Ahead of the Times

It seems as though I was one step ahead of the New York Times yesterday when I posted about the image of Vegetarianism and Veganism throughout the country. Today's article, The Carrot Some Vegans Deplore, is about just that.

The article starts by discussing a vegan strip club in Portland, Oregon. The owner, a male vegan (or vegetarian... forgive me for not getting the facts perfect), decided to combine these two interests. He claimed that combining a very masculine place like a strip club with vegan food was a great way to introduce men to this healthy, conscientious lifestyle. Whether spreading veganism was actually his objective is unclear, but apparently the association between animal rights and women's rights is not a new one. The article referenced many other examples of women's bodies being exploited to highlight animal rights, or on the other side, women leading a vegetarian lifestyle in order to highlight their personal struggle. The article did mention and have quotes from the authors of Skinny Bitch, and discussed the ways in which this and other popular vegan items contributed to the gender discussion around this lifestyle.

Overall, I'm not sure the article gave many answers to the questions that I brought up in my post. It did, however, say a lot of the same things. Exposure, even if it comes in the form of extreme ranting or attached to sexually attractive women, is a good thing. If you buy into that, you could argue that the vegan lifestyle gets a disproportionally high level of exposure for the very small percentage of Americans who actually call themselves vegan. On the other hand, many of these issues of fairness and appropriate treatment (whether for men, women, people of color, or animals) should be closely linked in our minds, shouldn't they? Should PETA really sell their message by attaching it to a picture of an attractive, half naked woman?

At least now the NY Times has weighed in on the subject.

Skinny Bitch

I've had Skinny Bitch on my Amazon wish list for a little while now. I knew that this was a "diet" book that ultimately argued the value of the vegan lifestyle. I knew that the authors wrote the book in a very harsh, "stop eating shit, fat-ass" type of tone... but I was looking for some solid philosophical reasons to give up all animal products. I didn't buy the book but I did spend a very enjoyable afternoon at Border's as I was playing hooky this week. I picked a sunny seat by the window, got some tea and read a big chunk of Skinny Bitch. I have to say, I'm glad I didn't spend the $13 to actually own a copy of this book.

I have read a number of blog entries that address the way vegetarianism and veganism are perceived among the omnivores of the world. These slightly extreme subsets of the population can be stereotyped as radical, throw red paint on fur coats, scoff at diners who partake in meat, type of people. Obviously, this is not the case and can lead to the general population to having a negative impression of a healthy, conscientious lifestyle. I felt like the book, Skinny Bitch, through exaggerations, a very harsh tone, and detailed descriptions of animal cruelty, contributed to the negative image of vegetarianism and veganism instead of aiding the cause. Does it really serve a purpose to tell people they're stupid for eating cheese? Wouldn't it be more beneficial to discuss the issues?

I'm sure a number of people are reading this and thinking, "You just don't get it," so lets look at the other side. This is a book about veganism that is hugely popular. Awesome. That's definitely something. Additionally, how many picked up this witty, comedic book and read it because of the entertaining tone... even though they might have been scared by the content had it been presented in a different manner? I'm sure there are A LOT of readers who fall into this category, meaning the tone of the book reached more people than my boring philosophical discussion ever would. I suppose we could refer to this as the Michael Moore presentation advantage, yes? Obviously this book has some positive things to offer the food/health community... I'm just not totally convinced that the net effect is a positive one.

The entertainment factor

I've never wanted to be a salesman. I don't really have the patience or the motivation to try and convince people that they need something or that they want to do something. I prefer to adopt a general, "Do what you want..." type of attitude. I was, however, very interested in education. I love reading, writing, thinking, and discussing; sharing that with others seemed like a great idea. I didn't realize how much of a salesman I would have to be in order to be a good teacher. In order to "be a good teacher" and reach the majority of my students, I must continually convince them that they want to do this. I must "sell" education to them. I hate this.

While writing my senior thesis on the economics of education from contending perspectives, I got into a lot of educational philosophy (I love how close economics and philosophy can get at times!). One very influential book that my adviser pointed me toward was Why Read by Mark Edmundson. In this book Edmundson talks about his experiences as a college professor. Specifically, he discusses the way students evaluate classes. Many students today expect education to be engaging and entertaining... and they expect teachers or professors to orchestrate the course in a way that accomplishes this. I run into it in my classroom everyday and I certainly remember those expectations in college as well. Teachers and professors are supposed to make education entertaining... because, seriously, what's the point if it's not enjoyable? (Sarcasm... hope you can pick up on it!) The New York Times has an article today that brushes on a lot of these same thoughts. The Professor as Open Book .

