Stop saying "Everything in Moderation".

[Janie Grace]

To me it advocates a balanced lifestyle... let's not get all crazing banning or binging on things. I actually think it's a good bit of wisdom. It doesn't strike me as self-referential at all. Of course each person has to decide what "moderation" is, but the phrase itself is just an abstract idea for how to evaluate life's offerings. 

 

Of course, there are plenty of things one might not partake in at all, not even in moderation (in my case: CrossFit, candy corn, reality TV shows), so I guess "everything" is kind of silly.

[El...]

I think it means you are coming off a bit extreme about something. 

 

I have usually heard it as a defense against extreme views - it means, "Back off, friend, you're getting a little legalistic/extreme about your new shtick and I don't want to be talked into it." It might mean that I feel judged by your viewpoint.  "No meat, huh?  Well, I like steak; back off, sister."

 

Now, if I told my MIL that I was teaching the kids Latin and she said, "Well, everything in moderation, dear," I'd definitely understand that she thought I was overdoing it!  (She would never, though; she's a great MIL.)

[poppy]

I can't imagine anyone getting annoyed by this phrase.

 

I tend to use it as a comfort phrase...if someone is down on themselves because they didn't stick to their diet and ate a donut - 'ah well, everything in moderation.'

 

It means, don't lose your mind over being rigid in a situation where it really isn't warranted.

 

Obviously, I wouldn't say it to an alcoholic who took a drink. Or a peanut allergic person who just ate a pb sandwich.

 

In general though, I think rigidity over small things - and that donut IS a small thing in the grand universal scheme of your life! - is self defeating. And I don't want to add to someone's sense of judgement by getting bent out of shape along side them. So, the useful phrase 'never mind, all things in moderation' which communicates 'I do not judge your for this 'lapse'. Because it's actually normal human behaviour which doesn't really do a lot of harm."

 

Just as letting your kiddo watch a few shows after you've been out all day hiking is 'all things in moderation.' We can't be perfect, it's unrealistic, a few shows don't matter.'

 

MOST of what we choose to eat, view etc is mere personal preference, not a Law which must be abided by 100% of the time.

 

I'd rather err on the side of laxness than rigidity. I think rigid thinking does more harm, But hey, all things etc!

I am not arguing for more rigidity? Just for folks to stop using this platitude to dismiss the idea of going against the flow of norm-for-your-culture habits. Clearly I am in a minority - I'm ok with that - but I don't think being irritated by the term is inconceivable . Particularly since it never , ever , ever means 'everything '.

[regentrude]

I actually am a vegetarian and learned long ago it is socially.... not unacceptable , but awkward to bring up. So I almost never do.

 

I guess I just wished the 'everything in moderation' folks were as caution about realizing their way isn't something that is universally true .

 

Course this is me being too rigid again, haha.

 

You need different friends. I don't see what's awkward about vegetarianism; it is fairly main stream nowadays. I have several friends who are. (And my vegetarian friends are happy to join us for Thanksgiving - they tolerate our turkey, and in turn I ensure everything else is vegetarian. We're having a great meal.). 

 

If anybody says they do things in moderation that is about them. I hope nobody is telling you that you should eat meat in moderation or do whatever else it is you're not doing in moderation - that would be rude. But folks talk about what they do.

 

ETA: Getting hung up that "everything" does not literally mean everything is rather nitpicky.

Edited October 23, 2016 by regentrude

[regentrude]

My family has gone screen free (subtext: I am sharing something about myself that has brought us joy)

 

Now I am confused: how are you writing on this board if you're screen free?

 

Or do you allow yourself to use screens in moderation?

Edited October 23, 2016 by regentrude

[poppy]

I am not screen free, that was an example. I *have* been in that conversation , but not as the screen free person. Or the 'everything in moderation' person, of course.

 

I guess it is the old George Carlin joke: "Have you ever noticed that everyone driving slower than you is an idiot , and everyone going faster is a maniac?'

Edited October 23, 2016 by poppy

[poppy]

I think the internet definition of "overthinking it" is "you're not wrong, but you are tiresome"  :tongue_smilie:

 

I know i have not convinced the world to end the use of "everything in moderation", which is sad.  But I just hope maaaaaybe I've twinged someone out there to take a beat before saying it.

 

[Bluegoat]

To me it means what it says and is pretty good advice.

 

Some people are, however, unable to really see themselves clearly, and probably do think that what they do is the measure of everything, including what constitutes moderation.  But that is an issue with the individual, not the idea.

