Hugo Schwyzer wrote a post about veganism and feminism that I found really frustrating. The point he is exploring is an interesting one – as a vegan who once had an eating disorder he is noting the similarities between the two:
The funny thing is that being strictly vegan (off honey entirely) means that I am more attentive to what I eat than at any time in my life since I was crash dieting fifteen years ago.
But, his perspective is extremely limited as he seems to see eating disorders primarily in terms of body image:
Back then, I counted calories and fat grams obsessively. Today, I largely ignore fat and calorie information and read to make sure that what I’m eating is entirely plant-based and devoid of hidden dairy or egg traces. (Damn that sneaky caseinate!) I’m once again radically concerned with everything that goes into my mouth — but for a radically different reason.
Eating disorders are not just about reasons, they’re not just about appearances, they’re often also about morality and control. Hugo doesn’t acknowledge that veganism can feed the food/control/morality connection, which is central to an eating disordered mindset. For someone with a tendency to trying to exert control through self-denial of food (which is rarely a small percentage of a female population), any language around veganism which emphasises self-control and morality is going to make things worse. I guess I’ve more experience of this than most; I’ve spent a lot of time in a scene where there are quite a few vegans and lots of young women. I’ve despaired every which way at the policing and limiting which young women do to each other can happen take on a radical hue, and still be just as damaging.
I don’t know if Hugo has tried to think about veganism in a different way (Stetnor suggests one). But I know that a restricted diet doesn’t mean that you have to control what you eat. I realised a couple of years ago that I was severely allergic to dairy products. I have to read the label. There are dairy products in most brands of some really basic products (bread and margarine, for example). If someone offers me food, then I don’t eat it unless I know it’s dairy free.
I don’t talk about, think about, or experience this as controlling what I eat. I didn’t know that I’d be able to avoid this dangerous thought pattern; I wasn’t even sure I could cut dairy out entirely. I was surprised at how easy as it was. Dairy products are not an option, in the same way foods I don’t like are not an option. Sure I miss them – other people’s cheesy food smells divine, but it’s not self-control that stops me from eating them. Avoiding dairy products is a choice I’ve made.
I’ve had to be incredibly protective of myself in all this: I’ve corrected people who say I’m not ‘allowed’ something, when people describe dairy products as if they were disgusting I’m likely to sing their praises. In order to maintain this as a choice, I have to avoid anything that sounds like moralism.
I’m sure it’s much easier for me than people with other food restrictions. My symptoms mean that I have every reason to avoid dairy products. But I don’t actually need the threat. Most of the time I don’t think “Wow that cheese looks yummy, but if I eat it I’ll feel ill and end the night crying on Betsy’s couch about much I hate my life.”* I think “What shall I eat?”
Even if I experienced every piece of cheese I didn’t eat as a massive battle for control, I’d be very careful never to talk about food and control. As a feminist, in the society I live in, my first goal when talking about food with people I know has to be to avoid reinforcing or triggering eating disordered thought patterns. I can have all sorts of conversations about food, but I need to have them in ways that won’t make other women’s eating disorders worse.
I think the way Hugo talks about veganism fails that basic test.
* Then after about half an hour of my whining at her she’d say “Could this be because you ate dairy products?”
I don’t know about this. Unless it’s for some dietary reason, few people are likely to chose to become vegans unless it’s for ethical reasons. It’s just so difficult in our society, that no-one would chose to otherwise.
I’m vegetarian, absolutely for moral reasons. But I don’t think of it constantly, or constantly pine for meat. Like you say, meat is now just one of those things I don’t and won’t eat. Like mayoinaise. Or brown sauce. I don’t spare it two seconds thought. Of course, it’s a lot easier to be vegetarian than vegan. I can eat in almost any restaurant, for example. But, still. I doubt you’ll find many vegans who won’t talk to you about the morality of what they’re doing. It’s the whole point.
Jess, I think Maia’s talking about language that reinforces the morality of “self-control,” not the morality of choosing to be vegan. It’s one thing to say, “I believe it’s immoral to eat animal products, so I don’t.” It’s another thing to talk about good food and bad food, obsess over everything you put in your mouth, and–most importantly–encourage other people to obsess over everything they put in their mouths.
