![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
![]() |
Oh yes, that is real. It's also everywhere on the internet, though to check its legitimcacy I found it here at USA Today and here at Global News in Canada.
The woman, who probably regrets sending the letter to her local radio station, apparently sees it as her duty to solve the problem of childhood obesity by refusing to give the lil' chunky monkeys candy one night a year. Not only that, but by informing the obviously ignorant parents that their child is too fat to deserve candy. On Halloween.
You can probably tell what I think about this, but the first thing I thought when I saw this wasn't 'that's mean', but 'that's stupid'. How can this woman purport to know which child is 'moderately obese'? And what, exactly, is her criteria? Unlike adults, determining the BMI range for children is far more complicated. Worse, it's not even terribly accurate. If you can't tell if a child is at a healthy weight by measuring, how can you tell just by looking? And who or what gave her the right anyway?
I'm not sure how she thinks this is going to help. First of all, it's pretty damn likely that the parents already know. Second, telling a kid that they're too fat for candy isn't motivating, it's humiliating. And--which I'm sure comes as a big surprise to absolutely no one--fat shaming doesn't work. And it certainly won't work if some person the child likely doesn't even know shoves a note into their treat bag.
As other people said in comments on the sites carrying this story: if you don't want to contribute to childhood obesity, then don't give candy. Give stickers, or raisins, or pencils. Or turn off the porch light and don't give anything at all.
Personally, I'd much rather be known as the stingy neighbor who's never home on Halloween than the bitch who humiliated someone else's child. Though she might end up known as the house everybody toiletpapers or eggs. After all, it takes a village to do some serious pranking.
(no subject)
30/10/13 17:35 (UTC)If she wanted to be so sanctimonious about it--don't celebrate Halloween at ALL. Many people don't for a variety of reasons.
Oh, and I have a fat shaming mother. Three out of four of her children have serious eating disorders.
(no subject)
1/11/13 18:30 (UTC)::sigh:: You have my sympathy, my friend. Even if you're (hopefully) not one of the children with an eating disorder, it still sucks.
I really do wonder what the hell this woman thinks gave her the right to comment on the appearance of someone else's children? I'm curious as to whether she actually did it in the end, after all the mostly negative publicity.
(no subject)
30/10/13 19:35 (UTC)(no subject)
1/11/13 18:32 (UTC)There have been many people who've written op-eds about it, at least. I'm not sure how many work with children medically, but it was reassuring to see.
(Edited because I can't spell 'reassuring'.)
(no subject)
30/10/13 21:15 (UTC)There are a myriad of reasons for children to be overweight that have nothing to do with overeating. I wouldn't even begin to judge someone based on weight for just that reason. ::shakes head::
There's always someone out there ready to ruin a kid's holiday. That's why we go trick-or-treating as a group - no-one who sees my big, scary hubby is going to pull something like that. LOL! And even the church people give a treat along with their little pamphlets!
(no subject)
1/11/13 18:46 (UTC)And yeah, that's another good point--how dare she assume that she knows the exact reason for the kid not being svelte? A lot of kids get wide before they have growth spurts, just as one example.
Crazy, mean woman.
(no subject)
31/10/13 00:21 (UTC)(no subject)
1/11/13 18:47 (UTC)(no subject)
31/10/13 00:26 (UTC)(no subject)
1/11/13 18:47 (UTC)Great icon. :D
(no subject)
31/10/13 00:31 (UTC)(no subject)
1/11/13 18:49 (UTC)I'd really love to know what she thinks gives her the right.
(I love all your new doggie icons, btw!)
(no subject)
31/10/13 01:06 (UTC)Our local dentist in town has a sign asking parents to give him their kids' Halloween candy, and that it will be donated to the food pantry. I can't figure out what he's trying to accomplish, because it's not like the kids who would get it won't also be Trick-or-Treating.
(no subject)
1/11/13 18:57 (UTC)I guess his reasoning is that kids with families without the money for luxuries like sweets can at least have them more often this way? That makes sense to me, at least...
(no subject)
1/11/13 00:54 (UTC)People. I never cease to be amazed (in fairly negative ways). :(
(no subject)
1/11/13 19:00 (UTC)I can understand the general concern for all children to grow up healthy, but unless you actually are in a position to be able to give the parent truly authoritative information (like their doctor--even a friend or family member would be pushing it!), it really isn't your business. It's really hurting kids for nothing.
I've never pranked anyone, but she is one person who might have changed my mind. ;)
(no subject)
1/11/13 03:59 (UTC)And I hope she gets flaming bags of poo in return.
(no subject)
1/11/13 19:02 (UTC)I would love to know what the upshot of this was. Did she actually give out those notes in the end?