Question about childhood hunger in America

[Shamzanne]

One of the kids whose tag my daughter and I plucked off an angel tree last year asked for "food." So, yes, there is a lot of broadbrushing going on here. (Look at me, making up words again.)

 

Here's my take on the charitable requests thing: I strongly suspect that, much of the time, those lists are made with a great deal of input and facilitation from the agency. I always get the feeling that they have categories and give instructions like, "Make sure you write down at least one big item, one medium one, some clothing and a few small things." I always assume it's designed to give donors options.

 

The fact is that most of the most-advertised gifts in any given year tend to more and more expensive. I remember 30 years ago the hot item was a $20 Cabbage Patch doll, instead of a $200 game system. Just because a kid's family is currently down on their luck does not mean said kid (or his/her parents) are immune to advertsing and a culture of consumption. Nor do I think it means the kid should be expected to check personality at the door and be grateful for "anything" the rest of us might deign to toss his or her direction. Even poor kids have a right to favorite colors and heartfelt wishes.

 

If we snag a tag that has nothing but larger items, we put it back. We keep looking until we find a child or two (or more, when I can get away with it) who has listed wishes we can make come true on our own budget. I just can't work up a big head of resentment steam about this one.

 

As a twelve or thirteen year old I visited a Catholic church with my friend. For Sunday School (or whatever you call it in a Catholic church) we filled out tags for the Angel tree. They told us to put toys that we know kids would want and a few clothing items. I was so disillusioned - I had thought there were actual kids behind each one.

[k2bdeutmeyer]

Wanting doesn't make it so. Can't count how often I've said that to my kids. And when times are rough, we have sat them down, even as young as kindergarten and told them point blank, they need to know some things are just out of Santa's budget. It's okay to want just about anything. But it's not okay for a parent to not honestly set reasonable expectations.

 

Oh! I totally agree! See my first comment on this (I know it easily gets lost, but basically I was saying that having been on the receiving end of this, I just couldn't even fathom asking for anything large) :)

[SKL]

Just because you thrive on processed foods you don't cook yourself doesn't mean that most people do though. We have serious health problems in this country. Skyrocketing rates of obesity in childhood. And rampant disease that's mostly preventable through diet. Being able to enjoy good healthy food that's not highly processed is not just a fun thing for those who enjoy it. And otherwise everyone else who doesn't cook enjoys good health and thrives without it. That's simply not the case.

 

Unless you're talking about whole-grain bread and pasta and yogurt drinks, I never said I thrive on "processed foods."

 

It would be more accurate to speak of "simple foods."

 

We eat quite healthy as well as pretty thrifty. Also, just because someone cooks doesn't mean the menu is healthy. People are still going to cook what they are used to (which probably isn't vegan stir-fry for most), unless they are motivated to change. But again, when we're talking about hungry kids, the #1 thing is to get them some calories and nutrients. Cold or hot is irrelevant.

Edited October 22, 2012 by SKL

[Mrs Mungo]

As a twelve or thirteen year old I visited a Catholic church with my friend. For Sunday School (or whatever you call it in a Catholic church) we filled out tags for the Angel tree. They told us to put toys that we know kids would want and a few clothing items. I was so disillusioned - I had thought there were actual kids behind each one.

 

Errr...I don't know what your church was doing, but this is not how the *actual* Angel Tree ministries works. Those tags are numbered and are absolutely connected with specific kids who have an incarcerated parents.

[Beetkvass]

We can agree to disagree on whether people "need" to know cooking skills beyond what they can absorb from their environment or teach themselves.

 

I think a lot of people misunderstood my comment about the poor home ec class I was required to take. I wasn't dissing cooks or cooking; only that cooking class and the idea of making that type of class mandatory for all (again). I felt it was a huge step forward when they did away with that requirement.

 

For what it's worth, my sister, who is an awesome cook and loves cooking, had the same attitude about our school cooking class. :)

 

"I disagree. I think it should be offered as a course for credit (I think it still is) but not required.

 

I had to take home ec for 6 weeks and it was idiotic. "This is boiling, this is frying, this is how you make a pizza out of a box. This is how you sift flour." Really? What a waste of time if you have other life plans besides homemaking.

 

I very rarely cook. My kids eat. If I needed to figure out how to cook, I would. Necessity is the mother of invention. But nobody needs to cook produce, bread, milk, etc. And you don't need a class to heat up canned or frozen veggies, soups, ravioli, and a million other things. It takes about five minutes to learn how to cook eggs, boxed pasta, rice, and potatoes. (OK, maybe 10 minutes for some kinds of potatoes.) Everything else is gravy (no pun intended). That's what they invented cookbooks for.

 

A better solution might be to get some of these people working in a "soup kitchen" where they can learn the basics while helping others."

 

I think people were thrown off then by comments like "What a waste of time if you have other life plans beside homemaking." And then following it up with how you rarely cook, and how nobody actually needs to cook and that beyond a few basics everything is gravy. How on earth is that not to be taken as a criticism of cooking in and of itself? Your main complaint was not the class but cooking.

 

And you did proceed to argue that cooking itself was not a necessity in our society in further posts. I really think you are just back pedaling here. I don't see people putting words in your mouth. Just because you also said you didn't think the class should be required doesn't negate all the other negative remarks regarding cooking.

[Mrs Mungo]

This was my original point when I wondered why a group of children with such high obesity rates can also have a problem of hunger. Junk food addiction may play a role. Maybe a child goes to school hungry because there were no more pop tarts-- but there was a cold leftover baked potato in the fridge. Or eggs that the parent is to exhausted or checked out to cook. Yet the net result is that the child goes to school "hungry" and is counted as hungry.

