A Culture of Consuming
Nov. 8th, 2007 12:42 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
threadwalkerOkay, consumerism is probably not a real word. But my brain has latched onto it. So bear with me.
I have been pondering several issues about being overweight in our culture and examining my own habits. I have reached a point where I see our culture as being very consumer-oriented, myself included. We consume food, electronics, fashion, appliances, cars, etc. The by-products are shipped to countries that are paid to dispose of our trash so that we don't have to. Which also encourages us to ignore that the consequences of consuming is byproducts of manufacturing and the waste that occurs when an upgraded item is replaced.
Between maintaining jobs that have long commutes and living in areas where the cost of living is high, many of us have painted ourselves into a corner where we need to maintain a high level of time/energy input to our jobs so that we can maintain the life-styles that we've developed. And between job stress and the advertising bombardment that we undergo daily, it's hard to determine the difference between "want" and "need" when we see the products that our consumer-culture pushes at us. I think it's very easy to slip over the edge and live a life based on consuming.
I think one of the fall-outs of our consumeristic culture is the disposable nature of the products that are pushed on us; manufacturers need to sell to make their profits, so upgrading and cutting-edge improvements are what they need to do to keep the consumers purchasing their products. Alternately, the quality of construction is so shody, you end up replacing things because they fall apart. This leads me back to my foreign landfill comment.
Another fall-out is how various industries have capitalized on the overweight nature of our culture. They have recognized a demographic of overweight people who want/need products; bigger clothes, bigger cars, bigger seats on planes, super-sized meals, portable devices that monitor vital signs, specialty food (whether it's low cal for the dieter or easy-to-prepare high cal for the time-compressed), new medicines that don't interfere with each other so that you can be diabetic and have high blood pressure and have high cholesterol, etc. I suspect some of these things, like super-sized meals, were available before there was a general feeling that "super-sized = norm".
I think another fall-out is the chain-reaction of consuming. For example, I work and commute extensively so that I can own my home, but I have no energy to cook dinner. So I can order pizza that can be delivered to my door or microwave something (which is soaked in msg). Then I can plug into my entertainment system and unwind without having to do cook dinner or do dishes. And my entertainment center, which helps me relax after a grueling work day and commute, is periodically upgraded so I can keep up with the stuff that makes it entertaining (multi-DVD player, computer games or whatever). This cycle encourages diminishing health and creaping obesity. It's my thought that manufacturer's capitalize on this cycle and make it easier for us to stay plugged in to consuming and unless we already incorporate a fitness/health oriented life-style before we get caught up, then we are suseptible to becoming overweight and sedentary, creating a new demographic for manufacturers to target.
So what does it mean when our overweight demographic is targetted with disposable products, products that encourage additional consuming and/or products that make us more comfortable when we are overweight?
It could be that manufacturers are being more sensitive to the needs of overweight people.
It could be that manufacturers are making it easier for us to embrace that being overweight is normal; by providing those goods/services, we don't feel set apart because we don't fit someone elses mold.
Since the demographic supports the industry, it could be that consumers are signalling to manufacturers that the range of "normal" also encompasses being overweight.
It could also be that we don't need to be responsible for our choices because if the products are present then they are meant to be purchased.
Personally, I'm not sure. I feel that, in general, most manufacturers couldn't careless about the personal welfare of their target demographic. They thrive on the consumers, so if it sells, then they will sell more and their world is about the bottom line. It's in their best interest if we buy their products and they'll hire Harvard Grads to market it successfully.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
g0atface posted a link to an article on how being fat leads to obesity. I'll have to slip in the link here so you can read about this amazing scientific break through.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071108/hl_nm/obesity_death_dc_3;_ylt=ApMvBPsrDNMCQ65y8M0JFYgE1vAI
But what's interesting to me is that the author seems to support the perspective that being overweight is considered normal and, since it's the norm, now we need to be warned about the consequences. Which makes me ponder harder on the link between consumerism and being overweight and whether we are encouraged to ignore the consequences of our choices.
Overweight Kids
The focus of my comments here is on kids, teens and young adults (not us tax-paying old farts who have to make time for the gym between commuting, working, caring for home/family, etc).
