Food – Page 3 – Feministe

Meet American Apparel’s New Plus-Sized Models

UPDATE: Duh, read Nancy’s blog. She’s mocking American Apparel and the whole contest. So now I can 100% say: Nice work! I am behind it, ranch dressing cumshots and all.
___________________________________________

American Apparel is having a plus-sized model contest. The current front-runner is named Nancy, she is a size 12, and she is pretty hot. Good on American Apparel, sort of, for not just using skinny hipsters to model their clothes — fat girls are hipsters too! But it’s American Apparel, so of course a lot of the big-girl photos have that same Terry Richardson / borderline-kiddie-porn-in-grandparents’-basement aesthetic that I waver between hating because it’s gross and hating because it’s so played out. (It’s worth noting, of course, that these photos are self-submitted and not actually taken by American Apparel).

But here’s the thing with Nancy’s photos: They aren’t that same “Oops you caught me being sexy in a lace ankle-length body suit all by myself! I’m so surprised!” thing (alternately: “Oh hello, here is my butt, I hope you like it because I am going to injure my lower back standing like this all of the time“). Nancy’s not just pushing out her good bits; she’s eating or otherwise hanging out with food in all of the photos. And like, really eating — chocolate sauce dripping down her face, laying in a bathtub of ranch dressing, etc. Which on one hand is kind of subversive and awesome — fat chicks are not really supposed to even be visible, let alone take serious pleasure in eating food. It’s cute when a teeny-tiny actress tucks into a giant burger, but it’s not so acceptable for someone whose body might be featured, headless, on the nightly news to illustrate the American Obesity Crisis. And it’s awesome that her website tagline is “I can’t stop eating” — there’s so much pressure to be a Good Fatty who exercises and eats healthily and doesn’t over-eat like all of the Bad Fatties that it’s refreshing to see a fat girl being like, “Yup, I like food, ok.” So first reaction is, “Fat girl eating in a sexy ad? Yes please!”

Oh but then.

You can just. . .

Via Karnythia’s tumblr, I found this post that summarizes Chef Karl Wilder’s attempts to feed his family for two months on the allotment a family gets on food stamps. Wilder, who did this as part of an awareness campaign for the San Francisco Food Bank, documented his and his family’s experience on his blog.

Now before I go on to the meat of this post, I’ll point out a couple of things–he found it very difficult to feed his family on the amount equivalent to a food stamp allotment, found the foods that fit into the budget boring, and while he lost weight, found that his actual physical health had gotten worse. As in: higher levels of cholesterol, body fat, blood sugar, and triglycerides.

An appetite for moral panics

Anthony Bourdain has had freakouts over Rachel Ray, Sandra Lee, Alice Waters, Guy Fieri, and now Paula Deen. The most recent pissiness–the carping on Deen–was because (he said) she is beholden to corporate interests and she features foods (southern foods, by the way) on her show that are “fucking bad for you” (both true, by the way).

Now, I don’t give a shit about Bourdain per se, he’s known for talking smack about everyone (especially Food Network stars–dude, seriously, find another hobby) and I mean really, Deen’s grown and can take care of herself. But this does point to a particular strain of upper-class righteousness. Frank Bruni pointed out the hypocrisy of food personalities (I hesitate to call any of them chefs) who sniff in disdain at the likes of Deen using butter or cream but salivate over duck confit or pork rinds in the latest hot chef’s dish.

However, unlike Bruni, I call bullshit on all these jokers.

First, it’s nothing more that a bunch of wealthy, well-known White people getting into more dramz while the actual people they claim to champion (oh, please) are still coping with the grocery gap, working longer hours for less pay, or chronic unemployment. Organic, farm fresh food is not easily obtainable for many people, and getting the time (or the money–butter is really expensive) to make Paula Deen’s dishes is no cakewalk either. This is nothing more than two sets of elites with different audiences and PR strategies duking it out.

Second, people on both sides are engaging in the moral deathfat panic, and it’s not helping anyone. Foodies, the frugal, lefties and right-wingers all seem to agree that being fat is horrible and a shameful thing, indicative of self-indulgence and a lack of discipline, and then all sides engage in shaming people who point out that it’s not just a matter of making the correct and moral choices. They also seem to miss the point that if the only marker of health you use is thinness, people will do some really hazardous stuff to get thin, and they will be assumed to be healthy. Look–I was very underweight up until about 12 years ago when I finally hit a normal weight. I can guarantee you that when I was underweight, I snarfed down junk food and fried crap, eschewed vegetables, drank entirely too much caffiene (still do, actually) and never worked out. But no one gave me crap because hey! I was thin, therefore I was healthy.

