Open Forum on Food Politics

[Okanagancook]

You bet it does matter.  For example there is a winery here that I do not go to nor recommend anymore even though they have great wine.  The owner kept two steer in a tiny pen in the winter with no shelter for a month while waiting to have them slaughtered for his consumption.  No problem with the consumption part.  

 

Another winery lied about what they were going to build and operate in a residential area, got neighbours on board for zone approval.  Now the neighbours content with large tour buses idling their engines ten feet from their windows.  They also built a restaurant without a permit then applied thinking they would not be denied seeing it as already there.  Thank god they were denied.  Do not go there either.

 

 

[IndyRob]

3 hours ago, kayb said:

Well, I don't patronize Chick Fil A, but that has as much to do with the fact I loathe their food as it does with their political attitudes.

 

If I walked out onto my driveway right now, I could hit a Chick Fil A by throwing a tennis ball. But I've never had anything from Chick Fil A.  Not because I have a problem with their politics, but because I've never felt a craving for a Fil A o' Chick. (despite the adorable cows they use for marketing).

 

Likewise, 'Black Olives Matter' is just a bad joke.  It's just a stupid idea.  The Chick Fil A cows are kind of clever.  'Black Olive Matters' is just dumb.

 

To get worked up about it serves no purpose other than to give them publicity,  Which is exactly what they were going for.

Edited August 18, 2016 by IndyRob (log)

[ElainaA]

20 minutes ago, IndyRob said:

 

 

To get worked up about it serves no purpose other than to give them publicity,  Which is exactly what they were going for.

 

I don't give them publicity. And I don't give them my money either. That goes for both several brands also.

[Alex]

1 hour ago, ElainaA said:

I don't give them publicity. And I don't give them my money either. That goes for both several brands also.

 

I think IndyRob was referring to Paisano's in that statement, not Chick-Fil-A.

 

Could you explain your reasoning behind withholding your money?

[liuzhou]

Interesting article on the problems caused by the " fetishisation" of avocados.

 

They have even reached China. Five years ago, they were impossible to find outside of  Beijing or Shanghai. Now Mexican avocados are in every supermarket.

 

Michoacán avocados bought in China

[JoNorvelleWalker]

Avocados taste good.  Kale doesn't.

 

[liuzhou]

28 minutes ago, JoNorvelleWalker said:

Avocados taste good.  Kale doesn't.

 

 

In your opinion. Perhaps you missed the point.

[Thanks for the Crepes]

Is the point that the "sleeping giant awakening" is going to make avocados more expensive for the rest of us poor slobs? Otherwise, I don't get it either. Please enlighten us.

 

And you all that don't like kale have not had home grown young, tender kale. It is a different animal/vegetable?. I can't stand supermarket overgrown kale unless it's made into roasted chips either.

[liuzhou]

I think the point re avocados v kale, a tiny part of the article, is that avocados cost the environment and the the local populace much more than is considered acceptable, whereas kale doesn't.

 

Relative taste preferences are irrelevant.

But I didn't write the article. I just put it up for consideration.

 

Edited August 18, 2016 by liuzhou (log)

[Tri2Cook]

Never mind... I think I want to stay out of this one entirely now that I think about it..

Edited August 18, 2016 by Tri2Cook (log)

[ElainaA]

8 hours ago, Alex said:

 

I think IndyRob was referring to Paisano's in that statement, not Chick-Fil-A.

 

Could you explain your reasoning behind withholding your money?

I wasn't referring to one specific company or brand. I simply mean that there are companies whose actions I find reprehensible and some who I know support causes that I strongly oppose. For example, a local grocery store that hires many teenagers - but teens of color shouldn't bother apply - there are never any jobs for them. I refuse to financially support such companies by shopping there or buying their products.

[cdh]

Seems as much a general hand-wringing about the fact that Latin America is pretty much an old-style feudalist agricultural economy, with lots of beaten down peasants laboring for environmentally destructive (narco)lords and the like...  and they want to paint it as a terrible situation that enlightened folks should not be supporting.  The globalists' riposte seems to be that such an economy is Latin America's competitive advantage, so let them depress prices and increase output all they can, because yum avocadoes.

