Is denial always bad?

No Snacks, no sweets, no seconds. Except on Days that start with S. Too simple for you? Simple is why it works. Look here for questions, introductions, support, success stories.

Moderators: Soprano, automatedeating

Post Reply
hexagon
Posts: 176
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 2:53 am

Is denial always bad?

Post by hexagon » Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:06 am

Hi,

The "Not a good idea" posting led me to thinking about denial. I was just wondering what your thoughts are about it.

I personally think that any big goal in life requires some form of work or sacrifice. That includes leading a healthy life, especially when our lifestyles in this modern world don't always easily allow for this (long work hours, driving everywhere, primarily sedentary jobs).

People always pooh-pooh the word "denial" when it comes to weight loss. I agree with this attitude, to a certain extent--I mean, if you make some foods absolutely taboo or call them "bad", it's human nature to immediately crave them because they're forbidden. It makes me think of tales of previous eras, when seeing a woman's *ankles* was a big risque thrill.

The thing is that with weight loss, well, you generally have to eat less, or somehow take in less calories. What does this mean? Well, it means giving up freely gorging on ice cream every night, or eating McDonald's milkshakes every day. Eating less calorically-dense foods (or less of said foods) constitutes, in a sense, denial. Burning more calories means maybe changing one's life a little bit--say taking the stairs more often, hence denying oneself of the convenience of the elevator.

Say the word "denial" and everybody wants to just leap on you and say how you're giving yourself a mental complex and maintaining some attitude that will cause little girls to starve themselves...

I say, damn straight.

You don't get something for nothing.

I've accepted that I have to work for weight loss, which means working for moderation. I feel a lot better when I don't eat too much (or too little). I think that denial is sometimes a part of moderation, and hence cannot always be considered an evil, evil thing.

Any thoughts?

hexagon
Posts: 176
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 2:53 am

Post by hexagon » Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:08 am

Er, just in case anybody somehow misinterprets what I just wrote--when I said "damn straight" I was not condoning giving oneself a mental complex or inducing little girls to starve themselves.

kccc
Posts: 3957
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:12 am

Post by kccc » Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:30 am

Hmm... I don't care for the word "denial" in this context. The connotations are wrong. Self control, boundaries, limits, or moderation all work better for me.T Those are all good things. Denial has overtones of not accepting reality, or punitive strictness, or something. So, I just wouldn't say it that way.

But maybe I'm just in denial. ;)

User avatar
MerryKat
Posts: 786
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 11:35 am
Location: Sunny South Africa

Post by MerryKat » Fri Apr 13, 2007 9:38 am

No I don't believe that denial is always a bad thing.

For me the important words that I have discovered on the No S journey are Discipline, Responsibility and from those Respect.

In society in general now adays there is no discipline or responsiblity taught or expected from people (from babies up) - it seems to be offensive to expect people to discipline themselves, take responsibility for themselves or respect others (and themselves).

For me changing my eating habits means being disciplined with myself and accepting responsibility for my habits and behaviours. This boils down to self respect and respect for my family to change my bad habits so I don't pass them on to my children or die too young from my health problems.
Hugs from Sunny South Africa
Vanilla No S with no Sugar due to Health issues - 11 yrs No S - September 2016 (some good, some bad (my own doing) but always the right thing for me!)

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Fri Apr 13, 2007 1:10 pm

A couple of weeks ago I picked up a Healthy Living brochure at the grocery. It was the ANTI-DIET issue. At the top of one of the articles was a statement that dieting is a very American obsession. And it is.

Since the mid-70s when our weight and health started to become an issue and low-fat craze started, we've been obsessed with dieting. But, like Michael Pollan says in both Our National Eating Disorder and Unhappy Meals, people in other nations have continued to eat what they always ate, based on what was available, tasted good and brought them pleasure.

They didn't deny themselves anything. They didn't restrict their food choices. There were just lots of things they didn't eat on a daily basis -- they were for treats and feasts. There's a huge difference between saying that you can't have something ever again and saying that it's fine to have every now and again.

In one case you're practicing denial. In the other, you're just delaying a specific pleasure. It's delayed gratification. Our biggest problem is that it's become the norm to snack any time we want to and to eat feast foods on a daily basis. While some other cultures do snack routinely, it's at specific times, not whenever the spirit moves them.

We've lost the ability to delay that gratification. Part of what makes certain foods so enjoyable is the knowledge that you'll only have them at a certain time of the year or on your birthday or whatever. Part of the enjoyment of them is the anticipation of that enjoyment.

Then there's our global food market. I can walk into my grocery any day of the year and find strawberries, fresh asparagus and melons, for example. But I know they're truly best in the spring or summer. If I wait until they're at their peak, I can pig out on them for a week or two or longer while they're in season, and for the rest of the year I'll anticipate how much I'll enjoy them next year.

So just because I'm not eating ice cream and am eating less calorically dense foods on a daily basis doesn't mean that I'm denying myself anything or restricting my food choices. I'm delaying the gratification.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

Kevin
Posts: 1269
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:02 pm
Location: Maryland, USA

Post by Kevin » Fri Apr 13, 2007 9:08 pm

Denial has bad connotations. Instead, substitute the word discipline. Discipline is not only good for you body, it's good for your soul.
Kevin
1/13/2011-189# :: 4/21/2011-177# :: Goal-165#
"Respecting the 4th S: sometimes."

storm fox
Posts: 119
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:55 am

Post by storm fox » Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:47 pm

The first week or two, not only was there a feeling of denial for me, but actually of hardship. No kidding. I was so out of control with my eating that any positive change, any discipline, any delayed gratification was very hard.
By the third week, I was really enjoying it. And today, I woke up after eating out (apetizer, beer, dessert-it was the 6th anniversary of our engagement. I wasn't going to "S" but my wife reminded me that April 13 doesn't often fall on Friday, so I had better *#$(# celebrate because we got engaged on April 13 and it was a Friday). Instead of finding myself bloated up to 196 as was customary, I found I weigh a trim 184.

I have noticed people are very annoyed at self-discipline. This especially includes my dear wife, who is being driven crazy by the contrast between our eating habits. I'm used to her sabatoging her own efforts at diet and exercise, but sabotaging mine is not going to happen. I did let her win last night, because the whole point of going out was to celebrate that our April 13 engagement had happened on a Friday again.

Another time we went out to a wonderful Mexican place and it irritated her that I wouldn't touch the pre-meal tortilla chips. But she ate fewer of them herself.

cvmom
Posts: 639
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 1:03 am
Location: California

Post by cvmom » Sat Apr 14, 2007 4:56 pm

I am really enjoying reading all of these comments. You are all so thoughtful and smart. :D :D :D

To me, Denial means that you know something, but on an unconsious level. So, if your body knows that its overweight (because it does have an inherant wisdom) but you keep putting more food in then it requires then that is denial.

If we would listen to our bodies more, before, during and after we eat, then maybe we could hear what our bodies are telling us. I don't mean stomach rumblings or other such digestive noises. What I mean is, how protein makes me more sated then carbs. Or how sugar really does make me crash. Or how coffee is repulsive when I've had more then one cup.

Someone recently told me that I was so structured!!! It really flabbergasted me because I don't think I am. But pondering this for a little while, I realize that my self-imposed limits (like doing the No-S diet and not drinking alcohol) may give that impression. If each of you thinks back to how you were a year ago, do you feel like your eating is better? I am 42 and it seems that every year I eat better and healthier then I did the year prior.

I owe a debt of gratitude to Reinhard for creating this system and website. The philosophy has enhanced my life a lot. All of these things: delayed gratification, self-respect, and the uncovering of denial are part of this journey.

Post Reply