Rant on Season 36 nutrition sketches

[ISNorden]

The producers at Sesame Workshop really shouldn't over-emphasize any one kind of food if they're trying to promote good health. Reducing their lessons to "eat your colors", "sometimes/anytime foods", and "good kids always choose fruit/veggies as a snack" may give children the wrong impression.
It's still possible to get sick from eating too much fruit, and still unbalanced to exclude other foods from the diet; even vegetarians need grain sometimes. Cookie Monster would still set a bad example if he became Fruit Monster instead: if you ask me, Hoots should have taught him that "Everything's a Sometimes Food"!"

 

[D'Snowth]

I feel they are really more or less touching up on general snacking, and trying to encourage kids to eat more fruits and vegetables as a snack, because naturally kids are going to want to eat lots of candy and cookies and things like that for a snack. I'm sure little kids know that for an actual meal, only fruits and vegetables just don't make it.

 

[Cherrymoon]

No, he is right all foods are sometime foods.
Some kids like apples. Most kids at 3 and 4 are good at eating just right. They eat until they are full and then burn it off playing. You will find that a lot of kids that are fat are that way because there parents are pushing them to much. Either saying don't eat that it is to fatten and not good for you or they are the clean your plate type.
No one got fat because of cookie monster. Even when we were pretending to be cookie monster. Kids will sooner or later get around to eat everything they need as long as not to much pressure is not put on them.

 

[Drtooth]

Cherry moon sums it up exactly. The problem isn't so much the younger little children whom have parents that feed them good, healthy foods. The problem of Childhood obesity hinges on inactive 7-12 year olds who drink Extreem fruit punch, watch extreem super rangers, and play extreem blow up stuff video games... and yet will not even pick up a skateboard or bike.

By forcing this "nutrition fad" down our throats, even now, we're essentually putting a bandaid on the solution.

Cookie Monster can't make kids fat, but he can't make them thin, either. What it boils down to is choice. If kids don't care about being active and thin, don't pressure them. They'll learn their lesson soon enough. I don't even wanna go on the lazy parents thing again.

The one problem I see is this half-shelled (I can't use the real one) attempt at health education by slamming it in your face, creating GOD Awful skits like "Veggiedance" (which sounds like a Veggietales parody of FLash Dance) and fruit songs, not to mention shoving it in little kids' faces that they have to be active every 2 minutes. There's a fine line between interactive TV and being a wanna be aerobics video.

 

[ISNorden]

Cherrymoon sums it up exactly. The problem isn't so much the younger little children who have parents that feed them good, healthy foods. The problem of childhood obesity hinges on inactive 7-12 year olds who drink Extreme fruit punch, watch extreme super rangers, and play extreme blow up stuff video games... and yet will not even pick up a skateboard or bike.

You hit the nail on the head: the content of kids' TV shows isn't as big a problem as the amount of time kids spend watching them. I also agree that changing Sesame Street won't do much good when most of the overweight, exercise-phobic children are older than the target audience for that show. (In fact, since nutrition/exercise lessons dominate Sesame Street so often today...the ones who need healthy snacks and active play most may "learn" that those choices are for babies, not for older children like them.)

By forcing this "nutrition fad" down our throats, even now, we're essentually putting a bandaid on the solution.

Bingo! Toddlers and kindergarten-age kids don't need a TV show telling them to eat their veggies or get up and dance; parents and other caregivers should take those responsibilities. Encouraging healthy choices is still possible without demonizing sweets or less-physical activity; whether the Sesame Workshop writers believe it or not, parents can teach moderation by example. If Mom consistently saves the cake and cookies for special occasions, then Junior won't need to hear a preachy song about "sometimes foods".

Incurable couch potatoes at home set a much worse example than Cookie Monster ever did. Besides, anorexia is just as serious as obesity; grade-school girls sometimes exercise fanatically and reject any food. What has Sesame Workshop done to prevent those kids from going too far in the other direction? Nothing I can see...

Cookie Monster can't make kids fat, but he can't make them thin, either. What it boils down to is choice. If kids don't care about being active and thin, don't pressure them. They'll learn their lesson soon enough. I don't even wanna go on the lazy parents thing again.

The one problem I see is this half-shelled (I can't use the real one) attempt at health education by slamming it in your face, creating GOD-awful skits like "Veggiedance" (which sounds like a Veggietales parody of Flash Dance) and fruit songs, not to mention shoving it in little kids' faces that they have to be active every 2 minutes. There's a fine line between interactive TV and being a wanna be aerobics video.

Encouragement is one thing; nagging is another. The health lessons on Sesame Street nag more often than they encourage: "Eat this, don't eat that! Get up and exercise, sitting here to watch is bad for you!" Hearing that a few times a day is reasonable; hearing it every five minutes (on a show with no single theme, yet) gets annoying even to active adults. Goodness knows how a three- or four-year-old feels about that nagging...

 

[Ilikemuppets]

You hit the nail on the head: the content of kids' TV shows isn't as big a problem as the amount of time kids spend watching them. I also agree that changing Sesame Street won't do much good when most of the overweight, exercise-phobic children are older than the target audience for that show. (In fact, since nutrition/exercise lessons dominate Sesame Street so often today...the ones who need healthy snacks and active play most may "learn" that those choices are for babies, not for older children like them.)


That's true, but maybe thre trying to reach the youngre kids before they end up like some of those older kids. But the question about how they go about doing it is a different story.

