Letters to the Editor
-
read it
While I found some pieces of info interesting, and the chapter on "pooping" made me laugh (as I wondered how many grown women in America are afraid of their own bowel movements), most of the book was heavy on the "bitchy" propaganda and light on science. ("Coffee is filtered through charred animal bones. Nasty." Are we 12?)
Though I'm sure many women would become skinny (and perhaps even healthy) if they followed the "Skinny Bitch" regimen, there was *much* in the book that made me think more women would end up with an eating disorder. (The chapter on fasting was particularly scary on that front).
I was also disturbed by their product pitching (to paraphrase: "Drink tea. But only decaf. Organic decaf. By this company. Everything else will make you fat and ugly").
But, I think few women will be willing and able to live the "Skinny Bitch" life. Everything they pitched was California-yuppie expensive and chic. And while I appreciated their commitment to ending animal suffering through veganism, who, really, i going to take dieting advice from former models seriously? I think Barbara Kingsolver's "Animal, Vegetable, Miracle" had a saner approach to healthy, respectful, affordable, eating.
-
I looked at this book once
It was at once full of interesting facts about the FDA, and really stupid and rude, and not in a particularly funny way, either (i love a good use of profanity, but the authors were lazy shits with their "lazy shit"s.).
You can peruse large chunks of it on Amazon, via "search inside," for free, actually. Some of the advice rings pretty true - don't drink soda, drink lots of water, don't trust the FDA like it was god. But then, the self-flagellating extremism seemed silly and childish. It made me feel happy to have read some of it without giving the veeg zealots any money.
-
should be "I read i"
as "read it" sounds like an endorsement. Which my comment is not.
-
Where's her copy editor: jettison
Do you think the author actually knows the meaning of the word "jettison"?
Journalists. What is wrong with this profession? Either they have no reportorial abilities or they can't write. Often both.
Is it because they all go to journalism school instead of serving apprenticeships?
-
This book is ridiculous
The central premise is flawed. Veganism is not a magic bullet for obesity. Fat vegans exist in abundance. It is especially not fun when they crash down on your head or stomp on your feet at hardcore shows. Ouch.
And if the original "Skinny Bitch" is bad, the cookbook sequel is even worse. It's full of recipes whose primary components are scary-processed fake vegan versions of non-vegan food. Fake meat, fake cheese, fake milk -- this stuff is all utterly vile. It's possible to eat a healthy vegan diet and enjoy it, but not if one is emulating the Skinny Bitches.
I'm pretty sure these books exist solely to make already-skinny bitches feel superior. Blecch.
-
All there is to it
Make 2/3 of your diet fruit and vegetables supplemented with lean meat and dairy. Eat a wide variety of colors in your fruits and vegetables. (this is one of the trends that's very healthy actually) and get some moderate excercise a few times a week. Drink water and snack to a minimum.
Do this and your weight problems along with many of your weight associated health problems will resolve themselves.
It's a lifestyle change and it must be viewed as such.
-
Bad, sneaky vegans.
Aah, poor little sensitive meat eaters, tricked into hearing nasty stories about how their meat is produced. Bad, bad vegans. How dare you.
-
I don't know about skinny, but the figure is very picasso....
Why does it look like her tits are on her back? If that's what veganism will do to a body -- do not want!
-
Michael Pollan and the Skinny Bitches are both unrealistic...
Both Pollan and the Skinny Bitch team make good points, but you can't just buy into every word of the latest diet-tract-masquerading-as-expose-nonfiction. That said, I strongly prefer Pollan--he points out, correctly, the many flaws in our current food/agriculture system (e.g., monoculture and factory farms), in well-reasoned, thoroughly researched fashion (let's not pretend that the many footnotes to PETA in "Skinny Bitch" are the equivalent of real research). Pollan sums up his latest, "In Defense of Food" thusly: "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants." And that is sound advice. Unlike the propagandists of "Skinny Bitch," Pollan points out that human populations have thrived on many types of foods for millennia--but only until the advent of highly processed, government-subsidized food did we see the rise of widespread diseases of affluence such as Type II diabetes. The authors of the "Skinny Bitch" screeds, however, advocate eating precisely the types of fake foods (vegan Canadian bacon, anyone?) that contribute to environmental and health problems. Not to mention their unkind, condescending tone. Unfortunately, neither the Pollan approach (locally grown, minimally processed) nor veganism is a realistic approach--they are both too expensive and time consuming for the average consumer.
-
Individualizing a social problem
I agree with many points made in this article. But, it seems like there are only two points of criticism for Klausner: mostly that the authors are deceptive and less so that this is perpetuating beauty culture, shaming women, etc. I agree that these are worthwhile points. But, this piece settles for individualizing a social problem, villifying the two authors. I agree, they sound contemptuous. But, wouldn't more context be helpful, for example, about Peta's sexism, beauty culture, etc.? Surely, the problem is larger. Also, there's something implicit in Klausner's article -- at least to me -- about vegan advocates being awful, rigid people.
-
Hacky Sack
Actually, in my experience, hacky sack players tend more towards dope and pizza (preferably in that order) than veganism. I didn't exactly do a thorough study, but that's certainly the way it was in Santa Cruz.
And if Santa Cruz isn't a vegan haven, I don't know what the heck would be.
-
copyeditor, please
"Less than 1,000 calories per day" should be "fewer than 1,000 calories per day."
-
Talk about propoganda...
This book wasn't quite as reprehensible as this article makes it sound. The foul-language grittiness was meant to be humorous - obviously. I mean, come on. I for one do not have any eating disorders, nor am I some blonde fashionista from L.A. And this article is the first I had heard that Posh Spice had a copy. You know, next time you feel like vegan-bashing, how about provide some well-researched points along with YOU?