Thursday, September 4, 2014

Food For Thought

This was going to be a long Facebook post but instead it has become a short blog post.

Remember in the 90's when first started and we were all nervous to shop online? Everyone was distrustful about putting their private information on the internet. People didn't want to use real names on their email accounts.

Now I buy my favorite lentil soup and the soup guy swipes my card on an iPad which withdraws money and puts it into his account. (That's Kamasouptra's soup if you're interested in trying it out.) I don't even think twice about putting my social security number into an online MFA program application. Our entire lives are on a digital cloud.

The world has changed, the social conscience has changed, so quickly in regards to this. Of course, one could argue that we've changed because internet security has changed, but that doesn't make it any less amazing. We grew so trusting of the internet. We went from computers being in offices to computers being in our pockets faster than we realized how horrible aquanet hairstyles were.

So my question is, what OTHER social norms could change so quickly if we found them convenient enough?

For instance, Amanda Palmer posted a very personal Ice Bucket Challenge video and the majority of the comments were about her armpit hair. Not the dead relative she was talking about. How quickly could we change social norms regarding armpit hair if we recognized how much more convenient it is to not shave? (By the way, I haven't owned a razor in over a decade. Just thought I'd say that now before there was any question of where I stand on this topic.)

If we decided, as a collective whole, that it was more convenient to look at nude photos of women who willingly had their photos taken than it is to look at stolen photos could we make photo leaks nonessential?

If it became more convenient to eat homegrown, whole foods could we do away with chemicals and processed foods?

If we decided as a collective conscience that we had no room in our lives to tolerate wastefulness could we feed the starving?

Okay, two sentences in a row about food. It's time for breakfast. Just wanted to throw out some food for thought (heh) this morning.


  1. Your compassionate heart is noted, however these statements are naive at best about how the world works.

    How about if we (Americans) collectively stopped funneling billions of dollars of year to Israel implicitly supporting their ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people? Imagine how many Palestinian children would live as a result of food and basic medical care and safety from Israeli bombs! Tens of thousands! More!

    Which to my mind is far more important than American women's comfort with their armpit hair. And far more specific - because we can actually express our own complicity in the deaths of these starving, dying children! - rather than issue vague, irresponsible sentiments about "not tolerating wastefulness" which ignore the political realities which undermine starvation all over the planet.

    1. I am far from naive on all of this, just looking at it in the widest way possible. Pre-breakfast ramblings. But yes, all good points. And all things we need to discuss as a society. As human beings.

    2. I suppose my overall idea here is simply that we can change, we are capable of it, and our relationship to the internet is proof of this. So why aren't we changing in these other ways as well? What is stopping us?

    3. Thoughtless, pre-breakfast ramblings can change the world too. In this case, your ideas can make people who read this complacent. They can rest easy because they are "changing the world" by growing their armpit hair.

      My point is that the issues you've presented are not memes that we as a society just decide to change our minds about. It's intellectually-shoddy to suggest this, even before breakfast. Sure, it'd be nice - but you're promoting an irresponsible view of what needs to happen for starvation, GMO foods, etc. to cease.

      I'd rather see you take one of these topics, do some research, put some thought into it, and then post a blog entry that actually provides an analysis of what's actually "stopping us". It's not like the answers to that question are not readily available. But there are political, sociocultural, historical, etc. forces that prevent the change you want. Why not take the time to find out what they are and share that with your audience, if that's what you really want to know.

    4. Oh that is definitely what needs to happen. And I'd encourage you to read a little further on my blog and you'll see I frequently do exactly that. Today was simply a recognition that we aren't stagnant. We are more than capable of change. And we are actively changing. So let's pause and consider the direction in which we are changing and make sure it is a good one.

      That being said if someone read this post and felt growing armpit hair was enough they are missing the point and I have failed as a writer. Which, considering how much I write, is bound to happen now and again. And it sucks, but it's part of the craft.

    5. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. I don't feel her ideas are nieve at all. I find yours both cynical and uneducated at best. You are a product of Fox News. That is quite opbvious. To suggest GMOs have anything to do with saving the hungry and nothing to do with the control of seed and the control of resources human beings need to survive, you must have some how missed your history lessons on Egypt and the Nile River. Anything that changes the cell of the human body or how that cell stores cell repairing energy from food is dangerous. This has nothing to do with "saving people" and everything to do with population control while making a profit. That's the same business the medical industry is in. There is no profit in cures, only treatment. Keeping people sick long term is profitable. The insurance companies profit from people's expectations of illness. Food companies profit when putting in cheap chemical fillers instead of selling expensive food free of additives. So chemical companies and food profit from the chemicals going in and pharmaceutical and the medical industry profit as our health declines as a result. Our country goes to no other country for any reason unless we can profit in some way. It has nothing to do with "saving others from big bad countries". That's just what they tell you to get your supporting votes. We have enough big bad country right here. When our country starts calling peaceful protestors "terrorists" and our civil rights are being cut down by one percenters and conservatives I know the illusion of freedom is about to lose its blinders. I have seen it before. First hand. There are 14 signs of fascism and our country exhibits all fourteen signs. We have millions of people homeless. They tried to take homeless people's rights to vote away from them because they know the homeless are the most likely to fight their two party system. You want to know the truth, don't go on here picking fights with bloggers that end up making you look like an ignorant product of American television. Do your own research. Follow the money. The deeper you dig the uglier it gets and you will figure out for yourself just what kind of "ethnic cleansing" is going on right in your own back yard.