 

If the parent is too "checked out" to cook, then the child is hungry. The fact that uncooked eggs may be present in the home doesn't negate the child's hunger.

 

I once watched a documentary about a band of widows living in caves in afghanistan. As widows they'd been shunned by their families are were living-- many with children-- in caves. They often survived for days at a time on nothing but weak tea. That's a very different hunger from the "hunger" we have in the US.

 

Is starving in a concentration camp different than being hungry because your meals are sporadic and/or nutritionally insufficient? Of course, but one has little to do with the other. One we can work on how to fix.

[Parrothead]

I agree only with the bolded.

 

I know hundreds of Indian women who are great cooks. Not one of them took cooking class in school.

And why is that? Because their mothers and grandmothers were available to teach them how to cook. In this day and age with so many single family and duel income earning homes adults are not around to teach the children how to cook. So they have to learn it somewhere. Why not school?

 

Again, opening a package of this or a can to heat up is not cooking. One may survive on a diet of processed food, but ones quality of life is not going to be good after one's body has had enough of the carp and chemicals.

[Parrothead]

The funny thing here is kids are graduating without ACADEMIC skills necessary to make it in the world/college or the LIFE skills needed to survive. What is it then are they learning? Sorry that last bit is off topic;)

This is a good point.

[SKL]

"I disagree. I think it should be offered as a course for credit (I think it still is) but not required.

 

I had to take home ec for 6 weeks and it was idiotic. "This is boiling, this is frying, this is how you make a pizza out of a box. This is how you sift flour." Really? What a waste of time if you have other life plans besides homemaking.

 

I very rarely cook. My kids eat. If I needed to figure out how to cook, I would. Necessity is the mother of invention. But nobody needs to cook produce, bread, milk, etc. And you don't need a class to heat up canned or frozen veggies, soups, ravioli, and a million other things. It takes about five minutes to learn how to cook eggs, boxed pasta, rice, and potatoes. (OK, maybe 10 minutes for some kinds of potatoes.) Everything else is gravy (no pun intended). That's what they invented cookbooks for.

 

A better solution might be to get some of these people working in a "soup kitchen" where they can learn the basics while helping others."

 

I think people were thrown off then by comments like "What a waste of time if you have other life plans beside homemaking." And then following it up with how you rarely cook, and how nobody actually needs to cook and that beyond a few basics everything is gravy. How on earth is that not to be taken as a criticism of cooking in and of itself? Your main complaint was not the class but cooking.

 

And you did proceed to argue that cooking itself was not a necessity in our society in further posts. I really think you are just back pedaling here. I don't see people putting words in your mouth. Just because you also said you didn't think the class should be required doesn't negate all the other negative remarks regarding cooking.

 

First, remember that my purpose was to disagree with the assertion (which I quoted) that everyone should be required to take a cooking course in school. I assumed that everyone would understand my response was about the mandatory cooking course, including whether it was valuable to all and whether it was needed. The "what a waste of time" quote was taken directly from the short paragraph in which I described the cooking course I'd been required to take. It is frankly illogical to take that and expand it to mean cooking itself is stupid. The thought that cooking is stupid never entered my mind. I happen to not enjoy cooking. That doesn't mean I don't want anyone else to cook. It is more logical to assume that I'm glad some people cook, so I can eat cooked food when I want to.

 

The point about cooking not being a necessity was in direct response to the idea that a cooling class should be mandatory.

 

Anyhoo, I need to get out of this conversation which I am spending way too much time on.

[amy g.]

Unless you're talking about whole-grain bread and pasta and yogurt drinks, I never said I thrive on "processed foods."

 

I absolutely consider whole grain bread and pasta as well as "yogurt drinks" processed food.

[justLisa]

 

 

 

Is starving in a concentration camp different than being hungry because your meals are sporadic and/or nutritionally insufficient? Of course, but one has little to do with the other. One we can work on how to fix.

 

These arguments are totally irrelevant to hunger in America.

[Slartibartfast]

I took a home ec class in Jr High. We baked cakes, made some bacon and gravy....I don't remember what else we cooked. I could cook dinner at that point so I didn't really learn much.

 

I do think that such a class now would be more effective if it discussed grocery budgets, actual cooking (no boxes!) and taught simple but useful things like cooking eggs, roast a chicken, foundations for soup, basic food safety and cross contamination issues (most food poisoning happens in the home). Simple things that people can use and need throughout their lives. I think everyone can agree that the foundations of cooking are inside some very basic things and those things could be easily taught in a school setting.

 

I do support the idea of a home ec requirement as long as the class taught useful things. However I don't have any delusions that the class I took then relates in any way to what they are teaching in home ec now. Maybe they have changed...it was awhile ago.

 

My family ate a lot of processed foods growing up. I have multiple chronic illnesses. I am making different choices because I know it is the right thing to do. I don't KNOW that what we ate growing up is a factor but it couldn't have helped.

Edited October 22, 2012 by Sis

[Rivka]

This was my original point when I wondered why a group of children with such high obesity rates can also have a problem of hunger. Junk food addiction may play a role. Maybe a child goes to school hungry because there were no more pop tarts-- but there was a cold leftover baked potato in the fridge. Or eggs that the parent is to exhausted or checked out to cook. Yet the net result is that the child goes to school "hungry" and is counted as hungry.

 

Absolutely there are people in these statistics really struggling, but I take it with a grain of salt (no pun intended).