One of my favorite quotes comes from John Dewey (I know... not original at all for an educator to be quoting Dewey... give me a break), "Education has no end beyond itself; it is its own end." I truly believe that true education is engaging, inspiring, and it's hard work that offers an intrinsic reward. It's not entertaining and enjoyable because the professor is funny or the teacher brings in manipulatives every day... it's amazing because it changes the person that you are and that's fulfilling. Here's the issue though...Why can some people feel it and others need engaging instructors to sell it to them? And... if I hate the entertainment factor while teaching on the high school level... will I hate it while working on the college level? Finally, is this a result of our culture... entertainment all the time... or is it just a natural division within the population, some people are nerds and others aren't?

To me writing, reading, thinking, and discussing are REAL SUSTENANCE. Now I need to figure out what to do with that.

Acceptance of food restrictions

A woman with celiac's disease goes into a restaurant to eat and explains that she needs a gluten free meal. She orders a salad without crutons and explains how sensitive she is to food that is cross contaminated with gluten... but the overworked, slightly annoyed waiter with tired feet just goes back to the kitchen and picks up a pre-made salad, tossing the crutons into the trash on the way back to the table. The woman eats this "gluton free" salad and breaks out in a rash later that night.

A man who has chosen to follow a strictly vegan diet because of his political and moral beliefs is invited to celebrate his grandfather's birthday at a local steak house. The man calls ahead, explains his dietary preferences, and asks the restaurant if they can accommodate him. The restaurant understands and wanting to increase business agrees to do what they can. The night of the celebration the vegan man arrives, introduces himself to the waitress and is greeted with annoyance and irritation. The chef had to go out of her way and the waitress is bothered by "picky" customers. The man is served cold food and treated poorly because he was "difficult."

In both of these situations the diner has a difficult time eating in a restaurant, and the restaurant staff is annoyed by the specific requests and added hassle of meeting the diner's needs. The difference is that the first situation involves an innate dietary restriction while the second one is a chosen lifestyle. The question is... is there a difference? Should people who choose to restrict their diet based on different belief systems have a harder time doing that than people who are required to eat differently than the majority of the population?

Personal anecdotes:

I ate at my favorite brewery recently and I wanted to share the chili cheese fries with my brother who was visiting from out of town (for all you non-New Mexicans - chili cheese fries out here have a green chili pepper sauce on them, not the red bean and beef sauce that other parts of the country call chili). I know that most places make their chili sauce with a little bit of pork so I asked if the brewery had any vegetarian chili sauces. They didn't, but the waitress was super friendly, talked to the kitchen, and came back with a few suggestions that worked out very nicely. The vegetarian "chili" fries were quite tasty. Even though my dietary restrictions are voluntary, in this case I felt they were respected.

On the other hand... I was recently invited to an Easter dinner with a close friend and his family. I made sure that my friend let his family know that I was a vegetarian in advance and I offered to bring something to contribute to the meal. The situation seemed ok, but I received an email about the menu where my friend felt the need to inform me that the meat was really going to be very high quality, free range, natural meat. When I replied saying that I was indeed going to be eating vegetarian, he seemed surprised. I don't tell this story to pick on my friend or insinuate that he was being insensitive - I know he had valid reasons for giving me this information and questioning what I would do - but this situation does make it clear that there is a difference between how chosen diets are perceived versus compulsory ones. My friend never would have asked his uncle, who has a gluten allergy, if he was absolutely sure he didn't want any of the delicious bread.

The question becomes, should there be a difference in how dietary restrictions are accepted and respected? Does it make a difference if it is chosen versus innate? Am I more responsible for the inconvenience my vegetarianism causes because I chose it... or should my choice be respected as a black and white, no-meat type of issue?

I'm sure that we can think of some parallels to draw in this situation. We'll come back to these questions.

Unconscious Cooking

On the I Can Make you Thin program that I watched yesterday... one of the points that Paul McKenna tried to reference repeatedly was that people should eat consciously. This meant that they should pay close attention to how the food actually tasted (this makes sense as many fast food meals are strategically designed to trick our senses into thinking they taste better than they actually do) and to eat very slowly and deliberately. By "eating consciously" you are less likely to overeat and more likely to hear the signals from your body telling you that you've had enough. I totally buy into this. I also enjoy meals a whole lot more when I put my knife and fork down and take the time to enjoy the setting and the company... anyway...

