“We Are Hungry” Video

      70 Comments on “We Are Hungry” Video

I finally received a link to the “We Are Hungry” video that I could view. In case you haven’t seen it, here it is:

I love this video not just because it’s funny, but also because ridicule can be an effective political tool.  The overlords don’t like it when the common people start laughing at them.  You can get angry, you can protest in the street, you can call your representatives and complain, etc., but those actions don’t knock the overlords from their mental pedestals.  Being publicly ridiculed is another matter.  When people are laughing at you, they are above you. There’s a reason we refer to ridicule as “looking down” on someone.

Back in the 1990s, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission decided the Hooters restaurant chain was being unfair to men by hiring only young, pretty women as waitresses.  Never mind that Hooters employed plenty of men as cooks, dishwashers, managers, etc. … nope, by gosh, if a restaurant whose entire marketing strategy was built around pretty waitresses in skimpy outfits refused to hire men to wait tables, something bad was going on and the overlords needed to fix it.  So the EEOC demanded that Hooters change the very concept that had made it a successful chain and pony up millions of dollars in back pay to men the restaurants never hired.

Hooters could have fought back with high-priced attorneys (which they probably did), but they also understood and employed the power of ridicule.  They placed ads like the one you see below in newspapers and on billboards.

One full-page ad placed in newspapers featured the same guy you see in the billboard.  The text simply read:  What’s wrong with this picture?  Your government.

The EEOC dropped the case and (laughably) accused Hooters of intimidation.  Sure, we all know how easy it is to intimidate a federal agency.  The “intimidation” was the company’s successful strategy of encouraging ordinary citizens to laugh at their government overlords.

Let’s hope the USDA feels equally intimidated soon.

 


If you enjoy my posts, please consider a small donation to the Fat Head Kids GoFundMe campaign.
Share

70 thoughts on ““We Are Hungry” Video

  1. Firebird

    I recall in elementary school we had to bring our own lunch because the school did not provide it, except for milk, and whole milk at that.

    In Middle school, we had lunch tickets so we could get the subsidized meals the school provided. Not only were we allowed to eat or not eat some of the things that were served, egads, we were allowed to go back for seconds. Then, when the time was right, the lunch ladies would let us know when we could go for ice cream!

    In high school, there was no limit to what you could or couldn’t eat, and you could also go back for seconds, thirds, fourths, etc.

    That was in the 80s.

  2. Nowhereman

    I remember that, too, Firebird, only my experience extends back quite a ways longer than yours. My school lunches were all packed by my mom for myself and my sisters from the time we were in kindergarten through to junior high school. Only when we got to high school did not need to, unless we really wanted otherwise, but the cafeteria and snack bars in those days, while not always healthy, did provide a good, wide variety of food. No food police (which I found funny that the kids made reference to a government rep that looks less like someone trying to help people and more like an old Soviet political officer enforcing dogma) telling us what to eat or not to, except occasionally we’d be given information, then allowed to decide what to do for ourselves.

    Boy have things changed… and not for the better.

    On a somewhat related positive note. Tom talks about wisdom of the crowd effect on the internet, but I’ve been witnessing recently a real world example at my local Trader Joes stores on two major fronts. First is in the meat department, where bacon tailings (the fatty end pieces that are cut off and usually discarded) have become insane sellers and are literally flying off the shelves along with an increasing prevalence of organic beef from grass-fed cows.

    The second front is in the snacks section. I lamented some months back to an employee that I’d would love to see potato chips with olive oil instead of canola oil. He said they did and showed me tucked into an obscure, partially hidden row was bags of olive oil cooked chips. Three simple ingredients; potatoes, salt, and olive oil. Wow. So I bought a bag and found they were fantastic! Best chips I’ve had since the old days when chips were cooked in proper tallow! Well, I thought it was too good to last and would soon be off the shelves and a relic of history, when each time I came back, I noticed that the row of one was now more prominently displayed and the product was going fast. Well now at present, they’ve expanded it up to two rows and they still can’t keep enough on the shelves to satisfy people! Meanwhile I noticed that the other brands of chips cooked in canola or other processed vegetable oils are not moving anywhere near as fast.

    See people aren’t stupid and they are getting better educated as to what is and is not good for them or they instinctively know what tastes better and satisfies them.

    There is hope.

  3. AndreaLynnette

    J, would you want go to a gentleman’s club if there were a government-mandated rule that a certain percentage of the dancers were fat? It’s discrimination not to hire someone because of their weight, isn’t it?

    Your example sounds dumb because it IS. Any business owner who did that would be out of business. They wouldn’t be serving most people by choice, and of the ethnicity they DID serve, virtually all of them wouldn’t go because they’re NOT racists and they DON’T want to support behavior like that.

    Bingo.

    (Fat? Heck, the EEOC would probably consider it a crime that all the erotic dancers were female, never mind not being fat.)

  4. Underground

    “If there were no nutritional guidelines at all, I’m positive business would eagerly step in with the most addictive, lowest quality foods to keep a healthy profit margin. All backed by super slick, reassuring mass media.”

    Oh crap, we’d better get some guidelines quick!!

    Ooops.

    Yeah, the current guidelines did so much good.

  5. AndreaLynnette

    J, would you want go to a gentleman’s club if there were a government-mandated rule that a certain percentage of the dancers were fat? It’s discrimination not to hire someone because of their weight, isn’t it?