 

I find it dispiriting that you've chosen to reject the very real physiological and practical explanations for why a person could be both obese and chronically hungry, in favor of deciding that hungry kids are just spoiled and refusing to eat healthy food that is available to them. Excuse me - "hungry" kids. That you would even put that in scare quotes is such an unkind way of closing yourself off to the needs and feelings of others.

 

People. Are. Hungry. In. America. Many of them are children. People are poor in America. Even more of those are children. It would be nice to be able to believe that all those poor and hungry people are just victims of their own laziness - kids who claim to be hungry because they don't like the fact that spinach is for dinner LOL. That would make it easier for those of us who are privileged to sleep at night. It would make it easier to boast that America is the greatest country in the world, with the best system.

 

But it just. Isn't. True. People are hungry in America. Not "hungry" in scare quotes - hungry.

 

If you are hungry, chronically hungry, your body's physiology will change. It will grab onto and retain every possible bit of fat that it can. Your brain will obsess about food, craving the sweetest and highest-fat items - the best bang for your caloric buck. Your brain chemistry will drive you to binge when food is available. Those factors are physiologically real. You can't deny them by pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps.

 

Yes, it's true that if hungry Americans didn't have periodic access to large amounts of nutritionally void calories, they would be thinner. It doesn't mean that they're not legitimately hungry when they don't have access to those calories - and it doesn't mean that they aren't suffering from malnutrition even when they do.

 

I once watched a documentary about a band of widows living in caves in afghanistan. As widows they'd been shunned by their families are were living-- many with children-- in caves. They often survived for days at a time on nothing but weak tea. That's a very different hunger from the "hunger" we have in the US.

But by this standard, who could ever complain about anything? Broke your leg? Well, other people are dying of cancer. Forced to work unpaid overtime at Wal-Mart, or lose your job? Your working conditions are still a million times better than Chinese sweatshops. Husband died in a car wreck? Tell your troubles to an Iraqi woman whose whole family was killed in the war. Unjustly jailed for a crime you didn't commit? Well, U.S. prisons are practically country clubs compared to prisons in the Third World, so I don't know how you can say you're suffering.

 

It's a great way to play "gotcha" and keep yourself from having to feel compassion for others, or from questioning our system. But it distorts the truth.

[Parrothead]

There you go Rosie, Chucki must not be as nice. :lol:

Sweetie, I've been telling people for years that I'm not a nice person. No one believes me. :D

[Mrs Mungo]

These arguments are totally irrelevant to hunger in America.

 

I agree. Were you agreeing? That was the point I was trying to make, sorry. It's so hard to communicate in this form sometimes!

 

I do think that such a class now would be more effective if it discussed grocery budgets, actual cooking (no boxes!) and taught simple but useful things like cooking eggs, roast a chicken, foundations for soup, basic food safety and cross contamination issues (most food poisoning happens in the home). Simple things that people can use and need throughout their lives. I think everyone can agree that the foundations of cooking are inside some very basic things and those things could be easily taught in a school setting.

 

I do support the idea of a home ec requirement as long as the class taught useful things.

 

Like I said before, I would call it "practical life skills" and think it should include much more than cooking or getting your whites whiter. ;)

[Caroline]

I took a home ec class in Jr High. We baked cakes, made some bacon and gravy....I don't remember what else we cooked. I could cook dinner at that point so I didn't really learn much.

 

I do think that such a class now would be more effective if it discussed grocery budgets, actual cooking (no boxes!) and taught simple but useful things like cooking eggs, roast a chicken, foundations for soup, basic food safety and cross contamination issues (most food poisoning happens in the home). Simple things that people can use and need throughout their lives. I think everyone can agree that the foundations of cooking are inside some very basic things and those things could be easily taught in a school setting.

 

I do support the idea of a home ec requirement as long as the class taught useful things.

 

However I don't have any delusions that the class I took then relates in any way to what they are teaching in homeec now. Maybe they have changed...it was awhile ago.

 

That is exactly what my son's middle school FACS (Family and Consumer Science) class taught. He can make a mean omelet now, roast a chicken, make some soup, and some good chocolate chip cookies. He has a cute little recipe book. My DH and I both still make recipes we learned in middle school home ec. I could sew better than the teacher, so the sewing part wasn't helpful to me. My son didn't have to do any sewing. It was all about budgeting and cooking and the robot babies. He didn't have to bring home a robot baby because we had a real one in the house.

[Slartibartfast]

That is exactly what my son's middle school FACS (Family and Consumer Science) class taught. He can make a mean omelet now, roast a chicken, make some soup, and some good chocolate chip cookies. He has a cute little recipe book. My DH and I both still make recipes we learned in middle school home ec. I could sew better than the teacher, so the sewing part wasn't helpful to me. My son didn't have to do any sewing. It was all about budgeting and cooking and the robot babies. He didn't have to bring home a robot baby because we had a real one in the house.

 

That sounds like a great class. I am all for schools teaching it.

[FaithManor]

i find it dispiriting that you've chosen to reject the very real physiological and practical explanations for why a person could be both obese and chronically hungry, in favor of deciding that hungry kids are just spoiled and refusing to eat healthy food that is available to them. Excuse me - "hungry" kids. That you would even put that in scare quotes is such an unkind way of closing yourself off to the needs and feelings of others.

 

People. Are. Hungry. In. America. Many of them are children. People are poor in america. Even more of those are children. It would be nice to be able to believe that all those poor and hungry people are just victims of their own laziness - kids who claim to be hungry because they don't like the fact that spinach is for dinner lol. That would make it easier for those of us who are privileged to sleep at night. It would make it easier to boast that america is the greatest country in the world, with the best system.

 

But it just. Isn't. True. People are hungry in america. Not "hungry" in scare quotes - hungry.

