My Current Pet Peeve: Fake Sushi

Several months ago, I was watching a party planning segment on the Today Show.  One of the party themes was a Pirates of the Caribbean birthday bash for children (older elementary school).  I love the Pirates of the Caribbean movie franchise, and I was pretty impressed with most of the decorations and ideas.  However, when it came to the party food, I got upset.  One of the snacks shown (alongside goldfish crackers and blue jello) was fake sushi.  It was basically a platter of banana slices and cylindrical rice krispy treats wrapped in fruit roll up and decorated with brightly colored candies.  First of all, that combination of foods does not sound tasty to me.  Second, what does sushi have to do with Pirates of the Caribbean?  Third, and most important, what on Earth is wrong with real sushi?  Why do we need fake sushi?  Is this a suggestion that children should not eat fish? Or vegetables? Or rice?  Is this a suggestion that children should not be exposed to new, healthy, and delicious foods?  I started eating sushi at age 8.  If I was a child presented with fake sushi at a birthday party, I would be offended.

I was reading Seventeen magazine the other day, and you know what there was a recipe for?  Fake sushi.  This snack was made up of banana slices spread with peanut butter and rolled in rice krispies.  Yes, peanut butter, bananas, and cereal does sound tasty.  But that's something I would want to eat in a bowl with a spoon.  Forming these foods into "sushi" seems like a waste of time.  Seventeen magazine is supposedly marketed to girls ages 15 to 21 (I know younger girls read it, but they are not supposed to be the target audience).  I would like to think that most teenagers and young 20-somethings would be confident and educated enough to eat (or at least taste/try) real sushi and not need a euphemistic breakfast snack to make them feel sophisticated.

I also think that this fake sushi craze is slightly rude to Japanese culture.  It further objectifies it and makes it a novelty for American audiences.
So here's what I want to see:  Introduce your kids to real food.  Don't patronize them by giving them fake food.  That behavior is unkind to Japanese culture and unkind to your children.   

At The Oscars...

The Academy Awards are not a program to honor the "best" movie of the year.  Or the "best" actor/actress.  The Oscars are moment for celebrities and others in the film industry to get dressed up, see someone try to be entertaining as host, and view the often incomprehensible results of some random elderly white men's vote about this years films. 

A lot of things go into consideration when the "academy" (an anonymous group of mostly white males over age 50 who have some sort of ties to the film industry--most are ex-producers) vote.  In addition to the obvious viewing of this year's films, there are the personal lives and other projects of the actors, the bribes the academy members may or may not receive, and the political correctness of certain films in the current climate. 

My virtual friend, one of the male hosts on the "lovely happy sunshine" Sunday morning human interest news show, talked about why Matthew McConaughey is probably going to win best actor.  He got a lot of press when he lost all the weight to play his dying character in Dallas Buyers Club.  He also played an AIDS patient who comes to accept the ideas of homosexuality and gender nonconformity after befriending some of his fellow AIDS patients.  He was also doing very well on his detective themed cable show while the academy voting was going on.  So, the stars seem to have aligned to give Mr. McConaughey the best chance of winning. 

All the cast members of 12 Years a Slave have a good chance too.  Mostly because the theme of the movie makes it politically incorrect not to support the actors (don't get me wrong, it looks like a well done, moving story too). 

After a few years of watching the "boring" looking films win best picture, I've stopped expecting too much from the Oscars.  The hosts and the outfits are my favorite parts, so with Ellen DeGeneres and JLaw there to entertain me, I'm good to go no matter who wins.  My advice to everyone else: sit back, relax, and be glad that you don't have to wear all that makeup and hairspray.  And dig in to your snacks.

A thought on sterilization and eugenics...

I'm taking a women's studies class called Beauty, Body, and Power.  Right now it is focusing on people with extraordinary bodies (formerly known as freaks) and freak shows in the 1840-1940 era.  One of the reasons that freak shows ceased to be popular is because of the eugenics/social Darwinism movement.  For those of you who don't know, eugenics is the idea of keeping certain types of people from reproducing in order to create a stronger human race.  The people who were to be kept from reproducing were mainly people with disabilities (mental and physical) that may be hereditary.  As the eugenics movement was popular around 1900, people did not have a good idea of which abnormalities were genetic and which were not.  The major negative that came from the eugenics movement was the nazi regime attempting to rid Germany of Jews, homosexuals, and people with disabilities by killing them and sending them to concentration camps during the holocaust.