Obviously, when you believe that some food is morally acceptable and some food isn’t, there’s some unavoidable overlap there–but I think it’s important for vegetarians and vegans, as compassionate people, to be aware that for people who have eating disorders (or are prone to developing them), moralizing about food is always a slippery slope–whether it’s based on calories or animal products.
I think there must be ways to promote vegetarianism without using language or encouraging behaviors that are likely to trigger people with eating disorders, but right now, I see a lot of what Maia sees, and it worries me.
Great post, Maia.
I find Hugo’s blog triggering on a number of fronts. I no longer visit there.
Maia, you’re right that restricted diet =/= controlled eating. I mentioned my partner, who’s severely allergic to wheat and dairy and a number of other things in one of the threads at Hugo’s, and whilst he did (caveat: this is my interpretation of his descriptions, though we’ve talked about it) go through a controlling sort of phase (though this had much to do with the severe lack of options back when he first figured out his allergies which meant that he had to be careful that was was eating enough), as he got older, and as his options opened up much more, he’s pretty well adjusted in terms of food stuff.
I generally don’t talk about food and control (or food in particularly moral terms), but, if anyone feels comfortable elaborating, are there any other kinds of talk about food and such that are likely to trigger or reinforce eating disordered thought patterns?
(Long-time lurker poking head above the parapet.)
Reading this, I had a sudden realisation. I have several severe food allergies, including anaphylactic reactions to peanuts. I’ve never before linked the controlling of my food because of the allergies with my eating disorders, but the two things are couched in very similar rhetoric. You are told by doctors that you must be very careful about what you eat, that you can’t ‘give in to temptation’ and eat chocolate (because it might have nut traces); you have to know very specific details about your food, spend time quizzing chefs if you’re lucky enough to be able to afford to eat out (no eating in restaurants where the food is pre-prepared, because of cross-contamination), and often refuse invitations to dinner. There is a sense that food is dangerous, because it genuinely is; it’s lifethreatening. The ‘May contain nut traces’ labels don’t ease the anxiety.
Is it possible that allergy and food sensitivity treatments feed into this idea that food and the body are constantly at odds? It seems that most of the messages given to me during allergy testing and treatment have been very similar to some of the messages that underlie and trigger eating disorders. Is there a way of framing treatment so that it’s empowering rather than limiting?
I hear you, Maia — and yet, from an animal rights standpoint, food is a fundamentally moral issue in the same way that buying sweatshop free clothes is a moral issue. I hear that it is easy to have veganism become a sort of socially acceptable front for an eating disorder. At the same time, upon what else does the salvation of the animals rest if it is not our own self-control?
Hugo, I try very hard not to feel guilty for eating meat* – well, the meat I am not allergic to, anyway. I am eating in order to survive. A vegan diet is impossible for me, for both physical and economic reasons. The implication that my ‘self-control’ is at fault is both triggering for my eating disorders and laughably inaccurate, given my allergies.
However, even if I could follow a vegan diet, I would not. I do not have a problem with eating animals that have been well treated. I do not believe that animals are in particular need of salvation, at least as I understand the term. (Freedom from mistreatment? Yes. Salvation? No.) You eat what you want, but please, don’t judge the choices of others without at the very least acknowledging that their belief systems, ideas and morality (not to mention the limits placed on their chocies) may be very different to yours. When people appoint themselves as moral arbiters of food choices, whether they are criticising fat people for eating chocolate or omnivores for eating meat, one end result is that people feel guilt for eating ‘bad’ things; this is triggering for people with experience of eating disorders in particular.
* I should note: I try very hard not to feel guilty for eating. At all.
This “good/bad” thinking is why, after reading up on the South Beach approach to healthy eating, my husband has easily and happily dropped his potato chip habit, taken up making salads daily, and is steadily dropping excess weight, while I am still STRUGGLING and fighting with myself over too many of my choices. This is a timely post for me, a reminder that I’m not doing myself any favours by investing emotional energy in simple choices.
My group of friends is very supportive, and lacks the bitchy image-obsession I have seen in a lot of other groups of women, but a couple of them are worryingly (to me) obsessive over food choices (theirs, not anyone elses) and sometimes I get burned out hearing to how “good” someone has been this week, or how much harder she’ll have to work to make up for being “bad” this weekend.
I don’t know about this. Unless it’s for some dietary reason, few people are likely to chose to become vegans unless it’s for ethical reasons.
