Wednesday 31 July 2013

Let's let the patriarchal overlords dictate our meals from now on. They surely know best.

[Alternate post title was "That horrifying moment when China supports your actions"] 

Here's a fun game.

Imagine that the government was worried about childhood obesity. I mean, I'm sure they are. There are little balls of heart disease roaming the streets and you can't pay taxes if you're dead. Anyway, the government decides that something must be done. They set down a law which means nobody, and I mean fucking nobody, can buy junk food (pizzas, doughnuts etc) without getting a card which states you opt-out of the ban on fatty food. It's for the children, yeah?

Anyway, if you want a pizza you have to go to the counter and explain that you want to eat fatty foods. The clerk kinda squints at you and calls you "fat fuck" in her head and hands you the forms which take a few minutes to fill in. Boom, you have your card.

But what if you don't have your card? What if you go to a different supermarket? Well, you can't have a pizza. And it's not just pizza. The government said it would be purely fatty foods, but it's cheese too, it's creme freche and semi-skinned milk and pretty much everything but pasta, beans and vegetables. Wait a minute, we didn't agree to that? We wanted to protect the children. The parents clearly couldn't moderate what they were buying and do their jobs, and now everyone must bear the weight of ensuring parents don't have to do a fucking thing to make sure their kids eat right.

Heaven forbid they might try and talk to their child about choosing the right things to eat*. Nope, let's just slap a ban on it and the freaks who want to be able to choose what they eat can jump through the hoops. What if you thought your favorite food wasn't too fatty? What if you moderated yourself anyway? What if eventually there isn't an "opt-out" because it's not in the best interests of the children? Hope you don't like chocolate.

I pray to fucking God I haven't just predicted "Phase 2".







*I'm sorry if you walked in on your son unwrapping a turkey twizzler. I get that it's tough with all the exposure and you can't watch your kids all the time, but it's not justification for intrusive and oppressive laws. I totally support an easy to use "opt-in" policy, where concerned parents can prevent access to delicious cake, but that's not what we're dealing with here.

3 comments:

  1. Spot on. These issues are more about 'meta-meddling' more than they are 'public care', and I'd hate to think I couldn't get pizza anymore.
    By the way, if you can and want to, I think you should put 'share' buttons on your blog so I can easily let other people look at your wise words :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Will work on it, hermano. Going to try and get blog active again :D. I get my first wage on the 20th, do you fancy a coffee?

    ReplyDelete
  3. If this is like an actual thing that's been suggested it has absolutely nothing to do with the health of children. It's about control.
    Not all fat people are less healthy than all non-fat people, for a start. It's a bit of a reductive daily mail opinion to hold and not examine.
    Policing/restricting anyone's behaviour whether you personally think it's not to your norm is just an exercise in control. Like those utter tird stains who think benefits should be food vouchers coz heaven forbid a poor person wants to drink alcohol or you know, do anything other than exist.
    Genuinely who has suggested this?

    ReplyDelete