Today I was going about my business. I ate a dinner of leftovers... it was ok. I had a rough day and I was still feeling hungry so I decided to make a yummy desert. I pulled out a bowl, started with plain low-fat yogurt and the remaining canned pumpkin from my fridge. I added some honey and a handful of dark chocolate chips. To finish it off I grabbed a small spice container that I thought had been left on the counter from making my oatmeal this morning - I thought it was pumpkin pie spice. Yummy cinamon, allspice, and cloves... perfect. I was wrong. It was the garlic powder that I left on the counter after making popcorn last night. Damn it! I had a beautiful bowl of pumpkin yogurt with honey and chocolate chips and I sprinkled garlic powder all over it. In an attempt to salvage the desert I found the pumpkin pie spice, added some and mixed it all up hoping that the garlic wouldn't be that noticeable. That didn't work. Bummer.

Desert yogurt number one got dumped in the trash while I toasted some bananas, honey, and a few more chocolate chips for desert yogurt number two. I left the garlic powder out of this version.

So much for unconscious eating... beware of unconscious cooking!

I can make you thin!

I don't know why, but I'm obsessed with weight loss. I think unpacking this obsession is going to take more than one post, so lets think of this as the first chapter in a continuing discussion. Personally... I guess I've always been attracted to a challenge. As a kid I wanted to get addicted to cigarettes just so I could be strong and show everyone that I could quit (I swear I truly remember having these thoughts on a regular basis). I still see a lot of evidence of this attraction to challenges in my life right now. For example, unlike many women I find myself slightly more attracted to men whom I have to chase. I'm turned off when men are too easily "won." But anyway, I'm aware of this romanticized idea I have of challenging situations... which can easily be applied to weight loss. My first instinct is that successful weight loss is a result of perseverance, willpower, and strength of character... and I'm well aware that the flip side of this statement involves blaming unsuccessful weight loss on weakness and a few other undesirable characteristics. I need to examine this, however, because there are a variety of factors that influence this view.

Personally... I have always been thin but in the last year I have lost about 20 pounds and am keeping it off quite easily (I actually lost a few more pounds accidentally since becoming a vegetarian... oops). But, I am proud of my body and my health; I feel like it is something I have worked for and accomplished. I don't want anyone to look down on that accomplishment as nothing special just because I had "thin / active" genes to start with. This is an initial, almost defensive reaction. On the other hand, I have no idea what it's like to really struggle with my weight. (My 20 pound weight loss brought me from 137 to 117... both of which are well within the healthy range for my 5'6 frame). My parents and my brother are all thin, healthy, and quite active. I can look around me and confidently say that the chances of me ever being overweight are slim to none. The moral of my personal story is that I don't want choices, will-power, and strength of character to be written off as contributing to health or obesity... but I also have no clue how much of my personal experience can be related to what others experience.

The inspiration for this reflection came from a television program that I taped the other night (because... as I said... I'm obsessed with weight loss) called I can make you thin. This show featured a British man named Paul McKenna who continually boasted that he had the golden rules for simple, permanent weight loss. I did like the rules that McKenna suggested because they seemed to be encouraging people to eat more consciously and enjoy their eating experience more. I believe that both of these are very important in order to have a healthy relationship with food. The thing that kept getting to me was how he reiterated how easy his program would be. He also told the audience over and over again that it was not their fault they were overweight. Is this the most productive way to think of the obesity epidemic? There's a quick fix out there and individuals really don't play any role in the epidemic... everyone is just a victim? I don't know.

Where's the line between crazy Mississipi legislation that makes it ok to discriminate against people to encourage them to loose weight (ultimately trying to emphasize personal responsibility for weight loss) and telling people who are overweight that they are not at fault and have just been innocent victims for years? Neither seem to be productive approaches to me, but where's the happy medium?

The convenience factor

Well... I took a few minutes and wrote the last post about shopping for the girls' track team. I did eventually find a grocery store that accepted the credit card I had and I got so excited to run around the store and fill my cart with lots of good things. I was able to pick up a ton of fruit as well as wheat bread, peanut butter, jelly, and granola bars. I really felt accomplished and felt as thought I was doing something positive for the students in a variety of different ways. First, they would be able to compete better because their stomachs wouldn't be filled with greasy burgers. Second, in a community that is so hard hit by the obesity / diabetes epidemic, I feel as though even the smallest opportunities to model and teach healthy habits are helpful. Plus, of course, healthy food is something I'm passionate about and sharing that feels great.

