Clive Thompson, in a column at Wired, has written a column about the "fun" of the Weight Watchers points system, by analogizing it to RPGs, and comparing eating healthy, low-cal foods to "hacking" the WW system. It reminds me of when I once asked my husband if he ever has kept a running count in his head of how many calories he's consumed. I was pretty amazed when he said he'd never done it.
Until then, I had probably done it every day of my life since fifth grade. It's a really boring game after a while, Clive.
Keeping that tally in the back of my mind was an unnecessary stressor taking up thinking capacity. I got all excited when I realized what a difference I could make in my life if I devoted all that energy and number-wrangling to making myself happy, instead of pursuing weight management or loss, which was never the result of all the calorie counting.
Right there with you, Sara.
I've written about body image and over-thinness ad nauseum (little eating-disorder joke there), and agree that the calorie-counting thing that's drummed into our heads at an early age is such a hard demon to silence. Been there, done that, got the extra-small t-shirt. Then late last year I became really, really thin and weak (it turned out I had pernicious anemia) without meaning to, and I looked and felt just awful. So I re-thought the past 30 years of dreadful eating habits.
For what it's worth, what I've (finally) learned about this matter include these bits of wisdom (hard-earned, trust me):
- obsessing over food--eaten or not eaten--only makes you hungrier
- humans, like other mammals, come in a variety of shapes and sizes, not just the ones our movies and magazines tell us are "acceptable" at the moment. It's always been that way. Yes, some of us are artificially underweight or artificially overweight, and by that, I mean we're either eating too little and denying our bodies' natural urges, or eating too much, using food as a tranquilizer or distraction from stress, again denying or ignoring our bodies' normal signals. The species has only encountered such an excess of calories as we have now, in this country in particular, in the past hundred years or so--we haven't evolved to handle so much food. Either way, being aware that one is not eating according to one's body's needs is the first step toward being free from the whole stressful trap.
- exercise, not dieting, is the best way to feel good and to be strong and healthy and sane
- the more you starve yourself, the more your metabolism will slow down and store every last calorie you do swallow; conversely, exercise speeds metabolism (to a point, of course)
- diets are bullshit, and they don't work, and some of them probably do more harm than good in terms of restricting certain nutrients and slowing metabolism
- eat a variety of foods, and strive to make the majority of them as close to their whole, raw state as possible; allow for a minority representation of whatever treats you bloody well like, even so-called junk-food, as long it's viewed as a treat, not a staple of one's meals (the first time I ate a warm Krispy Kreme doughnut without worrying or mentally calling myself a pig or a bad person was utterly liberating, let me tell you)
- ask yourself what you really want to eat, then eat it--do so deliberately and with pleasure, and stop when you've had enough. Sometimes it takes practice to know when you're satisfied, because we've grown so used to denying ourselves the pleasure of food, when faced with something good to eat, we go nuts and then feel stuffed. And guilty, which is more bullshit. So, I try to aim for satisfied, not stuffed.
- if chocolate is your thing (it is one of my things), treat yourself to the very best chocolate bar, your favorite kind, and enjoy it, whether it's all at once on certain weeks or a square here and a square there. It's better to have a little bit of something wonderful than a lot of something cheap, I say.
Forgive me, I am certain you know all this, but I am compelled to share it anyway, as other women (and men) who've unfortunately suffered under the calorie-counting thing might read this and go, Wow, I'm not alone!
Great post.
Posted by: litbrit | August 11, 2008 at 05:11 PM
Darn good advice.
As someone who bicycled to school and ate, well, everything in sight... To the point of in the lowest budget time counting calories-per-dollar rather than calories per meal...
...I'm a bit of a latecomer to the subject of eating well and enjoying eating based upon slow, reasoned, balanced diet.
Posted by: Crissa | August 12, 2008 at 12:22 AM
Sara,
Your husband has never done this because he is young. Trust me, the day will come. (I know -- I am allowed 26 points on the Weight Watchers system when I do it.)
I could eat without much thought until I was 32 or so -- since then I feel like aliens hijacked my body and planted their long gestating offspring in my abdomen.
Posted by: Sir Charles | August 12, 2008 at 08:48 AM
Clive Thompson, in a column at Wired, has written a column about the "fun" of the Weight Watchers points system, by analogizing it to RPGs, and comparing eating healthy, low-cal foods to "hacking" the WW system.
That's like making a "game" of raking the leaves, or homework or any other activity which we do out of a sense of duty. It never works.
WW is probably the most sane approach of any diet I've seen, but it's not "fun."
Posted by: Stephen | August 12, 2008 at 09:35 AM
Once I designed a game of Live-Action Hungry Hungry Hippos for my friends to play at a science fiction convention. It went quite well.
Posted by: Neil the Ethical Werewolf | August 12, 2008 at 02:50 PM