Here in Australia, we like to think we’re accepting of a diversity of values. But there’s one area where strict judgements and moralistic language are still going strong – even increasing.
I’m referring to how we talk about food choices and healthy eating.
These days, it’s as though foods aren’t just slapped with a nutrition label – they are also slapped with a moral one. They are either clean or dirty, good or bad, pure or impure – and it infuses our whole lexicon around healthy eating.
You hear it in phrases like “I’m being good on my diet” or “I had a cheat day”. We hear foods described as “sinfully rich”, “naughty” or “a guilty pleasure”. We praise people who are “being good” and “eating clean”.
Hey, if you’re becoming more aware of your nutrition and food choices, that’s great.
But what I’m seeing goes beyond personal self-improvement. Instead, there’s this strange piousness about health that foists awful ideas of body image and health on others. It’s looking down our noses at people who eat carbs, and it’s apologising for consuming sugar.
And it’s not just obnoxious. It’s much worse – because this “moral correctness” around food is implicitly about diet culture, and it also encourages a relationship with food that’s far more damaging that the actual food anyone is eating.
Here’s how.
It encourages a black and white approach to healthy eating.
We, as humans, love to divide things to categories, and this moral language around food implies a level of hierarchy and purity. After all, who wants to eat “dirty foods” instead of “clean” ones? As Margaret Ruch, a dietitian, once observed:
Food is sort of religious. Either there’s a halo over it, or it’s sinful.
Gone are the days of “sometimes foods” and “all things in moderation”. Instead, our current culture encourages us to be constantly on the warpath to eliminate anything “bad” – whether that’s eggs, red meat, fat, sugar, processed food or white bread.
As Ruby Tandoh put it in her wonderful essay The Unhealthy Truth Behind ‘Wellness’ and ‘Clean Eating’,
The language used in wellness circles soars clear of dietary science and straight into another realm altogether. On popular wellness blogs, the gluten I’ve heard about is ‘evil,’ ‘poison,’ ‘contaminating,’ and ‘toxic’… This isn’t just about nutrition, it’s about morality, and when food becomes imbued with this kind of scandalising language, the dinner table becomes a minefield.
When we make food into a matter of morals, we encourage shame and judgement, an “us” vs “them” approach. Because, funnily enough, when you use such moralising language about food, it quickly can transfer to the person who’s eating it.
The fact is, there’s no such thing as “good” or “bad” food. There shouldn’t be any such thing as a “guilty pleasure”. Food doesn’t have a moral value, and a calorie is just a unit of energy.
The only thing that matters is how you balance them for you.
It dresses up deprivation as a virtue.
It’s not fashionable to refer to clean eating and wellness as “diets”. But when they introduce restrictive meal plans and encourage the elimination of whole food groups, what else can you call them?
Whether they are based in science or not (who knows), these diets can posture normal, healthy parts of your diet (like carbs, wheat and lactose) as “evil” or “impure”, and encourage chronic under-eating.
Dieting is not and shouldn’t be a normal part of healthy eating. At best, it provides results that are usually temporary, and it can make us eat in ways that are less healthy.
At worst, it can set you up for an eating disorder, or hide the fact you have a problem with food. (A concerning number of people who are getting over anorexia can fall into “clean eating” and healthy food blogs, where their illness can hide in plain sight.)
What seems to be underlying all this is the lie that dieting is normal, healthy – and even a form of self-care. It’s disturbing that I can look around and think, I can eat the way I did when I struggled with an eating disorder, and no one will bat an eyelid.
In fact, I’d probably get congratulated for my discipline.
How is that okay?
Here’s a reminder that your health is far more complicated than any one meal.
Certainly, there are some foods that fuel us better than others, and it’s worth learning which these are and when to eat them.
But let’s move away from the idea that any digression from “good foods” is a moral failing, something you need to apologise for or be ashamed of. Nutrition is about balance and moderation, not exclusion.
Regardless of what we get peddled, health is holistic – and not only that, it’s complicated, unique to each individual. As Margaret Ruch put it,
Our health is made up of so much more than just the food we eat, but especially more than just one meal, or one food.
While we can draw conclusions from general principles, no one has any right to make a judgement on what you’re nourishing your body with.
(It’s really none of their business.)
The World Health Organisation puts it like this: “Health is a resource for everyday life, not the objective of living.”
It’s worth reiterating.
When we elevate food into a moral realm, we make it the object of life. We tell ourselves we are “dirty” or “impure” if we don’t stick to our clean eating regimen, and we give ourselves permission to judge and shame others who aren’t as “good” as us.
This preoccupation with food is joyless, problematic, and simply not the same as healthy eating. That’s because being healthy isn’t about providing your body with the least amount of food or calories you can get away with. It isn’t about restriction and body obsession.
It’s actually about understanding your physical and mental needs, and nourishing those well. It’s about balance. And it’s about freedom to make your own judgement.
Health is important. But food isn’t a matter of right or wrong, of guilt and virtue. Instead, it’s about making the right choices for you and your body.
It’s that simple.