 

if you are hungry, chronically hungry, your body's physiology will change. It will grab onto and retain every possible bit of fat that it can. Your brain will obsess about food, craving the sweetest and highest-fat items - the best bang for your caloric buck. Your brain chemistry will drive you to binge when food is available. Those factors are physiologically real. You can't deny them by pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps.

 

Yes, it's true that if hungry americans didn't have periodic access to large amounts of nutritionally void calories, they would be thinner. It doesn't mean that they're not legitimately hungry when they don't have access to those calories - and it doesn't mean that they aren't suffering from malnutrition even when they do.

 

But by this standard, who could ever complain about anything? Broke your leg? Well, other people are dying of cancer. Forced to work unpaid overtime at wal-mart, or lose your job? Your working conditions are still a million times better than chinese sweatshops. Husband died in a car wreck? Tell your troubles to an iraqi woman whose whole family was killed in the war. Unjustly jailed for a crime you didn't commit? Well, u.s. Prisons are practically country clubs compared to prisons in the third world, so i don't know how you can say you're suffering.

 

It's a great way to play "gotcha" and keep yourself from having to feel compassion for others, or from questioning our system. But it distorts the truth.

 

 

Thank you, Rivka!

[justLisa]

I agree. Were you agreeing? That was the point I was trying to make, sorry. It's so hard to communicate in this form sometimes!

 

 

 

Like I said before, I would call it "practical life skills" and think it should include much more than cooking or getting your whites whiter. ;)

 

Sorry yes I am agreeing. I just get tired of the "there are starving people in ....." so no one in US has any right to complain about anything less than starving to death....which some are, they just don't look like it.

[Caroline]

I find it dispiriting that you've chosen to reject the very real physiological and practical explanations for why a person could be both obese and chronically hungry, in favor of deciding that hungry kids are just spoiled and refusing to eat healthy food that is available to them. Excuse me - "hungry" kids. That you would even put that in scare quotes is such an unkind way of closing yourself off to the needs and feelings of others.

 

People. Are. Hungry. In. America. Many of them are children. People are poor in America. Even more of those are children. It would be nice to be able to believe that all those poor and hungry people are just victims of their own laziness - kids who claim to be hungry because they don't like the fact that spinach is for dinner LOL. That would make it easier for those of us who are privileged to sleep at night. It would make it easier to boast that America is the greatest country in the world, with the best system.

 

But it just. Isn't. True. People are hungry in America. Not "hungry" in scare quotes - hungry.

 

If you are hungry, chronically hungry, your body's physiology will change. It will grab onto and retain every possible bit of fat that it can. Your brain will obsess about food, craving the sweetest and highest-fat items - the best bang for your caloric buck. Your brain chemistry will drive you to binge when food is available. Those factors are physiologically real. You can't deny them by pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps.

 

Yes, it's true that if hungry Americans didn't have periodic access to large amounts of nutritionally void calories, they would be thinner. It doesn't mean that they're not legitimately hungry when they don't have access to those calories - and it doesn't mean that they aren't suffering from malnutrition even when they do.

 

But by this standard, who could ever complain about anything? Broke your leg? Well, other people are dying of cancer. Forced to work unpaid overtime at Wal-Mart, or lose your job? Your working conditions are still a million times better than Chinese sweatshops. Husband died in a car wreck? Tell your troubles to an Iraqi woman whose whole family was killed in the war. Unjustly jailed for a crime you didn't commit? Well, U.S. prisons are practically country clubs compared to prisons in the Third World, so I don't know how you can say you're suffering.

 

It's a great way to play "gotcha" and keep yourself from having to feel compassion for others, or from questioning our system. But it distorts the truth.

 

Amen.

[Mrs Mungo]

I find it dispiriting that you've chosen to reject the very real physiological and practical explanations for why a person could be both obese and chronically hungry, in favor of deciding that hungry kids are just spoiled and refusing to eat healthy food that is available to them. Excuse me - "hungry" kids. That you would even put that in scare quotes is such an unkind way of closing yourself off to the needs and feelings of others.

 

People. Are. Hungry. In. America. Many of them are children. People are poor in America. Even more of those are children. It would be nice to be able to believe that all those poor and hungry people are just victims of their own laziness - kids who claim to be hungry because they don't like the fact that spinach is for dinner LOL. That would make it easier for those of us who are privileged to sleep at night. It would make it easier to boast that America is the greatest country in the world, with the best system.

 

But it just. Isn't. True. People are hungry in America. Not "hungry" in scare quotes - hungry.

 

If you are hungry, chronically hungry, your body's physiology will change. It will grab onto and retain every possible bit of fat that it can. Your brain will obsess about food, craving the sweetest and highest-fat items - the best bang for your caloric buck. Your brain chemistry will drive you to binge when food is available. Those factors are physiologically real. You can't deny them by pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps.

 

Yes, it's true that if hungry Americans didn't have periodic access to large amounts of nutritionally void calories, they would be thinner. It doesn't mean that they're not legitimately hungry when they don't have access to those calories - and it doesn't mean that they aren't suffering from malnutrition even when they do.

 

But by this standard, who could ever complain about anything? Broke your leg? Well, other people are dying of cancer. Forced to work unpaid overtime at Wal-Mart, or lose your job? Your working conditions are still a million times better than Chinese sweatshops. Husband died in a car wreck? Tell your troubles to an Iraqi woman whose whole family was killed in the war. Unjustly jailed for a crime you didn't commit? Well, U.S. prisons are practically country clubs compared to prisons in the Third World, so I don't know how you can say you're suffering.

