The Contrarian Diet

I was having lunch at a buffet the other day. It was one of those all-you-can-eat deals where you come for breakfast and stay through dinner for the all inclusive price of $4.95. This particular buffet was of the Chinese variety and featured such venerable Asian delicacies as won ton soup, General Tso’s chicken, shrimp egg-foo-young, cheese pizza, and French fries.

I was seated near the door, enjoying my first course selections of Mongolian chicken, garlic shrimp, and a corn dog, when from out in the parking lot approached several of the largest humans I’ve seen since the latest The Biggest Loser premier. The restaurant owner spotted them too, but not in time to put the “Closed” sign in the window and lock the door.

Immediately upon ordering their beverages (“Included in Price of Buffet”), these monstrosities waddled to the nearest steam table, returning moments later carrying plates piled so high with various breaded and deep fried items topped with bacon and covered in gravy that they needed a second plate inverted over the top to prevent an avalanche of saturated fat capable of burying a small Indonesian island.

Stunned, I gazed around the restaurant, noting that patrons of average weight were a minority here. It was then it occurred to me I was witnessing a serendipitous lesson on healthy eating. To wit: watch what fat people eat, and do the opposite.

I knew I had stumbled upon a scientifically significant hypothesis which begged further study. As I sat nibbling on my Three Happiness Over Rice Noodle pondering the practicality of my theory, I quickly came to realize my original premise was fundamentally flawed. Do foods have “opposites?” For example, would beef be the logical opposite of chicken? Is a potato the opposite of a carrot? And exactly what is the antonym of deep-fried, sugar-coated bread? Steamed broccoli?

It seemed in order to truly take advantage of this opportunity for scientific study, I needed to follow one of these less-than-svelte folks around the buffet, making note of the foods they chose, and opting for only those items they sought to avoid, thereby gaining needed contrast between what were in theory poor versus healthy dietetic choices.

I selected an overall clad gent just seated to my left as my subject. In his mid to late 40’s and tipping the scales at well over 400 pounds, he seemed an ideal candidate. Placing another diner between us so as not to be spotted, I tailed him as he filled two plates with fried chicken, fried chicken tenders, onion rings, and rolls with butter.

Keeping to the same section of the buffet line, I then made my “anti” selections from the steam trays he neglected, returning to my table with sautéed green beans, baked salmon, sushi, and sautéed mushrooms.

Popping a shroom into my mouth, I paused to reflect on this topic as it relates to my own family.
My father is overweight. He likewise suffers from diverticulitis, high blood pressure, congestive heart failure, and a mean wife. His favorite food? Mayonnaise. And while he will sometimes order a salad when dining out – as long as it’s covered in fried chicken and a half gallon of ranch dressing – he will typically opt for the fat and cholesterol packed name-your-pasta alfredo, or the prime rib with a side of drawn butter.

Was it really this simple to determine the basics of a healthy diet? I decided my hypothesis required additional testing.

On our second visit to the trough, my subject elected two Chinese dishes featuring breaded, fried meats in a gelatinous, sweet-looking sauce, French-fried shrimp, spare ribs covered in an unnatural red glaze, and macaroni and cheese. I then hop-scotched through the remaining selections which included chicken with broccoli, vegetable lo mein, “Beef with Pea Pod,” and made-to-order stir fry.

For dessert? Based on my subject’s choices, I was precluded from visiting the ice cream bar or from sampling the cream puffs or mystery cakes, instead returning with orange slices, a wedge of watermelon, cottage cheese with canned peaches, and a cube of red Jell-O so resilient I had to cut it with a knife.

As my lunch hour expired, so ended the experiment. Though my research was far from conclusive, no doubt requiring further study at other buffets, there did appear to be a positive correlation between diet and weight.

Lest I be accused by the scientific community of having no empathy for the subjects of my research, however, after leaving a standard ten percent tip (on the count of it being self-service), I grabbed one of those balls of sugar-coated, deep-fried bread on my way to the door.