When I first moved to Concord, I was exposed to "muffin" tops on high-school girls; that roll of fat at the top of the low-cut ultra-tight jeans that are (sadly) still in fashion. What hit me was not the bad fashion sense (although the bad fashion sense is what brought it to my attention), but the number of young ladies who were over weight. Their metabolisms are in overdrive and despite having the best metabolic boost they're ever going to experience in their lives, their starting point for the rest of their life is at least 20 lb bigger than their jeans want them to be. Plus, they've choosen to share their rolls with everyone else by their choice of low, tight jeans and halter-tops. For the boys part, they would have to start wearing spandex shorts and mesh tank tops to be just as obvious about it, but there seems to be as big a distribution of bigger boys as there are bigger girls.
So what does this say about our culture?
It may say that we are proud of our bodies no matter what we look like.
It may say that we don't care what you think we look like, we like our selves.
It may say that overweight is the norm and it is accepted.
It's probably a reflection of our fast-food culture and what a diet of Starbucks mocha and do for you (yes - many of the teens I'm seeing are streaming out of Starbucks that's 1 block from school with their SB cup in one hand and pastry in the other)
(The tackiness of low rise jeans that share everyone's butt crack shows that teen fashion persists in rubbing adults the wrong way. The rebels are still rebelling.)
Since my son started grammar school last year, I've noticed the same trend in grammar school kids as young as 2nd grade (age 7/8) regarding being overweight (and the tacky fashion to boot). In addition to that, in the kids' clothing department there is now "x" sizes in youth sizes. Like "6x" for the overweight/oversize 6yr old.
What does that say about our acceptance of overweight 6yr olds?
And it's interesting that they have become a "demographic". What does that say about the state of our youth?
I think that kids should have clothing that fits comfortably and if that's the size that is needed, then that's what is needed. But I have to admit (and since this is MY journal, I get ta say what I wants) it seems wrong on a deep level that kids are overweight except in cases due to real medical issue or an ethnicity that tends to be porportioned larger. And trust me, I'm not finger pointing at the kids, I'm wondering if their parents are paying any attention. Or do the parents see the "x" sizes as a sign that overweight is normal because it's available?
So now that being overweight is the norm for our kids, when do we look for the cause? And who is responsible? Or is it normal and "overweight" is a term that's on it's way out?
I think that it's in the best interest in product-pushers and marketing to keep us in a state of feeling like we need to consume. However, as consumers, we have power and that means that even I have power. I also know that the FDA, Underwriter's Labs, and other agencies are in place to monitor the products that manufacturers market because manufacturers have already demonstrated that they cannot be trusted to put the welfare of the consumer first. Based on that alone, it's only hype that making purchases will make me happy or popular or fulfilled. Instead, I choose to believe that it's my responsiblity to define what I need then choose what I'm going to consume. Part of my consumer process has become looking for the hidden hook that will trick me into a chain-reaction of consuming; the upgrade, the required accessories, the shody construction requiring fast replacement, or even worse from my personal perspective, the hidden hooks like a computer game that will encourage me to be sedentary due to my own quirks. It's also my personally defined responsibility to teach my children to tell the difference between need and want, to help them to understand that everyday is not a free-for-all purchasing event, and to teach them to make their own choices apart from what media or culture tell them.
I have been pondering several issues about being overweight in our culture and examining my own habits. I have reached a point where I see our culture as being very consumer-oriented, myself included. We consume food, electronics, fashion, appliances, cars, etc. The by-products are shipped to countries that are paid to dispose of our trash so that we don't have to. Which also encourages us to ignore that the consequences of consuming is byproducts of manufacturing and the waste that occurs when an upgraded item is replaced.
Between maintaining jobs that have long commutes and living in areas where the cost of living is high, many of us have painted ourselves into a corner where we need to maintain a high level of time/energy input to our jobs so that we can maintain the life-styles that we've developed. And between job stress and the advertising bombardment that we undergo daily, it's hard to determine the difference between "want" and "need" when we see the products that our consumer-culture pushes at us. I think it's very easy to slip over the edge and live a life based on consuming.
I think one of the fall-outs of our consumeristic culture is the disposable nature of the products that are pushed on us; manufacturers need to sell to make their profits, so upgrading and cutting-edge improvements are what they need to do to keep the consumers purchasing their products. Alternately, the quality of construction is so shody, you end up replacing things because they fall apart. This leads me back to my foreign landfill comment.