I've always known that I had a morbid curiosity for things that make other cringe.  I really enjoy learning about this topic.  However, my instructor said something in class today that made me think very hard about an opinion that I've had for a long time.  She said that it was "obviously completely immoral and wrong to support the sterilization of any person with a disability."

I don't entirely agree with this statement.  I know that my instructor is slightly dramatic, and she was trying to impress upon the class the inherent wrongness of the eugenics movement.  But I do take slight issue with what she said.  I find the sterilization (that is, the removal of certain organs like the uterus or the taking of certain medications to reduce sex drive, ability to conceive, and ability to produce/ejaculate sperm) of certain individuals logical in certain situations.  Therefore, I think that sometimes it may be a good idea.

Let me give you a few examples.  When I was in high school, I did community service helping out in an ISP (Intensive Support Program) class.  The students in this class were between the ages of 15 and 21, and they had a diverse assortment of mental and physical disabilities.  The mental age range of the students in the class seemed to be between infancy and ten years old.  One female student, though a teen, functioned as a baby.  She had no bowel or bladder control, was non-communicative, could not feed herself, and could not move herself without assistance.  Because of her biological age, this girl was going through puberty.  She had a menstrual cycle, so she was probably able to conceive.  I believe it would have been easier for her caregivers if she had been given medication or had surgery to stop her development into a woman.  She would not have had a menstrual cycle to deal with.  She may have maintained a more childlike physique, making her easier to care for.  And, God forbid, if she was ever raped, she would not be able to get pregnant.

Another student was a young man who was over six feet tall and functioned at about the level of a two to three year old.  He was nonverbal, but used short words and phrases in American Sign Language to express certain things like "hungry."  Because of this young man's physical body, he was already difficult to care for.  He could walk, but was unsteady like a young child.  If he fell, it was hard to get him up again.  He had also gone through puberty, and had facial hair that his home caregivers would shave for him.  Additionally, this young man had a sex drive.  He would often touch himself, and his caregivers would redirect him to a different task, like coloring or doing a puzzle.  Occasionally this young man would make a pass at a female caregiver.  It was always laughed off, but it was clear that sometimes the caregivers were uncomfortable.  I believe that in this situation, the student should have been on medication to reduce his sex drive.  If he could have been put on some sort of hormone therapy prior to going through puberty, perhaps his body size and sex drive would have remained more childlike, therefore making it easier to care for him.

With this young man, I would feel a little bad about taking pleasure away from him.  However, his mental capacity did not allow for him to understand that there is a time and place for sexual exploration.  There was no possibility of him "growing out" of this phase as he matured.  Perhaps operant conditioning of behavior-reward systems could help him reduce his habits, but I think he would have functioned better without a sex drive to begin with.  If hormone treatment or other medication had been applied, this young man would not have had the habit of masturbating in public, therefore making him easier to interact with.  His female caregivers would also have felt more comfortable with him.  Additionally, if this young man ever ended up having sex with female, it would be unlikely for conception to be possible.

I am not trying to say that all people with disabilities make bad parents or should not reproduce.  However, in most situations with individuals severe physical and mental disabilities, I do not think that these individuals are well equipped to care for their children.  Therefore, I think that in most situations, it is better if they abstain from having children. 

I think that when these individuals abstain from having children, they also reduce the likelihood of passing on genetic abnormalities to their children.  I am not saying that every child with a severely disabled parent is doomed to have genetic issues, but it is much more likely for an unhealthy or high risk pregnancy to take place when one or both parents are severely disabled.  In these situations, the mother and the fetus are at risk of harm or death.  This is not a good situation.  If the mother is not intellectually capable of understanding the pain and discomfort she is experiencing, it falls to caregivers to make important and difficult medical decisions.  All of this could be avoided if the individuals in question were made unable to conceive. 

Overall, I know it's a difficult and controversial thing.  I'm not saying that sterilization is great in all circumstances.  I certainly don't want to remove all disabled individuals from the population as the eugenics movement suggested.  All I'm saying is that it is an option that I think I support under certain circumstances.  And it's something worth thinking about.