 

How do we as consumers deal with such situations?  Agricultural labor has never been idyllic or easy work, no matter where it is done... Maybe the questions should be framed as which is worse for a properly informed bleeding heart: treatment of animals that become meat, or treatment of laborers  without whom vegetables would never come to market? And just when you're about to become a fruititarian and only eat things trees drop on the ground, remember that for the tree that produces fruit to be there, the environment was disrupted and water was redirected to make that tree possible too. 

 

As for me, I eat it all, and believe that agriculture is better than the alternative of foraging for everything.

[Martin Fisher]

"Police said 260 pine trees and 87 firs had been cut down on a 12-acre (4.7-hectare) plot to make room for 1,320 avocado saplings. While the trees take seven years to reach maturity, if each bore 100 avocados a year — a fairly low yield — those farmers could make as much as $500,000 annually from the plot, a fortune for area farmers."

[cdh]

Today's avocado farming topic seems a perfect case in point for this observation.

[Shel_B]

4 hours ago, Thanks for the Crepes said:

And you all that don't like kale have not had home grown young, tender kale. It is a different animal/vegetable?. I can't stand supermarket overgrown kale unless it's made into roasted chips either.

 

I've never been able to get the kale roasted to my satisfaction to make chips, although I've tried.  I may have even posted here that I made chips, and they were OK, but not completely satisfactory.

 

That said, we grow our own kale (and remember, there are several types, some being intrinsically more tender than others) and I like to pick the leaves young, while they are tender and very tasty.  Older leaves, or those purchased at markets, usually go into soups where they soften.  However, there are some varieties I just don't find acceptable, like the curly leaf shown here.

[Alex]

OK, people. This isn't a kale topic.

 

As cdh pointed out here, this topic is a great example of how everything is politics (and money -- but I repeat myself).

 

I'm trying to imagine how difficult, if not close to impossible nowadays, it would be to eat 100% ethically, so to speak -- eliminating or greatly minimizing one's contribution to environmental degradation, pesticide use, organized crime, government corruption (but I repeat myself again), etc., etc. The issue basically boils down to money, as noted in DDF's quote.

 

It also relates to the meta-issue of what I call TMP -- too many people. From the year I was born, in the mid-20th century, to today, the US population has more than doubled; the world population is projected to have tripled by the time I die. (And the greatest proportional increase, by continent, has been, and will continue to be, Africa. That's why I think it'll be the next hot spot for conflict over the coming 50-100 years.) More mouths to feed = more opportunities for the problems I mentioned in the last paragraph.

 

I do take issue with the Guardian's use of "hipster." Yeah, I know it's clickbait, and the Guardian has an agenda and it's their style, but the snark factor really wasn't necessary here.

[cyalexa]

I don't shop at Hobby Lobby and do not patronize Chick-Fil-A. I know they do not miss the minuscule amount of revenue I might generate for them but it I am heartened to hear that others are making similar decisions. 

 

I try to choose food and wine from this continent when possible - thinking of the carbon footprint cost of food that crosses an ocean. Perhaps this is misguided but it makes me feel better. 

[chromedome]

On 17/08/2016 at 6:29 PM, Alex said:

"Everything is politics."  -Thomas Mann (1875-1955), The Magic Mountain

 

...which includes food and drink, of course -- from agribusiness to GMOs to alcohol regulation to raw milk to veganism to, well, you get the idea.

 

What brought this concept to mind today was this article about an Italian restaurant in Albuquerque, NM, that's selling t-shirts with the phrase "Black Olives Matter" on the front. (For those of you who ignore the news or who reside in another country and might not know this, the phrase is a takeoff on the political/social movement "Black Lives Matter.")

 

It reminded me of a topic I attempted to start several years ago, one related to the question, to what extent do your personal politics, etc. enter into your choosing to avoid or patronize a restaurant (or shop at a particular store or chain, stay at a particular hotel, etc.)?