Actually, a lot of people with EDs become vegan because it’s another way to control eating and because it’s more socially acceptable to be vegan than to be anorexic. If a person eats only salad during a social dinner, someone will nearly always ask, “Why are you eating only salad? Aren’t you still HUNGRY?” If the person says, “I’m vegan,” then questions usually relate only to veganism, but if the person gives any other answer, some rude asshole will accuse them of having an eating disorder and then everyone at the table will jump on the “omg you’re skinny you should eat blah blah!” bandwagon. Not that I have a huge pet peeve against this or anything ;)
A lot of eating disorder websites even list “becoming vegetarian or vegan” as a possible indicator of an eating disorder. That alone is obviously not a sign of an eating disorder, but it can be an indicator if there are other symptoms. It shows that a person is interested in controlling what they eat, and this is what EDs are all about.
*Before anyone freaks out, I am not saying that all vegetarians have EDs. I am a vegetarian, my boyfriend is a vegetarian, and many of my friends are vegetarians, and I know plenty of ED sufferers who aren’t vegetarian/vegan as well.
Well, given that Hugo’s whole mentality seems to revolve around the supremely-good moral status of restriction and self-control (a sort of extreme version of “everything in moderation”), I can’t say as this piece of his surprises me. It would also explain his reluctance or inability to try looking at it from a different perspective; if it loses its supremely good moral status, it isn’t worth pursuing to him.
I just want to get a couple of my thoughts out there…
Maia’s post about thinking about food in a way that’s “appropriately” feminist makes it hard to reconcile that with thinking about food from an anti-corporate/anti-industrial perspective. To do this, you have to think about where food came from, who benefited and who was hurt by its being made, and its impact on the environment. Some foods are inevitably going to end up being “bad.”
Unrelated: Maybe lack of self-control is a reason that people eat…but that doesn’t mean that it’s a bad thing. Why is lack of “self-control” a moral issue? I don’t think it is. I see it as a natural way to interact with your environment. You see something yummy, you eat it. It’s a strategy that serves many species extremely well.
Also, I have been known to say that eating in our society is inherently disordered because it is *always* controlled. Just that it’s usually controlled by corporations and advertising instead of stable cultural practices.
Kate – exactly – you can believe food is a moral issue and still not talk about it in a way that triggers eating disordered patterns. There’s no need for ‘good’, ‘bad’ or ‘disgusting’ to describe food or the people who eat it.
mazaru – that’s a really interesting point – I discovered that I was allergic to dairy products by myself, after I’d left home. So I didn’t have anyone else creating the thought patterns about my allergies.
Hugo – I’m not sure I can help you about how to answer your questions, because we disagree on some really fundamental issues:
1. I have slightly less than no interest in animal rights
2. I don’t think that an individual’s consumer choices are ever effective
3. My politics is about collectivism, not individualism, and so individual morality rarely comes into my idea of political action.
What I am saying to you is that I think the way you talk about veganism will promote eating disorders. Not just that veganism can be part of an eating disorder. The specific way you talk about veganism promotes eating disordered thinking. You do it in this very thread when you say that the fate of the animals rest on our self-control. Just like I don’t need any self-control to avoid eating dairy products – I don’t see why vegans need self-control to avoid eating animal products. I think it is easy to frame it is a matter of choice rather than a matter of control.
Outlier – I think we can have all sorts of discussion . But, as I said to Hugo, I don’t believe we can change the world by changing what we consume. So while I think it’s important to analyse food and the political meanings it is given, I don’t think that analysis should mean avoiding it (where this is done individually – I observe boycotts and don’t cross picket-lines of course).
I did blog a response at my place. This, Maia, is indicative of a colossal ideological and practical gulf between us:
But, as I said to Hugo, I don’t believe we can change the world by changing what we consume.
I do believe fervently in individual transformation as a prerequisite for creating a just society. And we begin not so much with collective action as with personal change. That’s what makes me a liberal, and you — if I am right — a radical. It’s an old divide in feminism, after all.
I think it’s more about individualism vs. collectivism, but I acknowledged the difference.
Those massive differences are the reason I can’t tell you how to express your politics in a way that doesn’t promote eating disorders. I’m not interested enough in your politics, and don’t agree enough with the premises to rephrase what you say.
But I believe it can be done, and I believe you should do it. If you can’t or don’t want to, I think you should be straight up about it. Acknowledge that the way you talk about food promotes eating disorders, but that you think being an evangelical vegan is more important than not triggering those around you with eating disorders.
