Discussion about this post

User's avatar
LauraS's avatar

Bravo, Carol!

Expand full comment
Harry La Rock's avatar

You make so many great points in this post, Carol. I like your rejectionism toward that attitude that “people die all the time.”

You’re onto something by validating both personal responsibility and the role of society in people’s diets. The person is always interfacing with social milieus and structures. You mention “seeing the social forces.” That’s really important, because if a person can see and understand something of these, then she can figure out in what ways those are a plus or a minus for her.

Then, anyone would need a way of dissenting sometimes from what society lays down. Those mechanisms of expressed self-differentiation are not automatically endowed. In contrast, there’s usually a dynamic maintenance – or even self-perpetuation – of existing social norms; they enjoy a certain incumbency. It’s very easy for a person to do what “everybody” seems to be doing, especially with eating, because one simply consumes what is present in the milieu.

As far as diet goes, one mechanism that a person could adopt in order to advantageously get outside of what a certain social milieu or food system is laying down is to make her own body and her own nourishment a high priority. (I think there’s a paradigm shift in going from eating to nourishment.) This would involve learning something of human physiology, nutrition, and food ingredients, as well as one's own authentic likes and dislikes (and everyone’s body is a little different, also.) Those likings or cravings that are not so great for health need a function of knowing “when to say when,” which is a judgment that the person is responsible for (and necessarily so because the Krispy Kreme donut company, for example, has an interest in people eating lots of the product.)

With volition and mental preparation, a person can undertake his journey in getting control of his food and making authentically satisfying decisions about that. Of course, there may be obstacles to obtaining the food that’s deemed to be preferable. You mention a few of those. I would add a couple of others, such as winter weather conditions, and the lack of a car.

One big step towards providing the means for people to obtain better food is increasing the SNAP benefit and updating the list of eligible items.

https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/usda-announces-important-snap-benefit-modernization

Your account of your preschooler lobbying for a Happy Meal is an excellent case in point, illustrating a number of interacting systems which mediate food choices. There’s McDonald’s as a capitalistic (which defines some existential parameters) corporation, marketing lucrative items to little consumers. McDonald’s is really good at this. There’s the toy that the kids will gravitate toward. There are the enticing – maybe addictive – french fries and chicken nuggets. The apple slices, I suppose, are mainly for parental buy-in.

Your kid is also systemic. He knows that he covets the Happy Meal, and that mom and dad are powerful agents who can get that to appear before him, and who are at least sometimes persuadable.

You have an interest in your kid’s nourishment, and that’s basically systemic for most parents. I think you have doubts as to whether the proffered Happy Meal is entirely consistent with that interest.

Expand full comment
8 more comments...

No posts