 

It's a great way to play "gotcha" and keep yourself from having to feel compassion for others, or from questioning our system. But it distorts the truth.

 

:iagree:

 

That is exactly what my son's middle school FACS (Family and Consumer Science) class taught. He can make a mean omelet now, roast a chicken, make some soup, and some good chocolate chip cookies. He has a cute little recipe book. My DH and I both still make recipes we learned in middle school home ec. I could sew better than the teacher, so the sewing part wasn't helpful to me. My son didn't have to do any sewing. It was all about budgeting and cooking and the robot babies. He didn't have to bring home a robot baby because we had a real one in the house.

 

Sounds pretty good. I would add more practical stuff like snaking a toilet, balancing a checkbook, changing a flat tire and how revolving credit card debt works. But, yes, I think that's a great start. :)

[applethyme]

My original comment about home ec being required was based on my experiences with my sons nurse aids. over the years we have had several. Every one has been low income and receiving assistance while working part time. Most have had children. All were amazed that I bake bread and make dinner from scratch. They say they were never taught. When I clipped coupons they thought I was crazy until I took them to the store and showed them how they were used. One in particular asked me to show her how to use them. We went to the grocery store. Sadly she had never been to this particular store because she felt she wasn't "rich enough" to shop there. Until I showed her how to purchase $150 worth of groceries for less than $70 using coupons and sales. She was so excited that after a few weeks she was able to shop that way without help. She then started teaching the members of her bible study how to use sales and coupons as well. The bible study would carpool to town so they could all shop at what they called "the rich store".

 

I have also taught several to make bread and showed them how to make basic foods such as spaghetti sauce and chili from scratch. Not to mention how to mend clothes and not just replace them.

 

I don't share this to toot my own horn but to show that not everyone is being taught basic life skills.

[Caroline]

:iagree:

 

 

 

Sounds pretty good. I would add more practical stuff like snaking a toilet, balancing a checkbook, changing a flat tire and how revolving credit card debt works. But, yes, I think that's a great start. :)

 

Balancing a checkbook was in there. It's a middle school class, so changing tires might be premature.

[Parrothead]

Speaking of snaking a toilet....

 

I once saw that my tire was flat. I know, just go put some air in it. I didn't know how. I didn't know how to check the pressure with a gauge. My neighbor pointed out my tire. She said I could go up the street and they only charge $8 to fill air into the tires. It never occurred to her that one could do it for free. (I'm too cheap to pay someone $8 for that.)

 

So I asked the lady at the doctor's office if she knew how to fill air into a tire and how I could figure out what the pressure needed to be. She explained it to me. I felt silly, but hey I don't have family nor many friends so why not ask the lady at the doctor's office. LOL

 

I figured it out. But gee something silly like that would have been useful to learn SOMEWHERE.

:iagree: I think that basic maintainence is something that girls need to know how to do. First off so they aren't taken ($8 for air? sheesh! Highway robbery, that is.) and second so they aren't stranded. It is one thing to say, "I don't know how." It is totally something else to be able to say, "I know how. I just don't want to deal with it."

[Parrothead]

I think people were thrown off then by comments like "What a waste of time if you have other life plans beside homemaking." And then following it up with how you rarely cook, and how nobody actually needs to cook and that beyond a few basics everything is gravy. How on earth is that not to be taken as a criticism of cooking in and of itself? Your main complaint was not the class but cooking.

 

:iagree: And it does relate to children who are hungry. Take for instance the lady who refused the green beans because she said she didn't know how to cook them. Knowing how to cook does mean that one can feed one's children in many instances. Only someone very short sighted would say the can of green beans is better than the ones fresh out of the garden.

[Parrothead]

Well I am proud to also announce that my car battery died in the parking lot at Walmart and I managed to change it myself. Go me! :D

 

Of course I later found out they would have done it for me for no extra charge. :tongue_smilie: Oh well.

 

I want to know how to do stuff and how it works. If for no other reason I can tell if someone is doing it right and not ripping me off. KWIM? I am very antsy in a situation of having to trust someone else to do something I need. I know, that's probably somewhat silly, but I guess I'm a control freak like that.

That is reasonable. It means that if the guy at the garage tells you your alternator is bad that you would question why he is taking off the tires.

[happypamama]

I learned how to make no-bake cookies. :tongue_smilie:

 

We learned how to make toast. In a broiler. In 1989.

 

We also spent a lot of time sewing holes on the lines of notebook paper. Not so much actually creating anything.

[Wheres Toto]

Hmmm, I'm not sure what to address first so this may sound very rambly.

 

I took Home Ec in high school 25 years ago. We learned budgeting, some basic cooking, following a recipe, food safety/handling. It was pretty useful, IMO.

 

That said, I would normally say I don't cook. But, I'm not sure what is being considered "cooking" and what is considered prepared foods on here. And is it a distinction that really matters given the original topic of the thread?

 

Is only making bread from scratch with grain you ground yourself considered cooking? Or only making tomato sauce from fresh garden tomatoes? Making your own pasta from scratch? Because going back to the original question, that's an awful high standard for a person who has been at work all day and comes home exhausted. A don't see a class teaching this kind of "cooking" to be useful to someone just trying to feed their family on a daily basis.

 

I can scrambled, fry or hard boil eggs. Very easy, would it be considered cooking? I can prepare vegetables - frozen, canned or fresh. I can brown meat and make sure chicken or turkey is cooked through.

 

I always thought of prepared foods as the types of things you open the package, throw it in the microwave and your done.