I can see what you mean, but I try to make the distinction between “I am eating a bad food” and “By buying this food, I am participating in a chain of events that includes things I would not normally support, but that I did not cause”. It’s a fine distinction, but by thinking the latter rather than the former, I’m blaming the companies that cause the problem and not myself. It isn’t that the food itself is bad – I don’t believe that eating a bacon sandwich is fundamentally immoral – it’s that the effects of the production are bad.
“Hugo doesn’t acknowledge that veganism can feed the food/control/morality connection”
Oh, for god’s sake: ANY pattern of eating can feed the food/control/morality connection–including living off junk food till you feel sick out of feelings of self-loathing.
Veganism is no more likely to “trigger” such behaviour than other way of eating. Are there not meat-eaters who obsess over reading labels and controlling every morsel they put in their mouths?
It’s not veganism that makes Hugo’s message unhealthy, it’s the generally unhealthy attitude towards food and eating in general. If it weren’t about eliminating the animal products, it would be about controlling the carbs, or the fat, or the orange-coloured foods or whatever other thing that could be pinpointed to obsess over.
I’m sure some of you here are tired of hearing me say the same thing over again, but you know, as long as this stuff gets repeated, I feel like I have to keep on addressing it: veganism is not a “limiting” way to eat. When I’m eating vegan, I tend to eat a much wider variety of foods than I do when I’m too tired to do anything other than go for the easiest, quickest alternative. Also, there may be some vegans with pathological attitudes towards food (just as there are for every other pattern of eating), but veganism in and of itself is not a pathological way to eat. Most vegans don’t freak out over meat or dairy. They acknowledge that when they ate it, they enjoyed it, but they’ve eliminated it for ethical and/or health reasons and have no problem eating faux meats and cheeses–though most do tend to limit those because processed foods shouldn’t form the basis of your diet. However, I’ve seen many, many meat eaters with pathological attitudes towards fruit and vegetables, to the point where apart from a tiny handful of items, they won’t allow these foods on their plates.
Most vegans I’ve had contact with CELEBRATE food. They are against fad weight-loss diets and love to cook, eat and try new things. Just because they check to see if there are animal ingredients is in no way indicative of unhealthy attitudes towards food.
I don’t say veganism is something everyone “should” do, I’m just tired of the negative attitudes that don’t seem to based on real-life vegans (or take a few extreme cases and try to present them as the norm) or vegan ideas.
Crys T – I know rather a lot of vegans, and this is based on the norm (among women) not the extremes.
But I’m not sure I’m arguing what you think I’m arguing. I said ‘can’ not ‘always’. I explicitly say that I think you can have a restricted diet in a way that doesn’t play into control/morality issues with food. What I was questioning is the language Hugo used, and the problems he wasn’t acknowledging.
Rosemary Grace – I wanted to respond to your comments specifically . I’m aware that the argument I use can be sold as a weight loss technique (just as every diet is now called ‘not a diet, but a way of life’) – if you stop stressing about food then you’ll have less control issues about food and eat less (this is an uncharitable reading of the book Fat is a Feminist Issue). I’m hardly immune from that kind of thinking. But I wanted to make it clear that I think body hating is really damaging, and that body-hating is pretty tied up with any attempt to lose weight. I would support any women who was trying to develop a heatlhy relationship with food, but I’m not sure that you can develop a heatlhy relationship with food to lose weight.
Maia: Again, yes, maybe many vegan women you know have disturbing issues with food. But you know what? NEARLY ALL women I know have disturbing issues with food, and most of them are omnis. No matter what style of eating (if someone can come up with a better way to describe the differences between omni/vegetarian/vegan, I’d be grateful) we choose, Western society as a whole has disturbing issues with food.
I understand that you were questioning specifically Hugo’s choice of words and the ideas they seem to be espousing. And I agree with you to a point: I’ve seen previous things that Hugo has written which may not have been specifically about food but have mentioned it, and they seemed to me to be, as you said, fixated on ideas of “good” and “bad” eating. However, there is nothing within his mindset that comes from or is related to veganism. Hugo would have similar ideas no matter what he was eating, just as those vegan women with disordered eating that you know would have disordered eating no matter if they were omnis or veggies. What you’re seeing is a Hugo problem, not veganism problem. It is not something that is in any way intrinsic to or brought about by or even accentuated by his veganism. Those self-righteous vegans that everyone here hates would be just as self-righteous about their eating if they were omnis on Atkins, annoying us all with their carb-hatred. Or if they were doing Weight Watchers and going on and on about how many “points” every damn thing has. It’s something within their personalities which is supported by our society’s sick attitudes towards food, not by what eating styles they choose.