[Bluegoat]

I can see someone telling a vegetarian "everything in moderation" in some circumstances, without it meaning that people can't or shouldn't make that kind of lifestyle or ethical decision. (I would not expect it to go over well, though.0 They could perceive the person as being judgmental of others, or think they are actually creating a harmful situation in some way, perhaps they are not eating properly, r they are allowing it to affect other important things, or they are becoming obsessive in an unhealthy way. 

 

I think if many people are saying that, it might be they are just rude, or rigid, but it also might be that they see the issue as being something like these other issues more than the diet itself.

[mellifera33]

I'm with you, OP. When someone brings out the everything in moderation line, I usually respond with "Yes, I find that crack cocaine in moderation is a fine treat." or something equally silly. Although I do like the way my uncle who is a pastor uses it--to avoid confrontation when a family member is engaging is something with which said uncle does not agree. "What do you think about premarital sex, Uncle?" "Everything in moderation."  :lol:

[MaeFlowers]

I was raised under this philosophy. It means, in general, don't go to extremes. In food, in drink, in thought. It helps to keep life balanced and helps you to be more open to the world around you.

 

However, I was also taught the whole phrase. Everything in moderation, even moderation. Sometimes extremes are necessary, sometimes we need to indulge. So when people throw this phrase around judgmentally, I just say, "Even moderation."

[maize]

In my experience "everything in moderation" is often used as a counterbalance to all-or-nothing, black and white styles of thinking--a tendency to go to extremes in everything.

[SparklyUnicorn]

I despise statements like that.  I guess because I'm fairly literal in my thinking.  Not that I don't get the gist of the statement, but it's just so arbitrary.  I clearly understand that 24 donuts is not moderate, but are 2?  Three?  Ya know?  I don't know.  Depends on who you ask.  So it's just not a useful thing to say. 

 

[SKL]

I think the internet definition of "overthinking it" is "you're not wrong, but you are tiresome"  :tongue_smilie:

 

I know i have not convinced the world to end the use of "everything in moderation", which is sad.  But I just hope maaaaaybe I've twinged someone out there to take a beat before saying it.

 

FTR I normally say "all things do in moderation," which means [to me] if you do it, do it in moderation.  Not to the point that you hurt yourself, lose your job, etc.

 

Words like "everything," "nothing," "all day long" etc. are often used when they aren't literally meant.  It's a legitimate aspect of at least some English dialects.

 

Haven't you ever said / heard "you're always nagging me," "I can never please her," "nothing is wrong," "let's just forget the whole thing" and similar?

 

I happen to like the phrase "never say never."  I also say "less is more" all the time [ok maybe not ALL the time], which is technically not "true," but I think people usually get the point.

Edited October 23, 2016 by SKL

[TranquilMind]

Ah, I could see it as a conversational dodge.

I more often see it as a parry:

 

I am low carb / I am vegetarian.... well not me, everything in moderation! (Says a person who eats very little variety-- chicken/pork/pasta/potatoes).

I limit screens for my kids.... well not me, everything in moderation! (Says the person who watches TV every day and is on Facebook all the time, but I guess not 24/7 = moderation)

 

I also can't get past the word "everything".  We don't smoke in moderation. We aren't all moderately evil. 

 

** I will also add, stating being low carb, vegetarian, screen free can be kinda obnoxious in some contexts too**

 

Right, this.  We don't smoke in moderation, or drink in moderation (or at all in our specific case), or kill people in moderation, or have affairs in moderation.  ;) 

 

[TranquilMind]

I despise statements like that.  I guess because I'm fairly literal in my thinking.  Not that I don't get the gist of the statement, but it's just so arbitrary.  I clearly understand that 24 donuts is not moderate, but are 2?  Three?  Ya know?  I don't know.  Depends on who you ask.  So it's just not a useful thing to say. 

 

Yeah. How big are the donuts?  ;)

 

[poppy]

FTR I normally say "all things do in moderation," which means [to me] if you do it, do it in moderation.  Not to the point that you hurt yourself, lose your job, etc.

 

Words like "everything," "nothing," "all day long" etc. are often used when they aren't literally meant.  It's a legitimate aspect of at least some English dialects.

 

Haven't you ever said / heard "you're always nagging me," "I can never please her," "nothing is wrong," "let's just forget the whole thing" and similar?

 

I happen to like the phrase "never say never."  I also say "less is more" all the time [ok maybe not ALL the time], which is technically not "true," but I think people usually get the point.

 

I think that would apply if "everything" was hyperbolic. But it's  not. It is a counter.

 

Speaker 1: "I ordered the chicken, I don't eat fish" 

Speaker 2: "well, we follow everything in moderation in our house"

 

Speaker 2 is conveying "we do not restrict fish from our diet".  Speaker 2 is not "we eat a wide variety of meats: fish, goat, buffalo, alligator...." 