 

That question was engendered by this 2006 news story about a restaurant owner's ties to Hezbollah. The moderators at that time apparently disagreed with Thomas Mann, decided the question wasn't sufficiently food-related, and tossed the topic into the Black Hole of Irrelevance. I'm hoping the current moderators are a bit more broad-minded.

 

Obviously there's no one answer to that question, but I was wondering how eG'ers deal with this issue, if at all. For example, there are two pizza chains whose founders' politics and practices I find reprehensible. Do I factor that into my decision of where to buy my pie?

 

 

I think Michael Pollan and similar writers have moved this kind of discussion into the food-related mainstream. If we can keep personalities and "politics, politics" (as opposed to "politics of food" in the macro sense) I'd personally be keen to follow the thread and participate sporadically. 

Edited August 24, 2016 by chromedome
Edited to revert to the main point (log)

[ProfessionalHobbit]

Host's note: this post and the associated responses were split from the Cracker Barrel topic.

 

On 8/25/2016 at 6:47 AM, DiggingDogFarm said:

 

That was my experience as well.

The food was horrible with the exception of the fried okra which was just 'okay.'

As to the discriminatory practices, much has changed in 25 or 30 years; Cracker Barrel is rated much higher in terms of LGBT 'equality' than the used to be and higher than many other well-known companies.

 

A rank of #55th place isn't exactly something to crow about.

 

As for the Human Rights Campaign, the LGBT community has issues with that organization which you can read more about here and here.  A criticism of the way HRC compiles its Corporate Equality Index is that the data is a result of corporate self-reporting practices.  Given that premise, it's not a sure thing that the ranking is 100% accurate.  

 

[ProfessionalHobbit]

As recently as 2006 -- 10 years ago, Cracker Barrel was in the news for living up to its name.

 

Quote

A gay woman in Londonderry, New Hampshire, has sued a Cracker Barrel restaurant, claiming that management did nothing after she complained of employees sexually assaulting her and making crude references to her sexuality. The woman, Bonnie Usher, joined the Cracker Barrel staff as a cook in 2000. In the complaint she filed with New Hampshire human rights commission, she says that she was denied better work shifts and promotions because she is a woman, that she was subjected to abusive language, was groped by a co-worker, and that a photo of the groping was hung on the wall of the restaurant's employee area.

 

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2006/02/cracker-barrel-sued-discrimination-again

 

You can't change a skunk from acting naturally.

Edited August 29, 2016 by ProfessionalHobbit (log)

[Jaymes]

3 hours ago, ProfessionalHobbit said:

As recently as 2006 -- 10 years ago, Cracker Barrel was in the news for living up to its name.

 

 

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2006/02/cracker-barrel-sued-discrimination-again

 

You can't change a skunk from acting naturally.

 

 

I dunno.  A lot can happen in 10 years.

 

For starters, the guy that founded the company, and was the CEO, has died.

 

And from stories I've heard about restaurant kitchens, I don't think an assortment of various types of harassment necessarily means that it's pervasive and condoned throughout the company, particularly one as large as Cracker Barrel.

 

As I've said, Cracker Barrel isn't my first choice when I'm sitting here in my living room trying to think of someplace great to go for dinner - for several reasons.  Even when I'm hundred miles from anywhere along some remote stretch of highway, I used to drive on by.  But now, I give them the benefit of the doubt.  

Edited August 29, 2016 by Jaymes (log)

[ProfessionalHobbit]

4 hours ago, Jaymes said:

 

I dunno.  A lot can happen in 10 years.

 

For starters, the guy that founded the company, and was the CEO, has died.

 

And from stories I've heard about restaurant kitchens, I don't think an assortment of various types of harassment necessarily means that it's pervasive and condoned throughout the company, particularly one as large as Cracker Barrel.

 

As I've said, Cracker Barrel isn't my first choice when I'm sitting here in my living room trying to think of someplace great to go for dinner - for several reasons.  Even when I'm hundred miles from anywhere along some remote stretch of highway, I used to drive on by.  But now, I give them the benefit of the doubt.  