But isn’t that exactly what Maia is saying? That’s the way I read it—that it’s the way Hugo, specifically, talks about his veganism that may act as a trigger for people with an ED, not veganism itself. Even though she associates veganism with ED, I understood her to mean that it’s the way veganism is so often presented in our society (as a superior moral position and a series of supreme acts of self-control and self-denial) that is the problem, not specifically the choice not to eat animal products. But maybe I’m just reading my own beliefs into her post.
Whether or not that’s what she meant, it’s true in my experience that the language around veganism and vegetarianism tends to centre on self-control and self-denial, and in a way that I don’t think is necessary. My aunt has been a vegetarian for at least 15 years, and although she talks about it quite a bit, I’ve never heard her connect her eating habits with self-control. As Maia has done with her dairy restrictions, she’s simply made a choice not to eat meat. The reasons behind the choice are personal, and she doesn’t feel the need to proselytize about them—she’ll explain them when someone asks, but she doesn’t ever imply that there’s anything wrong with people who don’t share her views.
Sometimes it seems to me as though some vegetarians, vegans, and dieters of all kinds have appointed themselves the Jehovah’s Witnesses of the food world. Obviously not all, or even necessarily most, are like this. But there are enough of them that I don’t think we can say that there’s no relationship between vegetarianism/veganism/dieting the way it is practised in our society and the kind of thinking that triggers eating disorders.
Yes, she does specify that it’s Hugo’s words that she’s commenting on. However, when she comments that any talk about veganism that calls to a person’s morality can be potentially destructive….well, the whole point is that veganism is an ethical choice. If you say vegans can’t talk about it in moral terms, you’re shutting off any chance of debate or openness.
Of course, anything that puts food into moral categories can be potentially destructive to someone with disordered thinking about food. And, to be fair to Hugo, he does actually say in his piece that any vegetarian/vegan with a history of eating disorders has to regularly question themselves about their true motives. However, to say that any discussion of food and morality is therefore dangerous is wrongheaded: just because *some* people *might* have problems, others should simply shut up about their moral convictions? Especially since some of the most influential vegan voices of the moment are passionate about making peace with your body and learning to love food. In a way I have yet to hear most omnis say it, too, by the way.
“in my experience that the language around veganism and vegetarianism tends to centre on self-control and self-denial”
But the way food is talked about IN GENERAL in our society is in those same terms. Anything chocolatey or rich is “sinful” or “decadent” and anything that has fibre and vitamins is seen as disgusting but necessary self-torture. And anyway, in my own experience, just about everything I’ve read about vegetarianism and veganism has been all about trying new things and sensual pleasures.
To be totally honest, I think that most people’s perceptions about “what vegans/vegetarians say” is much more based on their ideas of what omnis think veggies *ought to* say rather than what they actually do. And because most omnis perceive veganism/vegetarianism to be “limiting” and all about “self-denial,” then, dammit, that’s how veggies must feel. There’s also the fact that, because omni is marked as “normal” for most Westerners, they tend to see omni discussion of food as “general” talk rather than something coming from a specific omni point of view. So they go on about “vegan food police” without noticing how ubiquitous the omni food police are.
You’re absolutely right, and I’m not holding vegetarians or vegans responsible for our society’s attitudes about food—I’m sorry if that’s how it came across, especially to any vegetarians or vegans reading this.
While it’s true that veganism is almost always an ethical choice, I don’t think that talking about veganism in moral terms necessarily leads to judging non-vegans for the dietary choices they make. Of course, if vegans see eating meat as being incompatible with being a decent human being, then it makes some sense not to care that attaching a certain kind of moral implication to the consumption of animal products might trigger someone’s ED, but it’s never been my sense that this is where vegans are coming from.
If everyone (omnivores, vegans, vegetarians, dieters—human being, in other words) could simply accept that everyone’s personal dietary choices are just that—personal—and that you can’t know all the reasons a person eats the way she does, it would be better for all of us.