 

What about sauce made from canned tomatoes, with other fresh or frozen veggies added (squash, garlic, onions)? Or frozen vegetables? A variety of canned beans cooked in the crock pot with some ground turkey and other vegetables?

 

Where is the line between "cooking" and prepared foods?

 

Dh does the cooking in our house 99% of the time. He'll make things like chicken parm with boxed whole grain pasta, sauce made from canned tomatoes but with many things added (usually squash, mushrooms, onions, garlic), simmered for a while; tilapia and fresh spinach (packaged from the store) sauteed in garlic; grilled salmon served on a bed of greens (from the store) with ginger dressing; last night we had grilled steak with garlic and bacon mashed potatoes (made from whole potatoes bought from the store). Are those considered cooking or prepared foods?

[mommymilkies]

I find it dispiriting that you've chosen to reject the very real physiological and practical explanations for why a person could be both obese and chronically hungry, in favor of deciding that hungry kids are just spoiled and refusing to eat healthy food that is available to them. Excuse me - "hungry" kids. That you would even put that in scare quotes is such an unkind way of closing yourself off to the needs and feelings of others.

 

People. Are. Hungry. In. America. Many of them are children. People are poor in America. Even more of those are children. It would be nice to be able to believe that all those poor and hungry people are just victims of their own laziness - kids who claim to be hungry because they don't like the fact that spinach is for dinner LOL. That would make it easier for those of us who are privileged to sleep at night. It would make it easier to boast that America is the greatest country in the world, with the best system.

 

But it just. Isn't. True. People are hungry in America. Not "hungry" in scare quotes - hungry.

 

If you are hungry, chronically hungry, your body's physiology will change. It will grab onto and retain every possible bit of fat that it can. Your brain will obsess about food, craving the sweetest and highest-fat items - the best bang for your caloric buck. Your brain chemistry will drive you to binge when food is available. Those factors are physiologically real. You can't deny them by pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps.

 

Yes, it's true that if hungry Americans didn't have periodic access to large amounts of nutritionally void calories, they would be thinner. It doesn't mean that they're not legitimately hungry when they don't have access to those calories - and it doesn't mean that they aren't suffering from malnutrition even when they do.

 

But by this standard, who could ever complain about anything? Broke your leg? Well, other people are dying of cancer. Forced to work unpaid overtime at Wal-Mart, or lose your job? Your working conditions are still a million times better than Chinese sweatshops. Husband died in a car wreck? Tell your troubles to an Iraqi woman whose whole family was killed in the war. Unjustly jailed for a crime you didn't commit? Well, U.S. prisons are practically country clubs compared to prisons in the Third World, so I don't know how you can say you're suffering.

 

It's a great way to play "gotcha" and keep yourself from having to feel compassion for others, or from questioning our system. But it distorts the truth.

 

:iagree:

[AimeeM]

That's an awfully high standard for ANYONE to live up to - not just those who work outside the home. I know people who enjoy cooking COMPLETELY from scratch (yes, homemade pasta, homemade sausage)... OCCASIONALLY. I do not know anybody who can do it all the time. Perhaps I'm just bad with time management - but I have to start prepping dinner around noon. Not because it's an elaborate meal, but because I have to stop/start every 5 minutes to find out why the 3 year old is screaming, nurse a demanding 4 month old, stop a dog from drinking out of a toilet, or ask the 11 year old who she is texting at such an hour.

Hmmm, I'm not sure what to address first so this may sound very rambly.

 

I took Home Ec in high school 25 years ago. We learned budgeting, some basic cooking, following a recipe, food safety/handling. It was pretty useful, IMO.

 

That said, I would normally say I don't cook. But, I'm not sure what is being considered "cooking" and what is considered prepared foods on here. And is it a distinction that really matters given the original topic of the thread?

 

Is only making bread from scratch with grain you ground yourself considered cooking? Or only making tomato sauce from fresh garden tomatoes? Making your own pasta from scratch? Because going back to the original question, that's an awful high standard for a person who has been at work all day and comes home exhausted. A don't see a class teaching this kind of "cooking" to be useful to someone just trying to feed their family on a daily basis.

 

I can scrambled, fry or hard boil eggs. Very easy, would it be considered cooking? I can prepare vegetables - frozen, canned or fresh. I can brown meat and make sure chicken or turkey is cooked through.

 

I always thought of prepared foods as the types of things you open the package, throw it in the microwave and your done.

 

What about sauce made from canned tomatoes, with other fresh or frozen veggies added (squash, garlic, onions)? Or frozen vegetables? A variety of canned beans cooked in the crock pot with some ground turkey and other vegetables?

 

Where is the line between "cooking" and prepared foods?

 

Dh does the cooking in our house 99% of the time. He'll make things like chicken parm with boxed whole grain pasta, sauce made from canned tomatoes but with many things added (usually squash, mushrooms, onions, garlic), simmered for a while; tilapia and fresh spinach (packaged from the store) sauteed in garlic; grilled salmon served on a bed of greens (from the store) with ginger dressing; last night we had grilled steak with garlic and bacon mashed potatoes (made from whole potatoes bought from the store). Are those considered cooking or prepared foods?

[Rivka]

Dh does the cooking in our house 99% of the time. He'll make things like chicken parm with boxed whole grain pasta, sauce made from canned tomatoes but with many things added (usually squash, mushrooms, onions, garlic), simmered for a while; tilapia and fresh spinach (packaged from the store) sauteed in garlic; grilled salmon served on a bed of greens (from the store) with ginger dressing; last night we had grilled steak with garlic and bacon mashed potatoes (made from whole potatoes bought from the store). Are those considered cooking or prepared foods?