Another fall-out is how various industries have capitalized on the overweight nature of our culture. They have recognized a demographic of overweight people who want/need products; bigger clothes, bigger cars, bigger seats on planes, super-sized meals, portable devices that monitor vital signs, specialty food (whether it's low cal for the dieter or easy-to-prepare high cal for the time-compressed), new medicines that don't interfere with each other so that you can be diabetic and have high blood pressure and have high cholesterol, etc. I suspect some of these things, like super-sized meals, were available before there was a general feeling that "super-sized = norm".
I think another fall-out is the chain-reaction of consuming. For example, I work and commute extensively so that I can own my home, but I have no energy to cook dinner. So I can order pizza that can be delivered to my door or microwave something (which is soaked in msg). Then I can plug into my entertainment system and unwind without having to do cook dinner or do dishes. And my entertainment center, which helps me relax after a grueling work day and commute, is periodically upgraded so I can keep up with the stuff that makes it entertaining (multi-DVD player, computer games or whatever). This cycle encourages diminishing health and creaping obesity. It's my thought that manufacturer's capitalize on this cycle and make it easier for us to stay plugged in to consuming and unless we already incorporate a fitness/health oriented life-style before we get caught up, then we are suseptible to becoming overweight and sedentary, creating a new demographic for manufacturers to target.
So what does it mean when our overweight demographic is targetted with disposable products, products that encourage additional consuming and/or products that make us more comfortable when we are overweight?
It could be that manufacturers are being more sensitive to the needs of overweight people.
It could be that manufacturers are making it easier for us to embrace that being overweight is normal; by providing those goods/services, we don't feel set apart because we don't fit someone elses mold.
Since the demographic supports the industry, it could be that consumers are signalling to manufacturers that the range of "normal" also encompasses being overweight.
It could also be that we don't need to be responsible for our choices because if the products are present then they are meant to be purchased.
Personally, I'm not sure. I feel that, in general, most manufacturers couldn't careless about the personal welfare of their target demographic. They thrive on the consumers, so if it sells, then they will sell more and their world is about the bottom line. It's in their best interest if we buy their products and they'll hire Harvard Grads to market it successfully.
g0atface posted a link to an article on how being fat leads to obesity. I'll have to slip in the link here so you can read about this amazing scientific break through. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071108/hl_nm/obesity_death_dc_3;_ylt=ApMvBPsrDNMCQ65y8M0JFYgE1vAI
But what's interesting to me is that the author seems to support the perspective that being overweight is considered normal and, since it's the norm, now we need to be warned about the consequences. Which makes me ponder harder on the link between consumerism and being overweight and whether we are encouraged to ignore the consequences of our choices.
Overweight Kids
The focus of my comments here is on kids, teens and young adults (not us tax-paying old farts who have to make time for the gym between commuting, working, caring for home/family, etc).
When I first moved to Concord, I was exposed to "muffin" tops on high-school girls; that roll of fat at the top of the low-cut ultra-tight jeans that are (sadly) still in fashion. What hit me was not the bad fashion sense (although the bad fashion sense is what brought it to my attention), but the number of young ladies who were over weight. Their metabolisms are in overdrive and despite having the best metabolic boost they're ever going to experience in their lives, their starting point for the rest of their life is at least 20 lb bigger than their jeans want them to be. Plus, they've choosen to share their rolls with everyone else by their choice of low, tight jeans and halter-tops. For the boys part, they would have to start wearing spandex shorts and mesh tank tops to be just as obvious about it, but there seems to be as big a distribution of bigger boys as there are bigger girls.
So what does this say about our culture?
It may say that we are proud of our bodies no matter what we look like.
It may say that we don't care what you think we look like, we like our selves.
It may say that overweight is the norm and it is accepted.
It's probably a reflection of our fast-food culture and what a diet of Starbucks mocha and do for you (yes - many of the teens I'm seeing are streaming out of Starbucks that's 1 block from school with their SB cup in one hand and pastry in the other)
(The tackiness of low rise jeans that share everyone's butt crack shows that teen fashion persists in rubbing adults the wrong way. The rebels are still rebelling.)
Since my son started grammar school last year, I've noticed the same trend in grammar school kids as young as 2nd grade (age 7/8) regarding being overweight (and the tacky fashion to boot). In addition to that, in the kids' clothing department there is now "x" sizes in youth sizes. Like "6x" for the overweight/oversize 6yr old.
What does that say about our acceptance of overweight 6yr olds?