The kids seemed generally appreciative of the food choices. Especially the fruit. The girls loved the grapes, the apples and the oranges disappeared pretty quickly, and there were a few mumblings about a lack of bananas... good to know... I'll add them to the list. The sandwiches, however, were not a hit. Everyone liked the idea of peanut butter and jelly (some liked the idea of one without the other, you know how it goes...) but because they actually had to assemble their own sandwiches... NOBODY ATE ANYTHING! I was pretty shocked. There were kids who were really hungry by the end of the day and I guarantee that if there had been a cooler full of pre-made PB&J everyone would have gone to town on it. Instead they didn't eat any of it... too much work to make their own sandwich.

I guess I shouldn't have been that surprised, I did just finish reading Mindless Eating by Brian Wansink. Clearly, the choices that people make are not always rational, but how do you combat those choices? For example, one could argue that to truly feed yourself a healthy diet, you need to cook. Cooking involves time, work, energy, and... doing the dishes (EEK!). But people are lazy and the many will make their choices based on convenience rather than logic. Does that mean that the new single serving, microwaveable veggies are the best way to convince people to eat healthier? Would a fast food restaraunt that serves "rabbit food" in a quick, convenient way profit and improve America's health?

I don't know. Next time I'm going to recruit some of the free manual labor that I have at my disposal (aka my students) to make up sandwiches in advance.

The world I live in

I am currently the head girls track coach of the high school at which I teach. This is the first year I've been "in charge" and so far it's been a blast... a stressful blast... but a blast nonetheless. I am trying to change a number of things about the team so that all the girls have a better experience and really enjoy the season. In the past, during meets, the girls have been given double cheeseburgers, fries, and sodas... for lunch... in the middle of a meet. This is a huge problem and I don't want to teach these girls that it's ok for athletes to eat like that! In an effort to make better nutritional use of the team's allotted food money, I took a survey this week of acceptable, healthy snacks, and drove the 60 miles into town last night to pick up food for Saturday's meet.

I was shopping for 40 athletes and had a good budget so I definitely enjoyed myself. I pushed the cart around the store for an hour filling it with apples, oranges, bananas, peanut butter, jelly, whole wheat bread, string cheese, and a couple cases of gatorade. I wheeled my haul up to the front of the store with pride... my team was going to be very well fueled this week... but then ran into a big problem. The store did not accept the team's credit card; our school district hasn't been paying its bills so we won't be able to get food this week.

One would think I might have gotten upset at this, but my colleague (who had come along for the shopping extravaganza) and I couldn't do anything but laugh... We weren't surprised, this is just a normal occurrence when one works in a severely underfunded, slightly corrupt school district. We both bought ourselves a bottle of red wine (using our personal credit cards which were happily accepted) and chuckled in amazement as the poor store clerk began re-shelving my track team's would-be lunch.

I've been told that the Navajo grocery store will still accept the cards. That chain tends to have a much smaller selection of produce and healthy items but I will venture over there today in hopes of finding a way to feed my team something other than double cheeseburgers, fries, and soda.

I can't help but think that this is one of the big reasons why obesity is so rampant in low-income communities... it's not easy to eat healthfully when you're running into these problems on a regular basis.

Smorgasboard of Links

This has been a great week for interesting little articles about nutrition and food culture in the US. This post is dedicated to pointing a few of the highlights out. If you're sitting at work and you're board, I highly recommend these articles. (I suppose I would recommend them even if you're not bored and you're not at work... but who really reads blogs when they have something better to do?? ha!)

Tear Up the White House Lawn!
This comes from TakePart.org... a neat site that has articles on a ton of different topics. In this article they suggest that the next president should tear up the White House lawn and plant a garden in order to set a better example for Americans. Gardening, after all, not only encourages people to eat their fruits and veggies but it also forces people to get outside and get active. I would love a president with a green thumb, but could it ever happen? Would the large veggie corporations in California and Florida send hit men to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and replace a strawberry patch with a neatly packaged container of organic spinach? I don't know...

Explosive Truth about Twinkies
This article, also originally posted on TakePart.org but the link is from the repost on EatingLiberally.org, talks about the book by Steve Ettlinger called Twinkie, Deconstructed. It also has a great You Tube clip of a 1960 Twinkie commercial in which a mom talks about how important it is to serve the children Twinkies. "They're only young once!" she says... I thought this was really interesting especially after reading the chapter in Wansink's book about comfort food and where we develop certain predilections towards snacks, desserts, or entrees.