 

That's how I cook, and I call it "cooking."

 

Also, I think your DH should invite me over for dinner sometime. ;)

[SKL]

My home ec sounds a lot like the home ec of others (I'll guess in the 80s?). I think the idea at that time was moving to the "practical" in the "modern era". Microwave cooking was big then. But honestly, it was pretty stupid and pointless. Kinda sad because I could think of plenty of skills that would have been useful whether they were "modern" or not.

 

What!? Are you saying that people who cook using a microwave are stupid? ;)

 

When our moms were kids, home ec was a required course for all girls (many of whom hated the course). It didn't matter whether you already knew how to do all those things, or whether your career goal was to be an astronaut. When I was a kid, they got "progressive" and made the boys take the course too (and they shortened the required part of it). Yippee (not). To me, with that background, I felt the requirement was a carryover from the days when women were supposed to be kept at home, barefoot and pregnant. (No offense to anyone who is currently at home, barefoot and pregnant - it's just a saying!) Girls who didn't find that kind of life romantic were frustrated by these types of requirements. This is why I would fight against going back to those days.

 

I think it's important to teach our kids all domestic skills that they might need or find useful. But given that they are, in fact, domestic skills, they should generally be easiest to teach at home. I do realize that some parents do not teach them. But I see no logic in making "all" children take a course in domestic skills just because "some" did not acquire them at home.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

People have always worked hard yet had to find the gumption to feed themselves and their children at the end of the day.

 

There was this teeny tiny slice of history in the western world where people could buy boxes and tins that they opened and dumped onto a plate, but that was only for 50 years and now we can't because those boxes and tins are full of chemicals and starch.

 

Before that, since the dawn of time and everywhere in the world, people have to kill, plant, harvest, forage, or beg for edibles, and then spend the time cleaning, preparing, and storing the food.

 

For most of history, Mom didn't get to say, "I work really hard all day and I'm tired, plus I don't like to cook, so I won't. I don't have to. There's always canned ravioli." Nope. The tired Mom cooked the food for as many decades as she could and then she died.

 

Working. Sleeping. Exercising. Practicing good hygiene. Caring for those weaker than yourself. Obtaining and utilizing fuel, food, and water. Life is that struggle. You get out of from under those obligations by dying.

 

If our country has declined to the point where we can't give a starving woman dry oats and fresh green beans for her child because she is too intimidated to cook them (not speaking here of the woman who has no stovetop or water), then we must have home ec in school again. We must do something to return the feeding of children to the parents as their responsibility and their child's birthright, or we'll all watch generations of children suffer from malnutrition. That will be a horrible sight.

[Wheres Toto]

That's how I cook, and I call it "cooking."

 

Also, I think your DH should invite me over for dinner sometime. ;)

 

:D I know how lucky I am. He has always been the cook since back in his college days living with roommates. He goes "home" and cooks for his parents, instead of his mom cooking for him.

 

See, to me that is cooking. But some on here seem to be saying that using boxed pasta, or canned tomatoes means its prepared foods and somehow less.

[Rosie_0801]

I get what SKL is saying - I think. We have schools that aren't able to teach children to read. We all complain about the quality of schools - but we want to require everyone to learn how to cook at that same school? If I were to send my kids to school, I would rather them learn things that will help with their future career.

 

Then maybe cooking classes should be restricted to the parts of the country where future careers are unlikely.

 

Rosie

[Rivka]

Okay, first I was all :001_wub::001_tt1::hurray: about the tag with my name. My first tag!! But now I am paralyzed with anxiety at the suggestion that I should run for president against Tibbie. Can't we work out some kind of shared-power arrangement, like Roman consuls?

[Lovedtodeath]

 

so no one in US has any right to complain about anything less than starving to death....which some are, they just don't look like it.

I love the way you put that.

[Lovedtodeath]

 

Okay, first I was all :001_wub::001_tt1::hurray: about the tag with my name. My first tag!! But now I am paralyzed with anxiety at the suggestion that I should run for president against Tibbie. Can't we work out some kind of shared-power arrangement, like Roman consuls?

No. We need someone to have the final say. Don't you read threads on here?:D

[QueenCat]

Okay, first I was all :001_wub::001_tt1::hurray: about the tag with my name. My first tag!! But now I am paralyzed with anxiety at the suggestion that I should run for president against Tibbie. Can't we work out some kind of shared-power arrangement, like Roman consuls?

 

:lol: Thank you .... the Roman consuls method works for me.

[Jane in NC]

Okay, first I was all :001_wub::001_tt1::hurray: about the tag with my name. My first tag!! But now I am paralyzed with anxiety at the suggestion that I should run for president against Tibbie. Can't we work out some kind of shared-power arrangement, like Roman consuls?

 

Add Mrs. Mungo for the triumvirate.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

Okay, first I was all :001_wub::001_tt1::hurray: about the tag with my name. My first tag!! But now I am paralyzed with anxiety at the suggestion that I should run for president against Tibbie. Can't we work out some kind of shared-power arrangement, like Roman consuls?

 

No, no, no. The tag for me was a mistake. I'm President Mungo's VP. :lol:

 

You could take the odd months and have Mungo take the evens. Or you could divide it geographically. Would you rather be Diocletian or Maximian?

[Arcadia]

If our country has declined to the point where we can't give a starving woman dry oats and fresh green beans for her child because she is too intimidated to cook them (not speaking here of the woman who has no stovetop or water), then we must have home ec in school again.

 

I am wondering about who is going to sponsor a home economics classroom in every school if science labs are already lacking. :confused:

My neighbourhood schools are already using portable classrooms and have been raising new bond measures every year for more money.

