No Toy for Tot
Happy Meals Toy Made Illegal
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
San Francisco supes, where ya been all my life?
In a landslide vote last week, Fog City’s Board of Supervisors made it illegal for fast-food eateries to include toys in kiddie meals that fall below reasonable nutrition standards. No more can the area’s burger mills market high-calorie, high-fat, high-sodium food to children with the promise of a plastic, princess-shaped choking hazard in every grease-stained sack.
Starshine Roshell
It was a bold move, to be sure—a move undertaken to deflate ballooning childhood obesity rates, and a move that left the Happy Meal-hawking McDonald’s corporation understandably unHappy.
But I, for one, applaud it.
Oh, I know your new law will be ridiculed. I know loud-howling liberty-lovers will call your “eat this, not that” edict an audacious obstruction of free enterprise and a bass-ackward Band-Aid of a solution to a staggeringly complex socio-economic problem. Also, let’s face it; the crap food is still being served at irresistibly low prices, and this is exactly the sort of chop-off-our-hands-to-keep-us-from-harming-ourselves legislation that makes us liberals seem so frighteningly stupid.
But let me just say this: I’ve been waiting decades for someone to make my parenting job easier. And you’ve just done that.
Look, I know those kids’ meals are poison on an enriched-flour bun. I know there’s enough salt on those fries to sizzle all the snails in Golden Gate Park. But I have to live with something even more toxic than all of that: my children’s whines.
“Please, Mommy? Pleeease? I really want the (insert promotional movie tie-in tchotchke here) that comes in this week’s kids meal! I neeeeed it!”
They wear me down, those puppy-eyed li’l beggars. I hate being the “no” mom all the time. The “sorry, not today” mom. The unpopular, “forget it, that stuff will kill you” mom.
I have no parental willpower whatsoever. And now, thanks to your handy “no toy” manifesto, I don’t need it. Yay me!
Here’s what I’m wondering, though: What else can you do for me?
You’re not the first to pass this toy ordinance. The whole of Santa Clara County did so earlier this year. So I’m hoping the trend will spread to other parts of the country (Northern Californian parents aren’t the only ones who lack backbone, you know; we all need help)—and to other tricky areas of parenting, as well.
How soon, for example, before we can walk down a cereal aisle without our kids begging for Cocoa Puffs? My kids are coo-coo for the stuff, but it’s almost half sugar. And what can be done about the holiday toy aisle at Costco, which has my kids petitioning for the Techno Gear Marble Mania Galaxy from August through bleeping Boxing Day?
As long as we’re stifling pesky pleas, can you prevent Jackass 3D from advertising in places where G-rated eyeballs might see it and demand a ticket to the 3 p.m. showing? Can you enact a law that prohibits school-night sleepovers, so I don’t always have to be the bad guy in that conversation, as well?
Kids want all kinds of things they shouldn’t have: Airsoft rifles. Pet monkeys. Unsupervised access to YouTube. And all I want is a scapegoat. I’d like to live in a world where our family could get through one stinking dinnertime conversation without arguing about all the things my kids can’t have. When they asked, I’d simply shirk the blame, saying, “Sorry, sweetie. You know I would if I could. But it’s illegal here.”
Now that’s what I’d call a happy meal.
4•1•1
Starshine Roshell will sign her new book of columns, Wife on the Edge, at a launch party Thursday, November 11, at 6:30 p.m., at Jeannine’s (15 E. Figueroa St.). RSVP at WifeOnTheEdge.com.
Related Links
Comments
Would they have the backbone to go after the booze industry the same way they go after the junk food purveyors? I feel much more threatened by drunks getting behind the wheel than I do all the ghouls from Ronald McDonald land put together. (And the Evil Grimace is one bad mutha)
billclausen (anonymous profile)
November 10, 2010 at 2:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You say "But let me just say this: I’ve been waiting decades for someone to make my parenting job easier," as your personal "upside" to this latest assault on Liberty. Cool. I want a law that takes away the children of parents who are having to spend decades fighting the battle of the happy meal with their children. Obviously ill equipped to be parents, and the kids would be better off in foster care. And it's only a small sacrifice of Liberty, and after all, its for the good of children, so who cares.