And it's interesting that they have become a "demographic". What does that say about the state of our youth?
I think that kids should have clothing that fits comfortably and if that's the size that is needed, then that's what is needed. But I have to admit (and since this is MY journal, I get ta say what I wants) it seems wrong on a deep level that kids are overweight except in cases due to real medical issue or an ethnicity that tends to be porportioned larger. And trust me, I'm not finger pointing at the kids, I'm wondering if their parents are paying any attention. Or do the parents see the "x" sizes as a sign that overweight is normal because it's available?
So now that being overweight is the norm for our kids, when do we look for the cause? And who is responsible? Or is it normal and "overweight" is a term that's on it's way out?
I think that it's in the best interest in product-pushers and marketing to keep us in a state of feeling like we need to consume. However, as consumers, we have power and that means that even I have power. I also know that the FDA, Underwriter's Labs, and other agencies are in place to monitor the products that manufacturers market because manufacturers have already demonstrated that they cannot be trusted to put the welfare of the consumer first. Based on that alone, it's only hype that making purchases will make me happy or popular or fulfilled. Instead, I choose to believe that it's my responsiblity to define what I need then choose what I'm going to consume. Part of my consumer process has become looking for the hidden hook that will trick me into a chain-reaction of consuming; the upgrade, the required accessories, the shody construction requiring fast replacement, or even worse from my personal perspective, the hidden hooks like a computer game that will encourage me to be sedentary due to my own quirks. It's also my personally defined responsibility to teach my children to tell the difference between need and want, to help them to understand that everyday is not a free-for-all purchasing event, and to teach them to make their own choices apart from what media or culture tell them.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-11-08 10:17 pm (UTC)Oh, and consumerism is indeed a word.
There is a great site called the New American Dream that has some interesting stuff to look at that ties in with what you are talking about.
http://www.newdream.org/
no subject
Date: 2007-11-12 03:59 pm (UTC)Also, on a personal note, I'm pleased I'm already doing several of their recommended energy saving activities.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-08 11:39 pm (UTC)I do agree that what is perceived as "normal" has an immense influence on how people behave, both for good and ill. It's difficult for people -- whether kids or adults -- to model their behavior on something other than what they see around them. It's as true for inter-personal relationships and for career expectations just as much as for nutritional/activity behavior. And when those norms (speaking of the more general case) have been passed down through several generations, it can be very hard to get people to believe in alternative models in the same way that they do in the familiar ones. Getting a kid to choose healthy eating when all he ever sees is MacDonalds and pizza is as hard as getting a kid to choose college when all he ever sees is high school dropouts and street life.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-09 04:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-08 11:41 pm (UTC)I agree with everything you said. I'm really lucky that I don't have a commute and that I can work from home. Most people don't have that luxury.
Obese children are not the norm...
Once upon a time junk food used to be more expensive than wholesome food. That has changed. It now costs more to feed a family wholesome food than fast food. So this leads to more overweight at the lower income levels.
Thanks for your post. I really appreciate your insights.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-09 02:57 am (UTC)Don't get me started on how budget friendly fast food can be compared to eating and fueling our bodies and our lives with what we should be eating. ugh! I also think as a society we've gotten so caught up in the fast pace of life that we've forgotten how to live simply , and living simply can be so beautiful but we often times get caught up with the things that are supposed to be convences but in my mind seem to only impair our lives as we become more dependent on things to get things done instead of ourselves.
I could go on and on. Instead I am trying to improve myself and live not exist , to find a balance in my own life and to hopefully one day teach these things to my own children.
I keep telling Scott I don't want fat kids. I don't want to pass on my own food issues to my kids so that is part of the reason I am working hard now to learn a better way of living and to become healthier.
Yes
Date: 2007-11-09 02:49 am (UTC)In the last two years California has poured several millions of dollars in addressing the problem of childhood obesity.
The CDC has also begun a campaign to stop the epidemic.
You may have noticed billboards and other signs like at bus-stops that address childhood obesity. They are coordinated with several programs in the state and nationwide.
As for the consumer aspect of all this and the "normalization" of obesity, yes, it is entirely driven by advertisers/ manufacturers and industry.
We live in a capitalist society.
Its one of the reasons I really don't like living in the US.
For all of our priveledge and wealth we have some of the highest rates of loneliness, depression, suicide, schizophrenia and general isolation in the world.
We have "stuff" but no happiness and no connection.