What our food says about us

So the saying is right: we are what we eat. This well-known saying is true in several respects, says nutritional sociologist Daniel Kofahl: «From a physiological point of view, our body is actually the food it has ingested. From a socio-cultural perspective, we are also one with our food because we identify with it as a society - with certain table manners, foods and rituals from afternoon tea to Sunday roasts.» Kofahl teaches at the University of Vienna and the German Academy of Culinary Studies, and also runs a scientific office for agricultural policy and food culture.

How nutrition became a cult

The sociologist knows that the way we perceive and implement nutrition is pre-structured by the culture in which we grow up and live. «This is true even if we deviate from tradition,» says Kofahl. After all, we always view changes in the context of the diet legitimised by our society: «Anyone who does things differently becomes an innovator, rebel or sick person.»
There are more and more dissenters, and the consensus on what and how to eat is crumbling. Kofahl sees this as a natural consequence of the fact that food is no longer used solely to satisfy hunger.

One gets the impression that food is no longer a source of nourishment, but a substitute for medicine.

Our relationship with food has become both simpler and more complicated as a result. «Earlier generations had trouble putting food on the table,» says Kofahl, «but today we in rich industrialised societies have a decision-making problem.»

Abundance gives us a choice, which forces us to weigh things up: What do we want to eat? And above all: what not? In the jungle of possibilities, it seems that the ideal of a vital body serves as our compass. We judge food according to its health-promoting effect and get caught up in all kinds of entanglements. We get the impression that food has progressed from nutritional intake to a substitute for medicine.

Talking about food: not a luxury

In a society that makes staying young its top priority, health is also of central importance, says Kofahl: «However, it is very fragile and dependent on many factors, and now word has got around that one of these factors could be nutrition.» In this context, food also offers a rewarding field of activity for activism because change is tangible, says the sociologist: «It's easier to change your diet than to quit your job.»
According to Kofahl, the fact that we are so intensely concerned with the effect of food on our bodies also has a lot to do with a social contradiction. «It's almost paradoxical that we live in a society in which more and more people are obese, but this is stigmatised instead of cultivated,» says the sociologist. «This conflict leads us to take a close look at our diet.»

So do we talk about food too often? «I don't think so,» says Kofahl. «Food is something necessary and sensual at the same time, so why shouldn't we think and discuss it at length?» This phenomenon is not a luxury phenomenon in rich societies, but a basic need that can be observed in all cultures: «By eating the food that they believe to be the right one through collectively shared knowledge, their bodies ultimately represent a concrete product of these discourses.»
Even in tribal societies, people talk about food, but with a different focus. There it is about morals, myths and religion.

Power issues and status symbols

However, religious aspects of food are also playing an increasingly important role in places where many people from different cultures live together. Moral issues are also not reserved for tribal societies. «When we eat and drink, we give information about our ethical standpoint,» says Kofahl.
Conversely, we judge the attitudes of others by what they have on their plates. For example, cheap food is socially sanctioned in many milieus. Kofahl cites chicken from a discounter as an example: «Its consumers are suspected of putting their own well-being above that of others: the animals, the environment or those who have to produce it under adverse conditions.»
Others, says the sociologist, see the consumption of expensive organic products as pomposity and a waste of money. A relationship with food without status thinking is hardly realistic because we live in a culture that categorises everyone according to their social position. «But what should be possible,» says Kofahl, «is a more relaxed attitude. That means letting five things be five and realising how well you're doing.»

When it comes to eating, children can reverse the balance of power in the family - through secret consumption of sweets or rebellion at the family table.

Food always remains a question of power, both in society and in the family: who is authorised to issue commands and prohibitions? Although parents have the power to educate their children, says Kofahl, food is particularly well suited to shaking up this power structure, whether through secretly snacking on sweets or open rebellion at the family table.
«Food and drink convey cultural rules and norms,» says Kofahl. «This automatically raises the question of enforcement and resistance.» According to the sociologist, what can be observed in world history also applies at the family dinner table: «Issues of power do not have to be resolved in an authoritarian manner; compromises and enlightened persuasion are also possible.» And above all, parents must set an example of what they want to enforce: «Anyone who doesn't do this is untrustworthy.»
Image: Pexels.com

How do I feed my child a healthy diet? Three texts that can help...

• Do children have to eat more vegetables at all costs? An exciting interview on the question of how to prevent power struggles at the family table and still feed children a healthy diet
• 10 tips on how to make vegetables a little tastier for children
• Or try it the other way round and make fast food and sweets a little less appealing to your teenagers at home ...