The Lunch Police Are Coming! Parents pale in comparison to Nanny state Mommy and Police state Daddy.
Police state Daddy and Nanny State Mommy send out the Lunch Police.
Not so long ago it was thought resources should go into combating drugs in schools, gangs, dare I say it, illiteracy. In modern America, it’s the lunch police cracking down hard core on that most dreaded of all tiny tot afflictions, lunch. Little children nation wide are now plagued daily by that most wretched dealer, the one that on occasion peddles sugar, salt, a homemade reminder of those who love you, and, perhaps even from Mom’s own hands, that most dreaded of all the plagues upon children across the land, cookies.
Let that sink in for a minute.
In America, school tragedies over the years bring to mind such horrific events as those seen at Columbine. One can not help but think of such things as the ever escalating drug problems, gang problems, binge drinking, teen pregnancy, bullying, date rape and relationship violence, and oh yea, don’t they have budget problems? Wasn't there some talk about teacher shortages in certain subjects? Has it not been brought to the public’s attention that an alarming number of the nation’s children can’t read?
But now, let us not forget our focus, the lunch police.
Considering the vast number of problems plaguing the youth of America why would our leaders, our laws, or national attention be directed to lunches and the like? Is what little Suzy has concealed in her lunch box more important that the fact that chances are high she can’t read?
Are the lunch police but mearly another point on the lance of the PC weapon?
This hub shall endeavor to do the following...
- Define parenting.
- Examine how that definition has changed. Is it a parent's job or that of the government?
- Show manifest and latent functions of the governmental increasing encroachment over the autonomy of the family unit especially in relation to parenting.
What does an older definition say?
“late 12c., from O.Fr. parent (11c.), from L. parentem (nom. parens) "father or mother, ancestor," noun use of prp. of parere "bring forth, give birth to, produce," from PIE root *per- "to bring forth" (see pare). Began to replace native elder after c.1500. The verb is attested from 1660s. The verbal noun parenting is first recorded 1959 (earlier term had been parentcraft, 1930).”
Dictionary.com defines parenting as...
1. “the rearing of children. The schedule allows her very little time for parenting.
2. The methods, techniques, etc., used or required in the rearing of children: a course in parenting.
3. The state of being a parent; parenthood.”
My, my. How what is considered good parenting has changed.
Is it a change for the better? Even if one were perfect and followed the prescribed parenting trends could one be assured the perfect child? Is that even the goal of parenting? Let’s take a look.
In the modern definition we are to rear or raise one assumes into adulthood but in the old we are just to give birth, create. Obviously, we see a shift here. Was that bad? I have to think not.
Common sense tells us that the goal of parenting has to be to raise children who are capable of being independent adults. Traditionally, it was the job of the parent to raise children but over the years, in America, the government has become more and more involved in the role of parenting. It's not working out well.
OK. Hmm? So we have this modern definition.
What exactly is considered rearing? Which methods and techniques? Decided upon by whom? When did I miss this vote? Did you see it in the papers? There have been parents and children since long before nations, dictionaries, and definitions were even thought of. American parents did a pretty decent job of raising children for over 150 years.
One could argue that the decline in American youth as evidenced by testing data, high school completion rates, incidents of school related serious violence, and teen pregnancy rates is in direct correlation with increasing governmental regulation over education, families, and the very idea, the portrayal of family, of how family is defined and depicted in the media.
"Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted."
It strikes me as somewhat strange and leading that the very first sentence used to illustrate the modern definition, "The schedule allows her very little time for parenting" is one that points out how little time there is in modern society for parenting. Further, it stands out to me that the pronoun selected is “her.” It is not we as in he and she as in two parents. Nor is it simply he as in to have a father that does parenting but rather, if we go by this one statement alone, it is a single she. This is indicative of the breakdown of the American family. More and more families are headed by single females. Not only is that true, but it is also overly represented in our culture.
Why would that be?
