.
> >>
> >> But...since we do have a choice...why not go for ethically raised foods
> >> and organic if possible?
> >
> >Because I don't care.
> >
> >Here's where I peg the Narcissism Meter: my comfort and convenience
> >are of paramount importance.
>
> Would you call yourself a sociopath?

No. I pretty much stick to the laws and norms of society. It's a
way of leading by example: I want everybody to play nice, so I do.

Besides, going to prison would be neither comfortable nor convenient.
And the food is atrocious (bringing it back on topic for RFC).

Cindy Hamilton

On 5/15/2015 5:59 AM, Bryan-TGWWW wrote:
> On Thursday, May 14, 2015 at 2:11:59 PM UTC-5, ImStillMags wrote:
>>
>>
>> Unfortunately, if you scrutinize long and deep enough, just about any food choice can put you on the shame train. Seriously, at some point, we have to refuse to ride anymore.
>>
> If I were to take a newly born calf, and cut its throat, then quickly open its
> chest so that I can take a bite of its still beating little heart, should I feel
> shame?
Are you doing it for blood lust or the purity of the kill?

Bryan-TGWWW wrote:
>
> On Thursday, May 14, 2015 at 2:11:59 PM UTC-5, ImStillMags wrote:
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately, if you scrutinize long and deep enough, just about any food choice can put you on the shame train. Seriously, at some point, we have to refuse to ride anymore.
> >
> If I were to take a newly born calf, and cut its throat, then quickly open its
> chest so that I can take a bite of its still beating little heart, should I feel
> shame?

Yes.