As for knowing what vegans or vegetarians say, all I can go by is what I’ve heard them say. Living in a very liberal neighbourhood in a very liberal city (Toronto), I know quite a few. Speaking personally, it’s not vegans talking about the moral implications of consuming animal products that concerns me; it’s when vegans start to connect their dietary choices with health that I start to worry. Not because veganism is or isn’t healthier than any other set of dietary choices, but because discussions around “healthy eating” in our culture have so much baggage attached to them.
And it’s in no way limited to vegans or anyone else. As a society, we’re all obsessed with health and eating, in a way that has proved to be very unhealthy indeed for some of us.
“when vegans start to connect their dietary choices with health that I start to worry. Not because veganism is or isn’t healthier than any other set of dietary choices, but because discussions around “healthy eating” in our culture have so much baggage attached to them.”
Yeah, I agree, which is why when the conversation tends to head that way, I say something along the lines of, “You can be a vegan and eat a perfectly balanced diet or you can be a vegan and live off crisps, chocolate and cupcakes.” But of course, then what usually happens is that someone points out that crisps, chocolate and cupcakes aren’t “bad” foods. Which of course they aren’t, and frankly I don’t want to live in a world without them, but I don’t think anyone would advocate we make them our daily staples.
I do realise that “healthy eating” has become a huge stick to beat millions over the head with. However, that isn’t a reason to never talk about it. The fact that whether or not your diet is healthy depends far, far more on your income, social class and access to fresh food, information and the time necessary to aquire both and actually prepare the former than it does on your personal actions does not mean that healthy food shouldn’t be high up on our agendas. The only thing is that we have to make it clear that it’s a social issue, not a “lifestyle choice” issue.
And in an attempt to yank this conversation back on track, we have to keep the subject of food in general high on the agenda because of the extreme fucked-upness of the attitudes around it. The fact that food is used as an indicator of all sorts of personal control (physical and moral) seems to me to be a major factor in unhappiness for millions on a daily basis. I don’t disagree with the point of Maia’s post that this is unhealthy, but to be honest, I really didn’t see Hugo doing what she seemed to imply he was doing.
My point wasn’t necessarily about Hugo’s on attitudes (which I have no idea about). But that the way he talked could be triggering.
I wrote a whole excited comment but then it got deleted.
Anyway, I wanted to speak to this:
and how glad I am to see expressing this so eloquetly in your post. I am so tired of the middle-class moralism and self-righeousness that has invaded left-wing politics and especially left-wing food politics. I see so much of people involved in food issues talking about buying organic, buying vegan, buying local food, buying from farmer’s markets, buying seasonal food, buy buy buy. Of course combined with inflated rhetoric about how sugar, animal products, corn syrup, articifical flavors are “poisons” that people are foolishly “addicted to” and would stop using if only they weren’t so ignorant of the danger or had to little control over their eating habits.
Rarely to I see people involved in food politics interested in lobbying for changes in the agricultural subsidies system (in concrete way, I do see some “agricultural subsidies are bad”), creating programs so that there can actually be grocery stores in segregated inner city neighborhoods (I live in the only neighborhood in Detroit with decent, fresh produce selling, grocery stores), changes to the Food Stamp and WIC program so that people can actually afford to eat fruits and vegetables, reform of the free lunch and free breakfast programs, serious talk about how the pressures put on working-class people make it hard to eat healthy.
Instead of a genuine social-justice focus we have people wagging their fingers (using the same kind of racist classist images of the porcine ‘welfare queen’, that Reagan loved so much) at people who don’t have the time or money to buy heirloom tomatoes at whole foods.
I actually had people I care dearly for that I simply cannot be friends with anymore because their interest in food politics is a cover for the kind of fatphobia that I can’t tolerate.
leah;
yes this is really at the crux of the problem–I agree. its also what bothered me about Hugo’s take on feminism and self-denial. Social justice requires more than just “doing no harm” and individual committment to right living.
Exactly.
As a student who lives on a fairly slim food budget, I am tremendously conscious of the cost of what I eat. The idea that all, or even most, people in the world are capable of exercising total control over their food choices is laughable.
Anything chocolatey or rich is “sinful” or “decadent” and anything that has fibre and vitamins is seen as disgusting but necessary self-torture.
Crys D,
Chocolate has fiber and vitamins both in quite reasonable quantities.
I’m waiting for the average person to become a little more educated about this, and collapse the waveform.