OldDawg (anonymous profile)
November 10, 2010 at 7:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It passed by 8-3 vote, which was the minimum to pass this. It wasn't a land side, and there was heated debate.
While I agree with this test to see how it works in SF, you're article makes my head hurt. It's not witty or clever.
bronc (anonymous profile)
November 10, 2010 at 10:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
McDonald's serves millions of meals to poor people who cannot afford to spend more than $5 for a hot meal.
e_male (anonymous profile)
November 10, 2010 at 1:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
When my nephew asks for things, I say, "I don't get everything I want and neither do you".
e_male (anonymous profile)
November 10, 2010 at 1:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Interesting: hasn't the mantra of the political left been to blame parents for the problems of kids? Example given: when people say there is too much sex and violence on T.V, the usual suspects say "then don't let your kids watch that stuff" yet they want the state to regulate what we eat.
If you don't like the food McDonalds serves, don't go there.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
November 10, 2010 at 3:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I have to say it is rare when I can read every single comment on a thread and agree with them all...but that's the case here today.
Starshine, if you didn't want to have to raise your own kids, why did you have them? Why is is the government's job, or my job, or someone else's job, to say "no" to your child?
It does NOT take "a village" to raise children; it takes parents who realized what a big job it is, and who step up and do it without expecting everyone else to do it for them.
Grow up, Starshine. You wanted to be a mother. Now do the job and quit looking for someone else to bail you out. Your kids are depending on you.
Holly (anonymous profile)
November 12, 2010 at 6:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Pssst, billclausen & Holly -- it's called sarcasm.
e_male, the main reason a happy meal only costs $5 is because of the heavy subsidies for growing corn. Seems crazy, but check this out: http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/ki...
That's where government action could probably be far more effective -- end corn subsidies and the cost of junk food would skyrocket. Then apply the subsidies to organically grown produce and humanely raised animals, and their cost would plummet. Problems solved?
TheAverageMan (anonymous profile)
November 12, 2010 at 12:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Uh, Bill, are you dyslexic? Blaming parents for the actions of their kids, and phrases like "then don't let your kids watch that stuff" [oh dear, I quoted you; good thing I'm not on that whack job Peter Sklar's EdHat where that's forbidden] are distinctly *conservative*. Liberals tend more to blame institutions, and look toward regulation rather than private parental control -- just as Starshine laid out in this article. The thing is, with all the snark (i.e., sarcasm), I'm having trouble telling where she actually stands on this (and I don't usually have that problem with her humor).
e_male: poor people can shop and cook, which yields a far more nutritious meal for less than $5.
Holly's still angry at Starshine for giving away her doll house.
truth_machine (anonymous profile)
November 12, 2010 at 1:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Dyslexic"...hmm, never been called that one. I therefore randomly accuse you of possibly suffering for autism. You may also have St. Vitus dance. Maybe my wrath was directed at the people Starshine is lampooning?...just a thought.
All this talk about McDonalds is making me hungry, I think I'll have a Big Mac. By the way, I'm not afraid of Ed Hat, I'm more afraid of the hamburgler. He's creepy looking, and I think he's not safe to have around kids.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
November 12, 2010 at 3:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"*from* autism".
billclausen (anonymous profile)
November 12, 2010 at 3:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
T_M: I've been reading various reports about dyslexia (I like to read) and from what I see I don't appear to have it. Nonetheless, I appreciate your inquiry about the state of my health.
Despite the various afflictions you may have, (St. Vitus Dance, paruresis, et al,) I respect you anyway.
Speaking of dyslexia: there was a man who had dyslexia, insomnia, and was an agnostic. He would often stay up at night wondering if there really *was* a dog.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
November 13, 2010 at 2:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The term was not meant literally, Bill, it was a form of humor -- something you consistently have trouble with. That's a symptom of autistic spectrum disorder, although it's not conclusive.
truth_machine (anonymous profile)
December 1, 2010 at 12:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)