    Your example sounds dumb because it IS. Any business owner who did that would be out of business. They wouldn’t be serving most people by choice, and of the ethnicity they DID serve, virtually all of them wouldn’t go because they’re NOT racists and they DON’T want to support behavior like that.

    Bingo.

    (Fat? Heck, the EEOC would probably consider it a crime that all the erotic dancers were female, never mind not being fat.)

  6. Underground

    “If there were no nutritional guidelines at all, I’m positive business would eagerly step in with the most addictive, lowest quality foods to keep a healthy profit margin. All backed by super slick, reassuring mass media.”

    Oh crap, we’d better get some guidelines quick!!

    Ooops.

    Yeah, the current guidelines did so much good.

  7. Christopher

    All this talk about Government getting in the way Corporations trying to sell cheap, processed, unhealthy foods is giving me a headache. Government doesn’t control these corporations. These corporations control the government, and the rest of us for that matter. The very fact that there are companies that are ‘too-big-to-fail’ is proof of that. These companies have so much power that if one of them goes it could collapse the entire economic system. These corporations know this, and have Government kissing their rears because of it. Have I missed anything Tom? Because I feel like I didn’t expand this enough.

    I don’t believe letting those companies fail would collapse the system. I believe that’s the fear they put into us so we’ll agree to give them our tax money for bailouts. Corporations do control the government to a large degree, but the root problem is that the government has the power to rig the game in the corporations’ favor. Take away the government power, there’s no one worth bribing.

  8. Christopher

    All this talk about Government getting in the way Corporations trying to sell cheap, processed, unhealthy foods is giving me a headache. Government doesn’t control these corporations. These corporations control the government, and the rest of us for that matter. The very fact that there are companies that are ‘too-big-to-fail’ is proof of that. These companies have so much power that if one of them goes it could collapse the entire economic system. These corporations know this, and have Government kissing their rears because of it. Have I missed anything Tom? Because I feel like I didn’t expand this enough.

    I don’t believe letting those companies fail would collapse the system. I believe that’s the fear they put into us so we’ll agree to give them our tax money for bailouts. Corporations do control the government to a large degree, but the root problem is that the government has the power to rig the game in the corporations’ favor. Take away the government power, there’s no one worth bribing.

  9. Linda

    Tom,

    I was interested to note yesterday that the “hungry” video has really stirred some interest nationally. Yesterday, on NPR’s radio show “Tell Me More” four panelists concerned with children’s interests discussed the government’s interference in the school lunch programs. All four agreed that the responsibility for what children eat lies with the parents. Unfortunately, all four agreed that low fat, whole grains, fruits and veggies was the way to go. Now, if these same intelligent people working to “educate” parents on proper nutrition could be educated in “real” nutrition for children, we would be getting somewhere!

  10. 1956okie

    Thanks for posting this. A friend of mine who has three sons–all athletes–has talked on Facebook a lot lately about the students in their small-town school complaining about STARVING after eating school lunches. They’re even packing extra food to get them through the day and sports practice. The kids are really getting worked up and are about ready to complain to the school board. I hope they are heard!

    I hope so too.

  11. Linda

    Tom,

    I was interested to note yesterday that the “hungry” video has really stirred some interest nationally. Yesterday, on NPR’s radio show “Tell Me More” four panelists concerned with children’s interests discussed the government’s interference in the school lunch programs. All four agreed that the responsibility for what children eat lies with the parents. Unfortunately, all four agreed that low fat, whole grains, fruits and veggies was the way to go. Now, if these same intelligent people working to “educate” parents on proper nutrition could be educated in “real” nutrition for children, we would be getting somewhere!

  12. 1956okie

    Thanks for posting this. A friend of mine who has three sons–all athletes–has talked on Facebook a lot lately about the students in their small-town school complaining about STARVING after eating school lunches. They’re even packing extra food to get them through the day and sports practice. The kids are really getting worked up and are about ready to complain to the school board. I hope they are heard!

    I hope so too.

  13. Marilyn

    I suppose one possible “workaround” would be for the kids to eat as much fat and protein as possible at breakfast (maybe including some leftover meat from last night’s dinner, à la Barry Groves) and dinner. Plus a high fat/protein snack when the kids come home from school. Then one could view the school lunch as simply a mid-day snack, with most of the kids’ nutritional needs satisfied at home before and after school.

    True, but they shouldn’t need a workaround. They should be able to eat until they’re not hungry.

  14. Marilyn

    I suppose one possible “workaround” would be for the kids to eat as much fat and protein as possible at breakfast (maybe including some leftover meat from last night’s dinner, à la Barry Groves) and dinner. Plus a high fat/protein snack when the kids come home from school. Then one could view the school lunch as simply a mid-day snack, with most of the kids’ nutritional needs satisfied at home before and after school.

    True, but they shouldn’t need a workaround. They should be able to eat until they’re not hungry.

  15. Marilyn

    Tom wrote: “True, but they shouldn’t need a workaround.”

    I agree completely! But until things are as they should be (we can still hope), an alternate game plan might be helpful to the kids.

  16. Marilyn

    Tom wrote: “True, but they shouldn’t need a workaround.”

    I agree completely! But until things are as they should be (we can still hope), an alternate game plan might be helpful to the kids.

Comments are closed.