Third, people on “both” sides of this argument suddenly discover the magic of the bootstrap and self-discipline-to the point where you wonder how they’re on different sides. They sure aren’t on my side, or the side of my neighbors, no matter what they may claim. You could eat better if you just tried! You’re choosing to not eat beans and rice (forget being underhoused or not being able to afford a freezer to store all those extra helpings of chili and lentil stew you could make). You’re making bad choices–just don’t listen to that elitist liberal on the Travel Channel/that elitist conservative on the Food Network! Parents today whine and make excuses instead of making fresh, healthy meals for their children. And I call BS on that garbage as well. I am single, I don’t have children, and after my commute home (which is long, by the way), I am often too tired to cook. Or I am so hungry that my hands are shaking and so I go for whatever I can make in under five minutes. I’m not sure how lecturing and shaming people about how You’re Doing it Wrong is actually going to get us anywhere, and I’ve seen that on all sides of this.

If I find this cumbersome at times (and I love to cook, and am often gratified when I can take the time to do so properly, and have been grateful to be able to do more of that this summer), how do you think other people find it? The working poor and the destitute? Overworked parents? People on food stamps? People with no easy access to grocery stores, let alone farmers markets (which are often really expensive)? People who don’t have sunny yars or balconies, who don’t have a plot in a community garden (unlike me) who don’t have the transportation to get to a grocery store?

So you know, this concern over elitism and health and corporate interests rings hollow when it comes from these folks. Access and money (yeah, I said it, call me a socialist, I don’t care) would go a long way to solve the problem of the food crisis. But you can’t solve the food crisis or the health crisis (no, I’m not going to call it the obesity crisis, FFS) without solving the poverty crisis and the unemployment crisis and the overwork crisis and the lack of access crisis. It isn’t always about making good choices when the choices you’ve got in front of you are crappy either way. And it isn’t about talking smack about a Food Network personality or a Travel Channel personality.

PETA to start a porn site, because of course.

Justin Bieber in a PETA ad — Next Bieber for PETA ad: "Animals Can Make U Hard. Adopt From Your Local Shelter." Right?

I don’t see what could possibly go wrong with this plan:

Instead of focusing on anti-fur, the porn site will raise awareness of veganism, said Rajt. “We really want to grab people’s attention, get them talking and to question the status quo and ultimately take action, because the best way we can help the greatest number of animals is simply by not eating them.”
…
So how pornographic will PETA go? According to Rajt, it will have enough adult content to qualify for the XXX domain site but also some other graphic images of animals that viewers may not expect to see.

Sure. Titties, titties, titties, CHICKEN WITH ITS BEAK SAWED OFF. Sounds hot. Definitely sounds like an effective way to get people to go vegan — associate animal cruelty with sexual arousal. I see absolutely no potential downsides.

What’s in your basket?

I am Cat-Lady Cry-Fest + Hottie Health Nut + SO MUCH CHEESE. I wonder what that says about me.

A Modest Proposal: The Hoe Diet

A team of economics and business professors have found a link between farming methods and gender inequality. Societies that historically relied on ploughs for farming now have lower rates of gender equality; societies that historically relied on traditional farming methods like hoe and stick digging now have a more consistent rate of women’s participation in the public sphere. Plough farming requires a good deal of upper-body strength that women often don’t have, eliminates the need for weeding (a task often performed by women), and isn’t suitable for ersatz on-site childcare, relegating women to domesticity.

The study examined societies that rely on “plough-positive crops”—including wheat, barley, and rye—with societies that make better use of “plough-negative crops,” such as millet, sorghum, and root and tree crops. The authors determined that “societies that traditionally practiced plough agriculture…developed a specialization of production along gender lines. Men tended to work outside of the home in the fields, while women specialized in activities within the home. This division of labor then generated norms about the appropriate role of women in society.”

These findings are wildly appealing to me—it satisfies my itch to proclaim “Look, this stuff is ancient!” without resorting to evolutionary psychology (which is frequently fascinating, and often misogynist bullshit). It offers an insight into human geography; it reflects the ways in which cultural developments wear the mask of progress can divide along gender lines just as it creates and divides class.