Is it possible traditional families and father figures in general are being portrayed as things of the past? Is it possible this is being programmed through repeated exposure to such an image, such a portrayal that is seldom good in current media?
"He alone, who owns the youth, gains the future."
A systems approach - Your surrounded.
Mandatory education for all children, identification and testing requirements.
Bombards youth with ever violent images. It does not portray education in a favorable light to the youth. Changing the very image of family.
Increases in violence, pregnancy, drop outs. Over identification of special needs, manipulation of test data.
Less and less control over what children learn at school, are exposed to, less time for parenting due to increasing monetary demands placed by failing economy.
Mandatory education requirements for all pregnant school age girls.
Now teen moms get their own reality shows, prime time sitcoms are wrought with teen pregnancy. Constant exposure to it conditions society to take it as the norm.
Schools now provide day care, extra counseling, support groups, and other support services. Schools now even have $200.00 computerized babies so students can learn about parenting. Teen and pre-teen pregnancies are going up not down.
More children born without the benefit of two parents. More grandparents raising their grandchildren. More babies born to babies are winding up in state care. The American family is further weakened and will continue to be so as these children grow.
Mandatory dietary requirements for school children - one milk, fruit, whole grain, protien, two veggies. Never mind that tomato sauce on pizza is considered a veggie and the veggie of the day is always french-fries. Does that sound in any way more healthy than a home made lunch?
Seldom are the cool adolescents younger children look up to shown eating the school provided lunch. Constantly surrounds youth with images of muscle bound guys and skin and bones thin girls as the ideal.
Now has to enforce government guidelines. Seen as more of an enemy by children and parents. Forced to provide more with less funds. Forced by legislation to provide food that can trigger behavior incidents in special needs children. You can bet it isn't organic or gluten free.
Seen as non-capable of providing fit nutrition, seen by children as secondary to the authority of school officials/government officials from an age when Mom and Dad should be the authority and teach respect for law. Children now fear embarrassment of getting singled out and therefore may opt out of lunch altogether or eat the inferior school lunch as a result.
Uploaded on Youtube by: UrbanWarfareChannel
What's good for the goose is not good for the gander.
What's up with the lunch police anyway?
They say obesity is a huge problem for American youth. I believe the number thrown out is 20%, which I think is most likely correct. Mind you, you're not hearing about the huge percentage of anorexic/bulimic/body dysmorphic children anymore. You see they have fallen out of fashion. They did not disappear. They, sadly, are not however a good poster child image for the Lunch Police arm of politically correct law enforcement. Interesting is it not that the lunch police went after a home packed lunch but we hear nothing of the children who don't eat at all. It goes on in every cafeteria across the country.
The lunch police on the day in question encountered a four year old girl smuggling a turkey and cheese sandwich, apple juice, a banana and the dreaded potato chips. Obviously, this will make her obese.
It's the parents taking the time to consider nutrition and pack lunches that are the parents of the majority of obese kids. It's not the parents who depend on the free lunch from the school. It's not the parents who don't care what the kid eats and let them guzzle two monster drinks and inhale a Snickers before school, skip lunch, have McDonald's for dinner and then snack all night on pizza. You get the idea. Think about it. Do you really think the kids whose moms are taking the time to pack a healthy lunch are the ones that need it or maybe, just maybe, could it be the ones eating the cafeteria food or skipping lunch all the way around and pigging out half the afternoon when they get home?
Uploaded on Youtube by: LunchHourMovie
Video on Youtube uploaded by: Jon
Manifest function of the lunch policy mentality
The manifest function of the dietary requirements now set forth for school lunch minimal nutritional requirements are just what they say, that all children receive a balanced meal at lunch and breakfast. The vast majority of schools now serve both meals and an alarming number of students count on them for the only food they intake in a 24 hour period. That number is rising by the way, daily.