 

I had home economics class as a compulsory subject in Grade 7 and 8. There were two classrooms that has more than twenty sewing machines. Another two classrooms has eleven gas stoves and ovens each. Home economics was 3hrs per week and the four classrooms serves 880 students.

[justLisa]

Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizard-Spock to decide

[MomtoCandJ]

Faithmanor, I totally agree about the car insurance in Michigan. It's a joke. Not sure where you live but on the east side (Iosco County) We do have a transit bus (not sure of the costs though). We only have 3 headstart centers and they fill up pretty fast. My dd doesn't go to headstart in our school district because there wasn't enough room. I have to drive 15 miles to take her to school and if she rides the bus home I still have to drive a mile down the road to get her (where I pick her up there are 3 different district school buses that stop). When they have food pick up days or have any community giveaways, the line can start upto 3 hours before hand. I was at an event last week where they had free haircuts, dental cleanings and whatnot. People lined up 4 hours before (it started at 10 and lasted until three I think) when I was able to get there at noon (after taking dd to school) they had run out of most of the vouchers for personal care items, the local thrift store, dental cleanings and haircuts. The food voucher was for 1 bag of groceries that were not very nutritious and most was out-dated.

[Mrs Mungo]

I am wondering about who is going to sponsor a home economics classroom in every school if science labs are already lacking. :confused:

My neighbourhood schools are already using portable classrooms and have been raising new bond measures every year for more money.

 

I had home economics class as a compulsory subject in Grade 7 and 8. There were two classrooms that has more than twenty sewing machines. Another two classrooms has eleven gas stoves and ovens each. Home economics was 3hrs per week and the four classrooms serves 880 students.

 

Sorry, I am speaking in the sense of "this should happen" in the same sense I mean, "when I am president (or serve on the triumvirate consul with Rivka and Tibbie) of the galaxy and school systems look entirely different." I *realize* that they don't currently function well. That is why my kids don't attend.

[Rosie_0801]

There you go Rosie, Chucki must not be as nice. :lol:

 

She gets out more than I, the simple peasant, do. :lol:

[justLisa]

Sorry, I am speaking in the sense of "this should happen" in the same sense I mean, "when I am president of the galaxy and school systems look entirely different." I *realize* that they don't currently function well. That is why my kids don't attend.

 

:lol:

 

My home ec class did NOT have dozens of sewing machines and glass ovens. It was pathetic

[justamouse]

People have always worked hard yet had to find the gumption to feed themselves and their children at the end of the day.

 

There was this teeny tiny slice of history in the western world where people could buy boxes and tins that they opened and dumped onto a plate, but that was only for 50 years and now we can't because those boxes and tins are full of chemicals and starch.

 

Before that, since the dawn of time and everywhere in the world, people have to kill, plant, harvest, forage, or beg for edibles, and then spend the time cleaning, preparing, and storing the food.

 

For most of history, Mom didn't get to say, "I work really hard all day and I'm tired, plus I don't like to cook, so I won't. I don't have to. There's always canned ravioli." Nope. The tired Mom cooked the food for as many decades as she could and then she died.

 

Working. Sleeping. Exercising. Practicing good hygiene. Caring for those weaker than yourself. Obtaining and utilizing fuel, food, and water. Life is that struggle. You get out of from under those obligations by dying.

 

If our country has declined to the point where we can't give a starving woman dry oats and fresh green beans for her child because she is too intimidated to cook them (not speaking here of the woman who has no stovetop or water), then we must have home ec in school again. We must do something to return the feeding of children to the parents as their responsibility and their child's birthright, or we'll all watch generations of children suffer from malnutrition. That will be a horrible sight.

 

Sorry yes I am agreeing. I just get tired of the "there are starving people in ....." so no one in US has any right to complain about anything less than starving to death....which some are, they just don't look like it.

 

 

LIKE

 

 

Okay, first I was all :001_wub::001_tt1::hurray: about the tag with my name. My first tag!! But now I am paralyzed with anxiety at the suggestion that I should run for president against Tibbie. Can't we work out some kind of shared-power arrangement, like Roman consuls?

 

We are women, you BOTH will be president and do an amazing job. ;)

[FaithManor]

I am wondering about who is going to sponsor a home economics classroom in every school if science labs are already lacking. :confused:

My neighbourhood schools are already using portable classrooms and have been raising new bond measures every year for more money.

 

I had home economics class as a compulsory subject in Grade 7 and 8. There were two classrooms that has more than twenty sewing machines. Another two classrooms has eleven gas stoves and ovens each. Home economics was 3hrs per week and the four classrooms serves 880 students.

 

 

For the nearly $100,000.00 that our local school district spent on a decked out Cadillac for the superintendent to run around in INSTEAD OF PAYING MILEAGE (yes, the caps represent how I feel about this decision) or the 20% they voted to increase the sports budget of a class C school in which no one in the history of this school has ever received a major sports scholarship, me thinks they could fund a few kitchen ranges, sinks, dishwashers, pots, pans, refrigerators, utensils, blenders, and the like.

 

However, since NCLB required that every teacher be "highly qualified" ie. majored in and certified for the subject they teach, Tibbie, Mrs. Mungo, and I would NOT be educated enough to teach Cooking 101 to 8th graders! :glare:

 

Faith

[MomtoCandJ]

I didn't have home ec in school (graduated in 2002). They tried a "social skills" class which primarily was just a class about baby think it overs. I could have benefited greatly from a home ec class (just as dh he'll tell ya :)) The school I went to was very small (like maybe 300 kids in two elementary schools, one middle school and one high school).