Edited October 23, 2016 by poppy

[tm919]

It does not bother me when people say this. I think it is most often used when the other person does not want to argue with you about how you live your life, though they may not wish to scold you over it. So, i.e.:

 

Person A: "darn. Every week I buy five lottery tickets and i have never even won a dollar."

 

Person B, thinking, I don't buy lottery tickets at all and view that as wasting resources.: "Well, everything in moderation."

 

Certainly seems better than Person B saying, "So you're saying you throw away five dollars every week and you're mad you haven't become the 1:1,978,632,679 people who have won?" (Although I admit I really like the elegance in that second response.) ;)

Agree -- it's often a conversational band-aid that stops me from saying something more offensive. I most often find myself saying it to my "healthy" husband who reminds me of the carcinogens I'm eating as I'm eating them (in a non-specific way that's hard not to see as directed toward me, like "bacon causes cancer" while I'm cooking bacon).

 

Honestly if I'm about to eat a slice of ham and someone (who knows I eat meat) says they don't eat meat for ethical reasons, "everything in moderation" is less offensive response than some other alternatives "But pigs are so delicious!!," "whatever floats your boat," and awkward silence sound just as bad or worse to me.

[SKL]

I think that would apply if "everything" was hyperbolic. But it's  not. It is a counter.

 

Speaker 1: "I ordered the chicken, I don't eat fish" 

Speaker 2: "well, we follow everything in moderation in our house"

 

Speaker 2 is conveying "we do not restrict fish from our diet".  Speaker 2 is not "we eat a wide variety of meats: fish, goat, buffalo, alligator...." 

 

Well these sound hypothetical; I guess I would have to be there to really get the meaning.

 

But if I were there, I'd more likely be asking myself, "why did she make a point to say she doesn't eat fish?"  I mean when I order at a restaurant, I order what I want and leave it at that.  Unless someone tries to talk me into "oh their salmon is the best, you have to try it"; then I would say "I'm not really a salmon person, but thanks!"

 

I mean, why do you want me to know that you don't eat ___?  I think Miss Manners would say that you shouldn't do that as you're making me uncomfortable, wondering if you're inwardly crying with each bite of chicken I eat, or whatever emotion the slaughter of chicken creates in you.  I have now completely lost my appetite and I'm wondering if you also have a soft corner for the potatoes and beans on my plate, or if I should just fake a migraine and leave.

 

Now that I've read this thread, I think that if someone ever tells me "I don't eat meat," I will respond with "oh, really?  Cool!  I don't eat beets or lima beans."  :P

[poppy]

Well these sound hypothetical; I guess I would have to be there to really get the meaning.

 

But if I were there, I'd more likely be asking myself, "why did she make a point to say she doesn't eat fish?"  I mean when I order at a restaurant, I order what I want and leave it at that.  Unless someone tries to talk me into "oh their salmon is the best, you have to try it"; then I would say "I'm not really a salmon person, but thanks!"

 

I mean, why do you want me to know that you don't eat ___?  I think Miss Manners would say that you shouldn't do that as you're making me uncomfortable, wondering if you're inwardly crying with each bite of chicken I eat, or whatever emotion the slaughter of chicken creates in you.  I have now completely lost my appetite and I'm wondering if you also have a soft corner for the potatoes and beans on my plate, or if I should just fake a migraine and leave.

 

Now that I've read this thread, I think that if someone ever tells me "I don't eat meat," I will respond with "oh, really?  Cool!  I don't eat beets or lima beans."  :p

 

In my head it was two people chit-chatting about what they ordered for a wedding dinner, or a flight.  Just to set the scene.

[Guest]

You need different friends. I don't see what's awkward about vegetarianism; it is fairly main stream nowadays. I have several friends who are. (And my vegetarian friends are happy to join us for Thanksgiving - they tolerate our turkey, and in turn I ensure everything else is vegetarian. We're having a great meal.).

 

If anybody says they do things in moderation that is about them. I hope nobody is telling you that you should eat meat in moderation or do whatever else it is you're not doing in moderation - that would be rude. But folks talk about what they do.

 

ETA: Getting hung up that "everything" does not literally mean everything is rather nitpicky.

This is true. Half of my book club friends are either vegetarian or vegan. I know this, but it generally goes unmentioned unless the food is at this moment a subject of the conversation, such as when one friend discovered a piece of bacon had made its way into her otherwise meatless meal at the restaurant. None of them have ever stared at me or said, "really? You're getting the meatball sub?!" If they did, it wouldn't occur to me to say, "everything in moderation." I guess I would shrug and say, "yeah. Are you really getting the lentil soup?"

 

There would be no point in hanging out with people at a restaraunt if they can't bear my sandwich.