 

 

I'm not really willing to give them the benefit of the doubt based on HRC's so-called Corporate Equality Index.  HRC is a fucking joke in the LGBT community.  I have nothing but contempt for that organization.  But let's say that HRC's reports are great.  Even then, Cracker Barrel's score dropped 20 points from #55 in 2011 to #35 in 2013.  Source:  http://www.hrc.org/files/assets/resources/CEI_2013_Final_low.pdf.pdf

 

That lawsuit occurred in 2006 which suggests that the company's practices continued long after CB's board took action in 2002.

 

And the wikipedia article on Cracker Barrel has this to say:

 

Quote

On December 20, 2013, Cracker Barrel announced it would no longer sell certain Duck Dynasty products which it was "concerned might offend some of [its] guests"^[69] after Phil Robertson, a star of the reality TV show, remarked in a GQ interview^[70]

Don't be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won't inherit the kingdom of God. Don't deceive yourself. It's not right.
--Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson

Robertson also made "comments likening homosexuality to terrorism and bestiality" in the interview, and expressed views about race which attracted criticism. On December 22, less than two days after pulling the products from its shelves, Cracker Barrel reversed its position after protests from customers.^[71][72][73]

 

You can check it out and read the footnotes, in case you have concerns as to the veracity of Wikipedia's information.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cracker_Barrel#LGBT_policies

 

Yeah, a company's job is to make money.  And my job as a consumer who happens to be LGBT is to ensure that companies -- whether they're restaurants or mom-and-pop-shops held together by tissue paper and glue is irrelevant -- that put profit at the expense of the LGBT community are hurt where it counts the most:  their bottom line.

 

 

[Jaymes]

3 hours ago, ProfessionalHobbit said:

 

I'm not really willing to give them the benefit of the doubt based on HRC's so-called Corporate Equality Index.  HRC is a fucking joke in the LGBT community.  I have nothing but contempt for that organization.  But let's say that HRC's reports are great.  Even then, Cracker Barrel's score dropped 20 points from #55 in 2011 to #35 in 2013.  Source:  http://www.hrc.org/files/assets/resources/CEI_2013_Final_low.pdf.pdf

 

That lawsuit occurred in 2006 which suggests that the company's practices continued long after CB's board took action in 2002.

 

And the wikipedia article on Cracker Barrel has this to say:

 

 

You can check it out and read the footnotes, in case you have concerns as to the veracity of Wikipedia's information.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cracker_Barrel#LGBT_policies

 

Yeah, a company's job is to make money.  And my job as a consumer who happens to be LGBT is to ensure that companies -- whether they're restaurants or mom-and-pop-shops held together by tissue paper and glue is irrelevant -- that put profit at the expense of the LGBT community are hurt where it counts the most:  their bottom line.

 

 

 

Sorry to hear that.  Saddens me.  However, I just returned from a very lengthy road trip that took me across much of the western half of this country.  Did stop at a Cracker Barrel.  I have to say that their waitstaff, at least, was extremely diverse, including Hispanic, African-American, Native American, among others.  I'm very aware of the publicity surrounding their previous policy, so I definitely noticed.  And my server was openly gay.  I was hopeful that was an indicator that Cracker Barrel has indeed put their past discrimination issues behind them.

[ProfessionalHobbit]

Anecdotes aren't meaningful evidence or indicative of anything, unless backed up by documentary proof.  So while that store may have had diverse staffing, we don't know for sure that Cracker Barrel has improved its practices that much.  We may not know for certain for a while.  That's ok; I'll never set foot in there.

 

And if the company is saying one thing while doing another, that's ok too.  The truth always comes out.

[Martin Fisher]

19 hours ago, ProfessionalHobbit said:

 

A rank of #55th place isn't exactly something to crow about.

 

As for the Human Rights Campaign, the LGBT community has issues with that organization which you can read more about here and here.  A criticism of the way HRC compiles its Corporate Equality Index is that the data is a result of corporate self-reporting practices.  Given that premise, it's not a sure thing that the ranking is 100% accurate.  

 

 

 

 

 

The point is, their policies have improved quite a bit over the years.

 

Cracker Barrel Code of Business Conduct

 

Cracker Barrel Equal Opportunity Statement

Edited August 30, 2016 by DiggingDogFarm (log)