No wonder people are fat.

Marriage (And Other Hazards of Dating) - Chapter 1: The Fairy Tale Exposed

So you think you want to get married? Well think again.

Contrary to what rubbish your parents and society have fed you since childhood, marriage is not for everyone (and in certain cultures and/or socioeconomic groups, not for anyone).

The institution of marriage dates back to 1700 BC when king Paprikash Patel, ruler of the Persian Empire, offered his daughter, Moesha, to Egyptian Pharoah Testes II as an overture of peace in the hope of preventing war between their two nations.

Even though political mollification remains to this day one of the only valid justifications for marriage, within six months, fed up with his young wife’s whining and overeating, Testes II sent his army across the border into Persia intent on returning his bride to her people in exchange for three healthy goats. Believing he was rid of his daughter for good, Patel considered Testes’ gesture an insult, thereby provoking a war between the two empires which lasted three generations.

The painful lessons of our ancestors notwithstanding, the institution of marriage continues to thrive in all cultures in every part of the world.

Why?

Spanish author Jorge Agustín Nicolás Ruiz de Santayana y Borrás – perhaps most famous for having the longest name ever printed on the back of a Madrid Manglers soccer jersey – is also credited with “Santayana's Law of Repetitive Consequences,” which posits that “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

It seems we do indeed have short memories, as marriage continues to remain grossly popular even though the health of the institution is in no better stead today than it was during biblical times.

According to the National Center for Health Statistics, roughly half of all US marriages end in divorce – more than double the rate since 1940.

Why this dramatic upsurge in failed marriages? First and foremost, the per capita ratio of attorneys was far lower in 1940, whereas today we have roughly 7.6 lawyers to every US citizen. Secondly, during the 1940’s men demanded certain qualities in a spouse, and the women of the time were too busy sneaking out behind the garage to smoke and/or vote to argue.

Enter the sixties…

As the women’s rights movement took hold – thanks in large part to the work of Gloria Steinem and Larry Flint – women began to stand up, be counted, and make demands of their own. Since women are generally smarter than men, the balance of domestic power swung swiftly in their direction. As a result, increasing numbers of men today are finding themselves performing roles traditionally considered “women’s work” including cooking, getting up for two AM feedings, and changing the oil in the minivan.

This dramatic and unnatural role reversal is responsible not only for a worldwide gender identity crisis which finds more women demanding sex from their husbands and increasing numbers of men complaining of headaches and PMS, but is the leading cause of men’s figure skating.

This disassociation from the traditions which heretofore allowed marriage to function if not thrive has in fact so upset the delicate balance of male and female empowerment that many experts agree the divorce rate would likely approach 100% if not for religious strictures, community property laws, and the fear of violent retribution on the part of estranged spouses and/or mothers-in-law.

It seems we as a society are afraid to admit the obvious: it is unnatural for males and females of the same species to peacefully coexist.

Noted British statesperson Benjamin Disraeli once observed “It destroys one's nerves to be amiable every day to the same human being.”

We only need look to The Discovery Channel for confirmation. Even a casual observer of nature knows the primary reason males and females of most animal species come together is to mate and occasionally share a pizza. Keep those males and females together in the same confined space for an extended period without the possibility of procreation or pizza, however, and they will eventually eat each other.

The male-female dichotomy is further exacerbated by the fact that human females achieve their sexual maturity at an earlier age (and with greater permanency) than human males, which in turn affords human females the historical upper hand in dictating the future course of all male-female interactions.

Thinking back to sixth grade, by the time little boys get their first inchoate rumblings as to what their role in the whole male-female melodrama is all about, little girls already know what little boys want, that they’ve got it, and that they ain’t giving it away without compensation, preferably in the form of diamonds.

The result? Marriage: the only legalized, universally recognized, and religiously sanctioned form of prostitution known to man.