[SKL]

Well again - when you make a point to tell someone you don't eat __, especially if the reason is that you're in some way trying to be a better person (more ethical, healthier, whatever), then some people are going to respond defensively.  And others who have been where you are may respond with some wisdom they gained since then.

 

You seem determined to see only how their motive could be to belittle you, not how your comment might have affected them.

 

But maybe you do have some acquaintances who use that phrase to belittle people.  I've never seen this phenomenon, but I guess it is possible.

[poppy]

You guys bothered by 'all things' know that colloquial sayings aren't meant to be read literally, right ?

 

If I say that I 'paid an arm and a leg' for this dress', I did not chop my limbs off to afford it.

 

In the same way that I say 'all things in moderation', what is implied is not an amount - all the things or a certain number which defines moderation - but an attitude.

 

And the attitude is what maize said above - a counterbalance to all or nothing, black or white thinking.

 

This is why it's incorrect to use it when someone tells you they are vegetarian - that is a food preference, not an example of black and white thinking. 

 

Now, if someone told me 'meat will kill you, it's unethical to eat it, and you are a murderer, our family chooses not to live with the blood of animals on our conscience' I'd be tempted to shrug 'all things'...but only b/c hypothetical you was being an pain in the patootie. 

 

 

an arm and a leg= a nonsense phrase, clearly an idiom.

Dress for success = a 3 word idiom where all the key words convey the same idea (it is about how one dresses; the goal is success)

Everything in moderation = a 3 word phrase where  only one of the words is relevant?

It is a really annoying expression, is what I'm saying.

 

My original complaint is my main one. It is a phrase used to dismiss outliers and weirdos. 

Anyway, we are all black and white thinkers on some areas, right? We all agree on many fundamental things. Zero tolerance for cruelty to children and animals is very common, for example.

[SKL]

I should clarify that I have many vegetarian friends.  I don't have a problem with "I'm vegetarian" when discussing what to order or which restaurants are preferred.  Just saying you're veg or prefer veg isn't in the other person's face.  Adding that it's because you think that is going to make you a better person (compared to meat-eaters) is where it will rub some people the wrong way.

[Mimm]

Everything in Moderation --- what does this mean to you?

 

I think it means "be like me.".  I think people say "everything in moderation" to mean 'don't over-indulge or underindulge in this thing I do not over-indulge or under-indulge in'.

It is a way of placing yourself as the norm. It is a selfish way of looking at the world.  It never actually means, literally, "everything".

 

It sounds like you're reading a lot of negativity into it. When I say everything in moderation, it's a reminder to myself or my kids to not overindulge or be too strict. The last time I said something like that was to my nephew who was talking about how unhealthy it was to have a piece of candy he wanted. I assured him that a little candy was ok, but that it was good that he wanted to eat healthy.

 

I talk about this to my kids a lot because I grew up with a family that didn't do moderation. There was a lot of excess, in areas that my parents couldn't really afford. So we talk about trying to keep things at a reasonable level, whatever that might be. It's not meant as a judgement or holding myself up as some kind of standard...

 

Sooo... no, I'm not going to stop saying that.

[mom2scouts]

 

My original complaint is my main one. It is a phrase used to dismiss outliers and weirdos. 

 

I think you're talking this phrase way too personally and in a way that few people mean. If I say it, I'm usually using it about myself or to agree with someone who wants confirmation that it's OK to not always live up to their ideal. I know that eating doughnuts for breakfast isn't a healthy choice, but I might tell myself or someone who feels guilty about doing it that the occasional doughnut isn't such a bad thing. If someone chooses never to eat meat or use screens or whatever, I really don't care and wouldn't consider them an "outlier or weirdo".  I would only use the phrase with such a person if they really wanted to be vegetarian or screen free and then ordered a steak or watched a TV show. Something "in moderation" doesn't mean their original choice was wrong, it just means sometimes it's OK to make a different choice.

 

If people are saying "everything in moderation" in response to your telling them you are vegan or screen free, I think they are trying to politely say they disagree that eating meat or using screens is always a bad thing. It's not really about you. You told them your opinion and they told you they find it acceptable to sometimes do those things. Throughout this entire thread, people keep telling you they aren't telling you you're a weirdo when they say "everything in moderation", yet you refuse to believe they're just telling you they have a different opinion. Did you intend this to be a JAWM?

[Matryoshka]

Okay, is it a regional thing that it's used this way, because most of us have no idea how (or why) it could be, but it sounds like others are familiar with this use.

 

I don't think I've ever said this phrase to another adult, or heard it said by another adult in response to someone saying something about a lifestyle choice.  I may direct it at myself, but even then I usually don't say it out loud, it's more like a good rule to live by.

