Return to Archives
You Are What You (Don't) Eat
February 07, 2006
Was listening earlier to a few progressives discussing online what they would and wouldn't eat based on the oppressive practices of the applicable growers, marketers, importers, exporters, et al. Maybe because the subject in this conversation was chocolate, it occurred to me that boycotts are the moral equivalent of dieting for those who lean leftward, especially left-leaning women, especially where edible products are concerned. These are not people who would be heard saying things like "I have to lose five pounds by Friday."
But the payoffs for not eating chocolate because its producers use slave labor and not eating chocolate because it's fattening are remarkably similar: you get to restrict your food intake, deny yourself things that are supposedly bad for you, impress your friends with your stellar willpower, and flagellate yourself whenever you fall from grace.
True, if you must give up chocolate, I'd rather you did it because the growers exploit their workers than because you think it's desperately important to shrink a pant size or two. (Better yet, give it up because you don't like it and have finally mustered the courage to stand up to the choco-cops.)
Not so long ago, a co-worker told me that she only bought fair-trade coffee, and in the next sentence she referred to the great price she'd got on paper goods at Wal-Mart. I buy cheap name-brand coffee in a can, but I won't spend a cent in a Wal-Mart. Moral of story: There aren't many products out there that come with no ethical taint whatsoever, and for most of us it's not possible to give everything up. Consume as conscientiously as you can, but leave the hair shirt and the halo at home.
|