My blog is not meant to be a rebuttle of that argument. It has already been done by many bloggers, inlcuding in this post from The Paleo Mom. She sums it up quite well. I highly suggest you read it. She said everything that my brain was screaming after I read the offensive WAPF article.
So the first of my two cents is this:
1. I am used to my "Paleo Diet" being attacked by the general SAD (Standard American Diet) eating public. That I can deal with. Honestly, I know it's usually not their fault. They just don't have all the information I do, and they have been misinformed their whole lives, so when they tell me that my delicious lard will clog my arteries, I just smile and nod. It was a slap in the face, however to be disregarded and so poorly misrepresented by the leader of an organization that I respected, and that I thought was on "my team." The real food team, that is.
My second cent:
2. This debate reminds me a little of the Chick-fil-A scandal that was in the news recently. You remember, when everyone was up in arms because the founder, S. Truett Cathy, was giving money to anit-gay organizations? It was a big deal, wasn't it? Now, I gave up eating Chick-fil-A long ago, and it had nothing to do with the politics, and more about cutting out all fast food from my diet, but of course I followed the issue a little because I have a few close friends who are gay. At first, I understood why so many people were boycotting Chick-fil-A. They obviously didn't want their money going to fund an anti-gay cause. Makes sense. Then I read a note posted on facebook by one of their employees that I didn't necessarily know, but I knew of through friends. In the note, he wrote about how the scandal was affecting him and his family. He owns a Chick-fil-A and he was hurt. Because S. Truett Cathy was seemingly anti-gay, people assumed he and his family were too just because he worked for the company. People were boycotting his particular restaurant because of politics, but it felt to him more like they were boycotting his livelihood over a cause that he didn't agree with either, as he also has several close friends that are gay. He encouraged the readers to see Chick-fil-A as an organization made up of many different people, many who hold different opinions on the issue of sexuality from Cathy.
The WAPF organization is completely different from the fast food chain, obviously, but the sentiment is the same. There are many card carrying members of the organization that are probably just as angry about the article as I am. They are probably irritated that because Sally drew a line in the sand between WAPF and Paleo, that they are now viewed as having the same opinion as her, when that may not necessarily be true. Just as it was pretty stupid for Sally to make blanket assumptions about "us," the Paleo community, lets not make the same mistake and make assumptions about "them," the WAPF community. We really do agree with each other about 95% about what we should be eating to stay healthy.
Just as I visit many WAPF sites and blogs, I suspect that many WAPF dieters also enjoy Paleo sites and food blogs. I would wager a guess that many of "them" understand "us" a hell of a lot better than Sally seemingly does.
So basically what I am saying is this: Sally, you owe all of us an apology. You misrepresented us very poorly, but you also misrepresented your own just as poorly.
Oh, and it just has to be said: Sally, I'd like you to know that I have five jars of pastured pork lard in my fridge, and a grassfed cow tongue in my freezer that happens to be sitting next to a bag of bones for my next batch of bone broth. Just sayin'. Don't judge me until you've looked in my fridge. Ok, vent off.