So, in regards to that sad fact, this sounds like a wonderful thing. Here's part of the problem with it, the school lunch doesn't provide that either. Of course, on paper, everything looks wonderful. Milk, protein, two vegetables, a fruit, whole grain, yep, got them all. Their serving of two veggies most often is made up of tomato sauce, as in on pizza, and French-fries. The protein is chicken nuggets or some other such processed food. The fruit is shriveled or canned and typically winds up in the trash. The milk is warm and disgusting by the time the poor child makes it through the lines, pays or swipes their card, assuming they don't have to dig through their backpack at the register, elbows his or her way through the bigger kids to a table where hopefully they will be welcome and finally gets to sit down.
Latent function of the lunch police mentality
- First and foremost, it allows for more governmental control over one of the most basic needs provided for and guided by families, traditionally.
- It reinforces in the minds of the young that state supersedes family.
- It further weakens the family unit by removing the connection to family at meal times.
- The implementation of the policy makes students not participating in the government provided lunch stand out when confronted for inspection. This is typically the very opposite of what a child wants in the school cafeteria.
- It conditions the young to take what the government is handing out without question.
- It conditions the parents to do less and less in regards to the daily routines of providing on a physical level.
- When viewed within the framework of ever increasing restrictions on freedom, it is another subtle reminder that the government is in control of everything you do to students, parents and staff.
The state will be their daddy now.
Is not a basic component of “rearing a child” feeding a child? When the government steps in and takes that right away from parents, the traditional family unit as an ideal to be held in esteem by the youth further crumbles. The idea of family in America has changed with the change in the media portrayal of it, the educational systems portrayal of it, the increasing limitation of the freedom of parents to make the decisions about what is best for their own children, and the decreasing freedom children have to make decisions for their selves in some crazy ways.
A child can have a credit card today, with no job mind you. But a child can’t decide what to eat. A six year old child can be charged and disciplined for sexual harassment but can’t decide what to wear, for that matter, neither can his parents if the school district has a dress code. Most do. A child can have a Facebook profile that will follow them for life but a child can’t decide to wear an American flag on a shirt to school. Do we not see some contradictions here in terms of what society is saying through action that children are capable of?
If children are capable of doing all the above mentioned, and they do it everyday, is the idea behind the lunch police really about keeping them from becoming obese? Perhaps, partly so. Could it also be about further conditioning them, about taking away more and more choices, about who's really running their lives, about compliance without question? You bet your you know what!
© Vix a.k.a. Rhonda Enrayne
Disclaimer: This article is my opinion only.
The rest of the series...So far.
- How Is Politically Correct Ideology Destroying Our Nation? Effectively, efficiently, expediently!
Politically correct - An exploratory series.
- Terrorism or Terror Tactics? How Politically Correct Ideology Is Destroying What is Left of
Politically Correct - Exploratory series: Part two examines the word terrorist and how PC is using terror to shut up America.
- Hyphenated America - How Politically Correct Is Destroying Our Nation - Part three - Divisionism
Politically Correct - Exploratory series: Part three - divisionism.
- Politically Correct Ideology - The Weapon of Choice - Specific Term of the Day - Affirmative Action.
Politically Correct - Exploratory series: Part Four - Affirmative Action.
- Tolerance or the Intolerable? Drawing a Line in the Sand.
Exploratory series: Part five covers the term tolerance and what is intolerable.
- Patriotism in America - Who decides? Watch out! The PC Police may haul you away for speaking soon!
Part six in the ongoing exploratory series examining how the evolution of words through politically correct ideology and manipulation is destroying America. Part six covers the term patriotic and how the meaning of that has changed.
How long will you be programmed, how long robbed of your free will?
Part eight soon will come from the poet's increasingly sarcastic quill.
Uploaded to Youtube by: Mongchilde
The lunch police
How do you feel about more and more governmental control over all areas of your life?See results without voting
More by this Author
- 84How and Why Is Politically Correct Ideology Destroying America? Effectively, Efficiently, Expediently...Evil!
Politically correct - An exploratory series examining how PC uses, manipulates and changes language over time as a means of social programming and control.
A real life top ten list of American heroes covering heroes five through one.
Top ten ranking of my personal great American heroes.