It also offers an insight into feminist possibilities of our contemporary food choices. Much of the gender rhetoric surrounding food has been ecofeminist dialogue clustered around veganism and the sexual politics of meat: Worthy stuff, mind you, but since I do happen to believe that humans are higher beings, I don’t have problems eating meat; in fact, I do so with relish (and onions). We’ve also given thought to supporting agricultural collectives run by women, examined the ways the art of homemaking can transform our national dinner plates, and the gender politics of food rationing in times of war.

But I ask you, fellow feminists, to go beyond the meat, beyond the private sphere, beyond the Ghanaian agricultural collectives. I ask you, fellow feminists, to ask yourselves: But what about the grain? I ask you, fellow feminists, to join me in The Hoe Diet.

When we eat our wheat-laden breads, crackers, and Ding-Dongs, we are swallowing centuries of systemic oppression thrust upon the women of the weeds by their plough-bearing husbands. When we drink our barley in the form of beer, we quench our thirst with the sweat of men who have kept down our foremothers.

What would happen if we switched our diet from crops of oppression to crops of liberation? What would happen if we replaced our rice with woman-friendly millet? What would happen if we reclaimed the tree crops that were originally ours? What would happen if we rejected the yang wheat of The Man for the yin root vegetables of The Woman? What would happen if we capped off our SlutWalks with HoePotlucks?

We are what we eat, my sisters of sorghum, and to help you join me in the path to liberation, I’ve compiled recipes with gynocentric ingredients sure to start off your Hoe Diet with gusto:

Kate Millett Pilaf
1 cup millet
6 cups water
1 teaspoon salt
2 tablespoons hen broth
1 medium onion, finely chopped
1 cup chopped fresh parsley
2 medium tomatoes, chopped

Place millet, water, and salt in large saucepan. Bring to boil, reduce heat to medium-low. Simmer until tender, about 30 minutes. Drain. Heat broth in large skillet over medium heat. Add onion and cook until softened, 3 to 4 minutes. Add parsley and tomatoes; cook 1 minute more. Stir in cooked millet and toss gently to combine. Serve immediately while reciting from Sexual Politics.

GynGreen Smoothie
1 ½ cups chopped kale
⅓ cup coconut water or fruit juice
¼ self-pollinating avocado
1 cup unisex melon, chopped
½ mango
¼ teaspoon stevia
4 ice cubes
1 tablespoon Vermont maple syrup
1 tablespoon menstrual blood
¼ teaspoon cinnamon
Pinch salt

Add all ingredients to blender and puree in a spiral dance.

Womangia!

Things that are ok:

Being vegan. Yay vegans, eat what you want, live ethically, you are not all insufferable sanctimonious pricks, etc etc.

Things that are not ok: Leaving your roommate an off-the-chain straight-up aggressive note telling them they’re no longer allowed to have any animal products in your shared space, and then implying that they could stand to lose some weight (although in the vegan lady’s defense, I totally understand her objections to SlimJims and Spam; I’m not sure she needed to call them “trashy snacks” where “gross” would have done just fine, but I see her point that mechanically-separated chicken is indeed quite gross).

I cannot wait until my roommate gets home and sees the note I left her, telling her that in order to respect my dietary preferences she is not allowed to bring any food item into the house that does not involve cheese, wine, shellfish or asparagus (I’m really feeling asparagus lately, BACK OFF).

Food Visibility

Bittman has a great column this week about the ridiculous proposed laws to ban filming and photography at farms. Animal rights and sustainable food activists have embarrassed corporate farms by publishing footage of how corporate farms actually treat animals, and the disgusting and cruel conditions that they maintain (the footage is often shot by brave employees of the farm who are offended by what they see at work every day). In response, the food industry pushed legislators to just make it illegal to record what goes on in their facilities. The laws haven’t passed, but it’s still nearly impossible for journalists (or anyone else) to get into factory farms to see how things are run. Bittman tried, and was repeatedly refused.

When a journalist can’t see how the food we eat is produced, you don’t need ag-gag laws. The system’s already gagged.

The videographers that have made it into closed barns have revealed that eggs are laid and chickens are born and raised in closed barns containing (literally) hundreds of thousands of birds; an outsider wouldn’t even know what those barns were. Pigs are housed cheek-to-jowl, by the many thousands, in what are called concentrated animal feeding operations, where feeding, watering and monitoring are largely mechanized. Pregnant sows are confined in small concrete cells. Iowa is industrial agriculture’s ground zero. But when it comes to producing animals, zero is pretty much what you’re going to see.
…
Which would bring us a step closer to China, whose Health Ministry is trying to clamp down on news media outlets that “mislead” the public about food safety issues. (It’s worth noting, on the other hand, that the Chinese Supreme Court has called for the death penalty in cases of fatal food poisoning.) “Mislead” apparently means reporting about pork tainted with the banned drug clenbuterol, which sent a couple hundred wedding guests to the hospital; watermelons exploding from the overuse of chemicals; pork disguised as beef, or glowing blue; and — my favorite — cooking oil dredged from sewers. (Check my blog for the details.)

