In my daily Mashable perusing I ran across this infographic discussing “The Eating Habits of Conservatives Versus Liberals“. I sent it to Perrin (of the Perrin tag) and she was vocally unimpressed. Here are her thoughts:
***
Not only is the author of this article perpetrating offensive stereotypes about the nature of American politics, but she’s also illustrating a reductionist (and clearly biased) argument about food culture and palate. The politics of eating has absolutely nothing to do personal politics—it’s all about access. She writes that conservatives have more of a penchant for fast food and soda, while their more refined liberal counterparts prefer a glass of pinot with their seafood.
The first thing that’s wrong with this argument, and is also the tragic downfall of so many journalists who make such assumptions, is that the author doesn’t really disclose numbers. How many people participated in this “test graph”? What is their demographic, and where exactly were the participants found? I’m fairly certain that the people who conducted this survey didn’t exactly conduct it in an un-biased and scientific manner.
Secondly, what exactly IS the correlation between food and politics? I don’t know the answer to that, but I do know that food preferences are largely dictated by geography. As someone who has lived in the northeast all her life, I’d really have to do more research to give you an answer that isn’t chock-full of my own assumptions, but since the author of this article was not shy about documenting her own preconceived notions about food, I’ll just give you mine…
Despite the ironic fact that the bulk of American agriculture is based in the Midwest, access to a diversified group of foods just isn’t readily available in these landlocked states. For instance, how many people eat fish in Oklahoma, as opposed to Massachusetts? With a largely Caucasian population, “ethnic” cuisines just aren’t as available in the Midwest, as compared to coastal cities like New York or San Francisco. Coastal states have more access to a wider variety of food, but they just so happen to have a stronger liberal inclination. To reiterate: food preferences, or food choices, have nothing to do with politics, but rather where in the country certain people are located.
Coastal states have a much larger population density than the Midwest. More people = more food, and more food choices. Also, while food deserts certainly do exist in coastal states, public transportation is arguably more prolific there; as opposed to the Midwest, where nearly everyone drives a car, and grocery stores might be few and far between. The increasing price of gas is also an issue—why would a Midwesterner drive two hours just to get a piece of fresh fish?
Economics also plays a huge role in food choices. Do people in the coastal states tend to fair better financially? If so, that would also be a factor in determining what people eat. Not only is fast food cheap and readily available in the Midwest, but their dominating car culture invites pre-prepared meals.
As a die-hard northeasterner, my assumption is that people in the northeast have more of an opportunity to “eat well” due to an economically and ethnically diverse population. Admittedly, I’m a liberal, but I don’t think that matters. I’ve been very fortunate in two important ways: a) I’ve been exposed to a huge variety of foods in my life, b) I’m educated enough to know that subsiding on a diet of soda and fast food will kill me—and that has nothing to do with my politics.