 

I have said it to my kids, more like as a good rule to live by, and how even water, which is necessary for life (and which makes up some huge percentage of your body mass), can be fatal if overconsumed.  I use it when with teens we discuss things like alcohol use  (and I'm another one that thinks this only applies to things that you do indulge in at all - not murder, or for that matter, something you're addicted to.) - for most people, some is usually okay, but if you overindulge, it's a huge problem.  And for anything, if you find you can't use it in moderation without overindulging, probably abstaining or cutting waaaay back is better (sugar, screen time type 'addictions').

 

I have literally never heard it used as a comeback to something someone else has said.

 

 

Honestly if I'm about to eat a slice of ham and someone (who knows I eat meat) says they don't eat meat for ethical reasons, "everything in moderation" is less offensive response than some other alternatives "But pigs are so delicious!!," "whatever floats your boat," and awkward silence sound just as bad or worse to me.

 

Do you guys who've heard it used this way live in "Bless your heart" land?  Because this is so passive aggressive and weird.  If someone sniffed at me that they don't eat meat while I enjoyed my ham sandwich, I would indeed say "but pigs are delicious!!"  That, actually, is a phrase I may have used more than once when talking to my more-virtuous vegetarian friends - but with a smile and a wink, and only if they start pontificating on the virtues of vegetarianism.  Otherwise I'll actually go out of my way to cook vegetarian stuff if they come over.  I'm very supportive, I just don't want to be converted. Because, pigs. you know, are in fact delicious...

[kitten18]

 

My original complaint is my main one. It is a phrase used to dismiss outliers and weirdos.

I have never heard it used that way.

[kitten18]

You guys bothered by 'all things' know that colloquial sayings aren't meant to be read literally, right ?

 

If I say that I 'paid an arm and a leg' for this dress', I did not chop my limbs off to afford it.

 

In the same way that I say 'all things in moderation', what is implied is not an amount - all the things or a certain number which defines moderation - but an attitude.

 

And the attitude is what maize said above - a counterbalance to all or nothing, black or white thinking.

 

This is why it's incorrect to use it when someone tells you they are vegetarian - that is a food preference, not an example of black and white thinking.

 

Now, if someone told me 'meat will kill you, it's unethical to eat it, and you are a murderer, our family chooses not to live with the blood of animals on our conscience' I'd be tempted to shrug 'all things'...but only b/c hypothetical you was being an pain in the patootie.

Right. If someone says "my toddler is into everything". I know that they don't mean that she/he is into every single thing.

[Jaybee]

I've heard the phrase, of course--and maybe used it before. But I haven't heard it used or used it in the way OP is using as examples. The conversations used as examples don't make sense to me as per the meaning and usage of the phrase.

[SparklyUnicorn]

You guys bothered by 'all things' know that colloquial sayings aren't meant to be read literally, right ?

 

If I say that I 'paid an arm and a leg' for this dress', I did not chop my limbs off to afford it.

 

In the same way that I say 'all things in moderation', what is implied is not an amount - all the things or a certain number which defines moderation - but an attitude.

 

And the attitude is what maize said above - a counterbalance to all or nothing, black or white thinking.

 

This is why it's incorrect to use it when someone tells you they are vegetarian - that is a food preference, not an example of black and white thinking. 

 

Now, if someone told me 'meat will kill you, it's unethical to eat it, and you are a murderer, our family chooses not to live with the blood of animals on our conscience' I'd be tempted to shrug 'all things'...but only b/c hypothetical you was being an pain in the patootie. 

 

Oh no no.  This is not a colloquial saying.  This is dietary advice.  Like the doctor who told my kid he should eat small portions.  Thanks doc.  That's wildly helpful.  Let's see...teen boy...who is extremely picky to boot...."eat small portions".  WHAT DOES THAT MEAN!!!!!  My poor kid.  If he didn't start off with issues he is on his way.  I told him to ignore the doctor because it's stupid and bad advice. 

[poppy]

I want to clarify for the 4th time that I do not announce my vegetarianism to the world in person, ever. I am extremely aware of how much people like pork products. Sheesh.   

[Matryoshka]

Well, maybe this is another of those US/AU confusions. it's not dietary advice here.

I'm in the US, and I understand it the same way you do...

[poppy]

If you google 'everything in moderation' you will see that most results refer to food intake / eating choices .

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[myfunnybunch]

an arm and a leg= a nonsense phrase, clearly an idiom.

Dress for success = a 3 word idiom where all the key words convey the same idea (it is about how one dresses; the goal is success)

Everything in moderation = a 3 word phrase where  only one of the words is relevant?

It is a really annoying expression, is what I'm saying.