Free Lunch
This article is from the New York Times this week and is can be tied into my last post on conspicuous consumption and how it affects food choices. In the article they talk about how many students who receive free lunch do not eat it because they don't want to be seen eating it. Free Lunch is not cool. This makes perfect sense. Certain food is seen as a status symbol so despite the fact that these students may be hungry, they will pass. Very interesting.

Quest for Local produce

There was a great article on the times last Saturday that I just got around to reading. It's written by a Midwestern vegetable farmer who shares some of the troubles he has had with government restrictions on what he can grow and where. He claims that the demand for local produce is on the rise but the government and the farm bill are heavily influenced by the large vegetable companies in California and Florida; therefore, laws are stacked against local vegetable farmers. This is why it's so hard to become a member of certain CSAs. Demand is much higher than farmers are allowed to supply.

Anyway... check out the article. My Forbidden Fruits (and Vegetables)

Wine Snobs and Conspicuous Consumption

Currently I am reading two books. The first one I started is Appetite for Profit by Michele Simon. While I tend to agree with much of what Simon discusses in the book, I am having a hard time getting through it because the organization is too S for my tastes (according to multiple Myers-Briggs tests I am a very strong N... not a surprise to anyone who has had a real conversation with me) and I feel that she is repeating the same argument over and over again. Corporations cannot be trusted to do anything in the interest of public health because they are more concerned with profit. I get that. But anyway... because of great recommendations I plan to continue through Simon's book... but while I do that I decided to start Brian Wansink's Mindless Eating.

First, a little background, Wansink is currently a professor of consumer behavior at Cornell University. This specialization has him dabbling in the fields of Economics, Behavioral Psychology, Business, and a variety of other fascinating subjects. (He also just happens to be a professor in the Applied Econ program that keeps floating around in the back of my head as a possibility here soon...) But, Wansink conducts experiments at his Food and Brand Lab where he tries to figure out how different environmental factors influence what and how much we eat. Mindless Eating is a great book for anyone who is trying to lose weight, because it points out a number of unhealthy habits we have. Eat on smaller plates. Eat slowly. Create a positive atmosphere. Replace short fat drinking glasses with tall skinny ones. All of these can be used to effectively trim calories from your daily consumption. More than just a diet book, however, it is very interesting and slightly depressing to realize vulnerable our food choices are to environmental factors. I also love the fact that this book applies quantitative, scientific analysis to our food choices.

I just finished reading a chapter entitled "Name Game." Wansink talks about how our enjoyment of food is shaped significantly before we taste it by the name of the menu item or the label on the bottle of wine. He provides a number of references to support this claim. He ends up talking about wines, citing the fact that very few people can actually distinguish good wine from great wine, and most choose a bottle by first choosing a price range. "Well, this is a nice party and she's a good friend so I should spend about $15 on the bottle of wine I bring..." As often as I am currently surrounded by people who talk as if they could distinguish a California Merlot from a Chilean Cabernet... I'm not so sure they could. I'm not ignorant when it comes to wine, but I know my palette cannot make that distinction. Wansink brings this point up and argues that the enjoyment is influenced by expectations, but another big red wine flag went up for me as I was reading this part.

How closely can Veblen's theory of conspicuous consumption be applied to our eating decisions? (For a quick, game theory enhanced overview of this theory check out my college project Conspicuous Consumption, I would also highly recommend reading up on the "Special Applications" at the bottom of the page!) Isn't choosing the wine to bring to a party based on price an example of someone who is trying to consume in order to fit into a certain social group? Wansink also discusses how eating in groups tends to encourage both heavy eaters and light eaters to forgo their extreme habits and mirror the habits of the group (discussed in "Mindless Eating Scripts" page 96). Another example in which people are literally consuming in a way that helps them attain a certain status or acceptance. This is exactly what Veblen was referring to except food consumption actually goes into your body as opposed to consumption of clothes, vehicles, or houses which just goes around it.

I have little doubt that these conspicuous consumption ideas can be applied to wine snobs, organic eaters, vegetarians, locavores, or a variety of other high end labels that people define themselves with. We may not readily admit it, but there is a level of pride and belonging when one chooses to shop at Trader Joe's every week or decides to order the garden burger instead of the prime rib sandwich. But I'm not sure one could apply this idea as easily to the populations who struggle with obesity. Does a young man of color choose to gorge on Whoppers and fries and become obese because he wants to identify with a certain social group? I don't know. I suppose I just need to do more research to see how Veblen addresses those at the other end of the conspicuous consumption spectrum.