Our watermelons don’t explode and, for now, I can write about it. Yet when a heroic videographer breaks a horror story about animal cruelty, as happens every month or so, the industry writes off the offense as an isolated incident, and the perpetrators — usually the workers, who are “just following orders” — are fired or given wrist slaps. Business continues as usual, and it will until the public better understands industrial animal-rearing techniques.

And until the food industry stops intimidating journalists, suing anyone who speaks ill of them, and using their economic and political might to obliterate small ethical farmers.

The Omnivore’s Dating Dilemma

Can vegans and meat-eaters romantically coexist? Sure they can. But I don’t think I could deal with it.

Well, it’s lasted, and I have to say, being in a relationship with a meat eater is the worst. Before I became a vegan, one of our favorite things to do together was go out to eat. We’d order a bunch of small plates and have a blast sharing them.

Now, picking a restaurant is pretty challenging. We often end up just swinging by Whole Foods, where we can order burritos within eyeshot of each other (there’s a vegan taqueria right next to the regular one) or prepare our respective beef and tofu pho. Then we eat our meals out of cardboard containers at one of the booths. Let me tell you, it’s romantic.

God bless you folks who can make relationships like this work, because if I couldn’t go out to dinner and share a bunch of delicious things with my partner, I would end the relationship. Food is too important. And cheese is way too important. I don’t eat all that much meat, but I do cook a lot of fish, and cheese is a dietary staple. Vegetarianism I could handle, but veganism would be a big deal-breaker, below being a pro-life Republican but probably above believing that Two and a Half Men is a good show.

Then again, I never thought I’d own a cat, watch The Bachelorette or date blond-haired blue-eyed white dudes, and I’ve gone down all of those sad paths. The world is a strange and mysterious place, and maybe in ten years I’ll be serving seitan at my wedding.

Article via Amanda.

Gluten-free dishes that sound… ok.

The Times is really excited about their gluten-free recipes, which they claim are actually flavorful. Maybe they are! I’ve had Babycakes and that shit is delicious. But oh man this gluten-free craze is the worst.

Don’t get me wrong: Some number of people have legitimate gluten allergies or intolerances (I actually suspect I am slightly gluten intolerant? And also lactose-intolerant? Whatever I eat cheese and pasta anyway and just deal with getting really sick every single day) and can become extremely ill if they consume gluten. That sucks! I am sorry for you people. And lots of people try to eat gluten-free food because it just makes them feel better or they like it. Great. But “I’m allergic to gluten” seems to be the new cover for women who are basically just seeking to limit their food intake, and is almost never mentioned in any articles covering the trend of gluten-free eating. For example, the Times says:

Gluten-free baked goods have become tastier as demand for them has risen. More Americans — about 6 percent of the population, according to the Center for Celiac Research at the University of Maryland — have found that gluten, in wheat, barley and rye, causes health problems. What had been a niche market has become mainstream.

Notice the phrasing — “causes health problems.” Not that they’re allergic to it or even sensitive. Celiac Disease is a real thing, and it sucks. But only about 1% of Americans have it. And it’s unfortunate that a legitimate intolerance to certain foods is being used as an excuse to just not eat bread (it also makes everyone more skeptical of people who claim gluten allergies).

Obviously I can’t blame women — and it seems to usually be women, as I’ve met like one dude in my life who says he’s gluten-intolerant — who claim to have gluten sensitivities for using that as a convenient excuse not to eat. There is immense social pressure to go out and eat a lot, but also to not look like you eat a lot. “I’m gluten intolerant” is, in many circles, a much more acceptable reason to forgo bread or pasta than “I’m trying to stay skinny” or “I’m on a diet.” And that is very fucked. But we should maybe be casting a bit of a jaundiced eye on the gluten-free fad. It can be great, for folks who can’t consume gluten products without getting very sick; it’s also great insofar as it makes us more creative with the food we eat, and less reliant on the same old ingredients and recipes.

But it’s not great that it’s an acceptable cover for eating issues. It’s on the same footing as veganism and other dietary restrictions — great when done right, really less great in that a whole lot of people use it as a way to avoid eating.