 

My original complaint is my main one. It is a phrase used to dismiss outliers and weirdos.

Anyway, we are all black and white thinkers on some areas, right? We all agree on many fundamental things. Zero tolerance for cruelty to children and animals is very common, for example.

 

The bolded is where I think the disagreement with your interpretation lies. I have never heard it used in this manner, nor do I interpret it that way. I've always heard it used to mean that we should find balance, but never in a dismissive way. I have said it to people with whom I agree or support, mostly, and while I do know some "outliers and weirdos" :P it's never been used to imply that their views are outlandish. More the opposite: I've mostly used it/heard it used to mean, "Yeah, I get what you're saying. XYZ issue will be just fine because you're not a complete and utter whackadoodle about it."

[rocassie]

In my neck of the woods, it's a figure of speech meaning "don't beat yourself up about doing that "unhealthy" thing/food/activity  because I myself have done it or something similar - no judgement here." or it's in response to feeling or actually be judged by another for the way you live your life.  I know I have said it in both situations. 

 

Since it a figure of speech here, it's not meant to be taken literal, but my literal DH likes to add on to it, "except poison mushrooms."

 

If it's said in a judgmental way or given as advice by a professional, then yeah I can see being annoyed by it.

[creekland]

If you google 'everything in moderation' you will see that most results refer to food intake / eating choices .

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Of course, because it's the wine, chocolate, Spam, donuts, steaks, bacon, cheese, and similar that most of us know ought to be consumed in moderation if we choose to indulge in them.  It's our guilt free way of doing so along with our reminder that we shouldn't be indulging 24/7.

 

The only other thing I can think of that I've heard it used with is exercise - or lack thereof.  Skipping a day or two when something comes up won't hurt anymore than the occasional Spam & eggs for breakfast does.

 

I still see absolutely nothing wrong with using the phrase and have no plans to stop.  My friends would probably think I was weird if I objected to their using the phrase too.  We all say it when we're cheatin' on being healthy, but we're ok with cheatin' once in a while.  It's probably more like code for "Yes, I bought a cheesesteak sandwich for lunch instead of a salad today, and I'm enjoying it."  In no way does it imply that someone else should do the same thing tomorrow - or any day.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

For two pages and 85 posts (give or take a few), I did NOT see where the OP was coming from. Now suddenly, I do. I agree with the people who say that most people aren't meaning it the way the OP is taking it, though.

 

Poppy, is this barking up the right tree?

 

When I was strict about my child's medically necessary dietary restrictions, when he was little, relatives who didn't know how celiac disease works would suggest I let him have a (gluten containing) cookie now and then, because, "It won't hurt him just once in awhile! Everything in moderation!"

 

Or when I made a decision not to drink, ever, until I'm done raising children, friends or relatives who aren't comfortable with abstinence might say, "Oh, one drink now and then is totally harmless, and legal, and if it's red wine it's good for your heart...everything in moderation."

 

Item #1: I've never been a drinker, am not an alcoholic, so perhaps I'm being extreme but it's my life.

Item #2: I've never told anyone else not to drink, nor ever been offended at anyone drinking in my presence.

Item #3: I don't mind the 'everything in moderation' remark if they're saying it about THEM. It's only a problem if they're telling ME to change because of THEIR philosophy!

 

If the abstention is because of medical, moral/religious, or philosophical/conscience reasons, and the moderation-advocating, non-abstaining 2nd party is trying to put your in your place or correct you (even in the smallest way) because they're really not into something as radical as abstinence of anything for any reason ever, and don't think you should be, either...then that is annoying.

 

Up until the point where they're telling me what to do, it's just conversation. I said my thing, now they're saying their thing. This does not, and should not, offend either party! But when it crosses over into, "This is what you should do, because you should think what I think," that doesn't feel to me like mutual respect or small talk, either one.

 

In my personal experience, there have been fewer than a dozen people in my life who are saying it to push me around, and they neither begin nor end with this phrase, so there's no doubt of their meaning! The other hundred people that I've heard say it are talking about themselves, not me.

 

 

Edited October 24, 2016 by Tibbie Dunbar

[Matryoshka]

If you google 'everything in moderation' you will see that most results refer to food intake / eating choices .

 

It's not that I don't think it's often used to reference food (I also think of it for other things, like exercise or spending), it's that I've always thought about it as a personal attitude/philosophy, not advice to give someone else.

