Puritanical attitude towards food?

[PetraG]

I don’t hear him getting “worked up” about it; he’s simply pointing out a valid observation. Language does reflect cultural attitudes, and it’s indeed interesting that we seemed to have attached moral codes and virtue values to a biological necessity.

Fair enough.
I think his most valid concern is that there is a glamour associated with sin. I mean the implication in advertising that when something is “sinful” or “naughty,” that implies that it is better. That doesn’t mean that rich desserts are sinful, per se, but I’m getting his other concern: that is, the concern with the idea that “Sin Sells.”

The other concern, that is that all self-denial is automatically good self-denial–that is, the idea that if you choose a salad instead of a heavier meal, you are being “good”–is another very reasonable concern. We live in a time where people are inclined to take ideas too far. (I think someone has quipped that it is a tough age in which to do satire, LOL.)

 

[redbetta]

Not specifically Christians, but wider secular culture is very Puritanical when it comes to food. For whatever reason, people find it easier to accept that the idea that cutting out this or that will solve all their problems as opposed to enjoying everything in moderation. You’d think the latter would be easier because you are not missing out on anything. But, no, keep blaming the gluten while inhaling that 3rd pint of ice cream.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

I don’t hear him getting “worked up” about it; he’s simply pointing out a valid observation. Language does reflect cultural attitudes, and it’s indeed interesting that we seemed to have attached moral codes and virtue values to a biological necessity.

I didn’t have in mind the “glamour” aspect, but that could be part of it too. I had in mind that, from a Catholic standpoint, it is no sin whatsoever to enjoy something, even if that “something” gives you intense pleasure — as truly delicious food does — as long as the pleasurable thing is not sinful.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

The other concern, that is that all self-denial is automatically good self-denial

My concern is that self-denial is always bad, or at least that’s the only part that’s brought up when the subject is mentioned.

 

[PetraG]

But, no, keep blaming the gluten while inhaling that 3rd pint of ice cream.

That is the other problematic idea: that is, that something that is unquestionably bad for some people must therefore be at least somewhat bad for everyone. No, it doesn’t work like that! It’s great that they’re making the food packaging and food manufacturing careful enough that the gluten-intolerant and other people with serious food intolerances or allergies can shop at a normal store or eat at a typical restaurant, but that doesn’t mean that avoiding gluten is at all important for people who tolerate it just fine or that everything gluten-free must somehow be “healthier” than things that are not gluten-free.

 

[blackforest]

The other concern, that is that all self-denial is automatically good self-denial–that is, the idea that if you choose a salad instead of a heavier meal, you are being “good”–is another very reasonable concern. We live in a time where people are inclined to take ideas too far.

Indeed. “Too far” all too often manifests itself as an eating disorder.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

On the lighter side, the McRib is back. I had one for lunch today, got the meal. I had the Diet Coke and I gave the fries to my son. Life is good again.

McDonalds’ cultural sensitivity in not bringing this back during Lent is much appreciated.

McDonald’s is bringing the McRib back next week