 

I've also kind of always thought of it more towards a caution against overindulgence, not abstaining, so I guess that's why it confuses me in terms of applying to food choices.  There are lots of foods I don't eat at all.  I don't eat pickles or olives (among other things).  No one has ever tut-tutted me when I've said this with 'everything in moderation' - like I'm supposed to eat a moderate amount of every single food available to me on the planet?  I think of it more in terms of "it's okay if I eat one slice of pie, but I probably shouldn't eat the whole thing' - aimed at me, not someone else - or maybe my kid if they're being a pig and eating all the cookies. I've also tried to talk to my picky kid about not eating things made from white flour and milk products and some tomato products and not much else.  But then we have a real conversation about moderation, I don't just flip out a glib line at her.   I'd never say something to another adult, and certainly not about their lifestyle choices.  

 

I'm not doubting that you've heard it (enough to make you sick of it, apparently :grouphug: ), it sounds like a few others have too?  I've just never heard it used in the contexts you've given, which seems more like a comeback or someone trying to make someone else feel guilty about their choices.  That's why I wondered if it was a regional thing.

[hornblower]

Here's how it seems to me: 

If you're saying it to yourself, or saying it to a sympatico friend as you both 'cheat' on your diet & order the extra dessert or whatever - then it's just a self-comforting phrase. 

If you're saying it in response to someone who has just said something about how they *are* limiting themselves in some fashion, then it's very much subject to being taken as a judgement of their decision to be strict. 

But I also tend to think most things people say are about them, and not about me...
 

[SKL]

Here's how it seems to me: 

 

If you're saying it to yourself, or saying it to a sympatico friend as you both 'cheat' on your diet & order the extra dessert or whatever - then it's just a self-comforting phrase. 

 

If you're saying it in response to someone who has just said something about how they *are* limiting themselves in some fashion, then it's very much subject to being taken as a judgement of their decision to be strict. 

 

But I also tend to think most things people say are about them, and not about me...

 

 

I sometimes say "I don't drink alcohol" when it comes up in conversation.  (For example, other parents saying to me, "I bet you'll have a glass of wine when this is over.")  However, I know going in that some people may read into this as meaning "I don't approve of drinking alcohol," which is certainly not true.  So if someone comes back with a comment similar to "all things in moderation," I will view it as justifying themselves, not advising me.  I would respond by reassuring them that I have nothing against other people drinking, I myself just don't choose to.  I would not assume they think I am looney tunes because I don't drink.  :P

 

[Jean in Newcastle]

This kind of black and white literal thinking is what I spend a lot of time (mostly unsuccessfully) trying to get my Aspie to get away from.  No I'm not saying that everyone who thinks like this is an Aspie but I do think that it would be a higher percentage of Aspies in this group.  Why do I spend time trying to get my Aspie to not think this way?  Because it can be damaging to social relationships and interactions.  And it can be too simplistic for the greys of human interaction.  And it can lead to catastrophizing in some cases where negative intentions are routinely attributed to people who have none. 

[eternalsummer]

well, it never means what it says, anyway

 

no one thinks you should do heroin in moderation, or rape women in moderation, or whatever

[poppy]

For two pages and 85 posts (give or take a few), I did NOT see where the OP was coming from. Now suddenly, I do. I agree with the people who say that most people aren't meaning it the way the OP is taking it, though.

 

Poppy, is this barking up the right tree?

 

When I was strict about my child's medically necessary dietary restrictions, when he was little, relatives who didn't know how celiac disease works would suggest I let him have a (gluten containing) cookie now and then, because, "It won't hurt him just once in awhile! Everything in moderation!"

 

Or when I made a decision not to drink, ever, until I'm done raising children, friends or relatives who aren't comfortable with abstinence might say, "Oh, one drink now and then is totally harmless, and legal, and if it's red wine it's good for your heart...everything in moderation."

 

Item #1: I've never been a drinker, am not an alcoholic, so perhaps I'm being extreme but it's my life.

Item #2: I've never told anyone else not to drink, nor ever been offended at anyone drinking in my presence.

Item #3: I don't mind the 'everything in moderation' remark if they're saying it about THEM. It's only a problem if they're telling ME to change because of THEIR philosophy!

 

If the abstention is because of medical, moral/religious, or philosophical/conscience reasons, and the moderation-advocating, non-abstaining 2nd party is trying to put your in your place or correct you (even in the smallest way) because they're really not into something as radical as abstinence of anything for any reason ever, and don't think you should be, either...then that is annoying.

 

Up until the point where they're telling me what to do, it's just conversation. I said my thing, now they're saying their thing. This does not, and should not, offend either party! But when it crosses over into, "This is what you should do, because you should think what I think," that doesn't feel to me like mutual respect or small talk, either one.

 

In my personal experience, there have been fewer than a dozen people in my life who are saying it to push me around, and they neither begin nor end with this phrase, so there's no doubt of their meaning! The other hundred people that I've heard say it are talking about themselves, not me.

 

 

Yes. I think this is where I'm coming from.

I have one child whose diet is restricted due to sensory/anxiety and it is so bad that we go to weekly feeding therapy.

I have a husband with autoimmune issues that has to stick to a severely limited diet. (AIP paleo, for those familiar).

I am an ethical vegetarian.

Everything in moderation, diet-wise, doesn't apply to us at all. 

Or another way to think of it is, why must I make things so difficult, when the answer is always everything in  moderation? Ha.

People who say it sound ... smug? Like they are sitting on top of the world.  While I try to feed a family with three completely different, often contradictory diets.

 

So yeah I hear it and get defensive, and go to "Good to know you like porn in moderation! I for one do not like rattlesnake bites in moderation. Crystal meth in moderation does sound unwise, but, OK then." etc. 

 

[Guest]

Yes. I think this is where I'm coming from.

I have one child whose diet is restricted due to sensory/anxiety and it is so bad that we go to weekly feeding therapy.

I have a husband with autoimmune issues that has to stick to a severely limited diet. (AIP paleo, for those familiar).

I am an ethical vegetarian.

Everything in moderation, diet-wise, doesn't apply to us at all. 

Or another way to think of it is, why must I make things so difficult, when the answer is always everything in  moderation? Ha.

People who say it sound ... smug? Like they are sitting on top of the world.  While I try to feed a family with three completely different, often contradictory diets.

 

So yeah I hear it and get defensive, and go to "Good to know you like porn in moderation! I for one do not like rattlesnake bites in moderation. Crystal meth in moderation does sound unwise, but, OK then." etc. 

 

I think you are hearing the "everything" part and everyone else is hearing the "moderation" part.

[thessa516]

Thank you Tibbie for providing the perspective!

 

Yes, when I say "Everything in moderation", I'm saying it to myself to quiet the overbearing guilt voice screaming in my head while I'm trying to enjoy a planned cheat meal. It should not be used for guilting someone else!

 

I don't tell my DH to eat everything in moderation, because he functions best when he abstains from certain foods. I can eat a piece of chocolate, walk away, and tell myself everything in moderation. On the other hand, my DH has a terrible time walking away from junk food. If he takes a bite, he has a more difficult time walking away after that bite than he would have had if he had ignored the junk food in the first place.

 

I'm sorry that someone has been using that phrase in a mean-spirited way towards you. They shouldn't try to make you act in a certain way because of their beliefs. Likewise, you shouldn't expecting everyone to stop saying "everything in moderation". :D

[SKL]

It's obnoxious if people brush off your serious dietary concerns.  But if this is happening with more than one or two people, could it be the way you are saying it?  I have a friend whose kids have very serious food issues.  She doesn't mince words.  "She has celiac.  If she eats xyz she will be sick for a very long time."  "She has diabetes.  If she does xyz she could go into a coma."

[Bluegoat]

It's perhaps useful to look into the kinds of thinking the phrase/idea actually comes from to understand what it is getting at.  It's a not uncommon suggestion in a number of philosophical schools.

 

In the West it's associated particularly with the Stoics, and with Aristotle.  If we look at it with Aristotle, it's particularly associated with the idea of balance between reason and desire.  And with the Stoics with the idea of detachment from desire - Buddhism tends to look at it that way as well.

 

The point being that it isn't about finding some median spot for every activity, at all.  That isn't the point at all.  It's about not being overcome and ruled by emotion and fleshly concerns, while not repressing those things either. (Either giving them their due ruled by reason or treating them as a kind of externality depending on the school of thought.)  And in this way of thinking, even taking too rationalistic or abstract a path can be an error against the rule of moderation.

 

 

[poppy]

It's perhaps useful to look into the kinds of thinking the phrase/idea actually comes from to understand what it is getting at.  It's a not uncommon suggestion in a number of philosophical schools.

 

In the West it's associated particularly with the Stoics, and with Aristotle.  If we look at it with Aristotle, it's particularly associated with the idea of balance between reason and desire.  And with the Stoics with the idea of detachment from desire - Buddhism tends to look at it that way as well.

 

The point being that it isn't about finding some median spot for every activity, at all.  That isn't the point at all.  It's about not being overcome and ruled by emotion and fleshly concerns, while not repressing those things either. (Either giving them their due ruled by reason or treating them as a kind of externality depending on the school of thought.)  And in this way of thinking, even taking too rationalistic or abstract a path can be an error against the rule of moderation.

 

Yeah, I know the origins, that's partly why it burns. Because it is considered a fundamental philosophical truth, to some people. It gives a lot of weight to a viewpoint which I find somewhat specious.

[SKL]

OK so you believe that people who prefer to be moderate are wrong?