 

[Drtooth]

Incurable couch potatoes at home set a much worse example than Cookie Monster ever did. Besides, anorexia is just as serious as obesity; grade-school girls sometimes exercise fanatically and reject any food. What has Sesame Workshop done to prevent those kids from going too far in the other direction? Nothing I can see...

Well... considering that it happens to teenage girls, I'll admit it's out of their jurisdiction. That's why we have umptillion tweenage girls shows where the Hollywood standard of beauty is hypocriticly shown as a myth, when a thin beautiful young woman whines about how she's not attractive enough, and learns that it's what's inside that counts.... clearly it's not what's "Inside" that got her the job. Certainly not acting or any talent.

Then of course, those cereal commercials where a bunch of beautiful women worry about the calories in once in a while indulgence breakfasts, and get a bowl of dirt flavored cereal at a restaraunt. And the Yoplait "teeny Weeny bikini" ad. If the idiot girl is so sensitive about her weight, why the shell did she need to buy a sexy bikini for? This pretty much leads me on to a rant about the idealized stereotype of a woman as having to look like some trophy wife for a male model millionaire they could never possibly get.

Encouragement is one thing; nagging is another. The health lessons on Sesame Street nag more often than they encourage: "Eat this, don't eat that! Get up and exercise, sitting here to watch is bad for you!" Hearing that a few times a day is reasonable; hearing it every five minutes (on a show with no single theme, yet) gets annoying even to active adults. Goodness knows how a three- or four-year-old feels about that nagging...

Then that brings up the OTHER problem of nagging... if you nag enough, you'll
totally change the person's mind, causing them to act the opposite way. Reminds me of a South Park episode, where an annoying anti-smoking school assembley makes the kids try cigarettes out of spite.

It's cliched to say it, but you truely can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. AS I said before, it's the older kids that have that problem, and (given the shocking amount of older children's programming I watch) they nag just as hard in ways as annoying as this. I cannot stand McDonalds "cover their butts after that stupid documentary, it's what I eat and what I do" ads.

The problem is, I agree with the logic of a sometimes food. Teach that every so often, I don't mind. The problem with obesity is that people don't know the difference between endulgence and gluttony. The kids that sued McDonalds went every day to eat the biggest meal, supersized. That's gluttony. Once and a while, eating places like that isn't too bad. Then of course there's the "no time" convieniance aspect. I praise the fast food chains for offering alternatives, like Salads, even though Wendy's was the first one to get it right. But that's still no excuse to shove food down your throat, like your at some sort of contest.

Then of course, there are seriously depressed (or anxious) people who have an addiction to food, and can barely help themselves. I had a problem like that pretty much my whole teenage-twentydom... though my depression isn't extremely serious. I'm working through it. I feel a lot of these people are in the silent majority. They don't want to admit it.

Back on the main subject, I feel the worst part is they favor quantity over quality. I've noticed that some of the skits about health are quite well thought out, Like the Man of LaMuncha and Omelet. Even "Stretch Wiggle, Yay!" was a pretty well thought out idea. But it seems that the problem lies within the filler skits worst of all. Putting aside the fact I have NO RESPECT for the lousiness of the newer filler, it seems like they made a whole bunch, en mass, to keep nagging the same idea.

 

[Ilikemuppets]

You, know, I think Sesame Street came up with the whole food Idea just to get pubicity and and attention from the media. They are geniuses at that and it's not nessasarly a bad thing depending on how you chose to view it.

I think in a way, that do cover the whole anorexeia thing, they encourage kids to eat food.

And as for the whole Cookie Monster eating healthy thing, I think he said it best, and this is true no matter what he eats. "Me not lyer, me Glotton!

 

[ISNorden]

Then that brings up the OTHER problem of nagging... if you nag enough, you'll totally change the person's mind, causing them to act the opposite way. Reminds me of a South Park episode, where an annoying anti-smoking school assembley makes the kids try cigarettes out of spite.

Bingo! After seeing ten health-pushing sketches on Sesame Street, five days a week...what you want to bet that a lot of those kids trade their fruit/veggie snacks for cookies at school? What you want to bet that those same kids show absolutely no interest in dancing, trying sports, or getting any form of exercise that doesn't accomplish some unrelated goal?

It's cliched to say it, but you truely can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. As I said before, it's the older kids that have that problem, and (given the shocking amount of older children's programming I watch) they nag just as hard in ways as annoying as this. I cannot stand McDonalds' "cover their butts after that stupid documentary, it's what I eat and what I do" ads.

First TV gets blamed for kids' aversion to good health habits, so the networks cover their butts (how true!) by producing preachy shows and PSA's for those kids. Then fast food gets blamed when the kids still don't follow good health habits, so the restaurants cover their own butts by sponsoring the preachy health programs and offering "nutritious alternatives" which still aren't the main menu items. Even parents who emphasize nutrition and exercise at home can't always shelter the family from what everyone else does. (I read about one couple who raised their child on a strictly organic vegan diet, but were horrified a few years later when he told a reporter "sugar is my favorite flavor".)

The problem is, I agree with the logic of a sometimes food. Teach that every so often, I don't mind.

My biggest objection is that the writers of those spots are defining "sometimes" as "virtually never": a girl in one recent Sesame Street cartoon felt tired after snacking on cake instead of fruit, even though nothing in the story showed that she usually preferred sweets. I'm also worried that by labeling fruit "anytime food", the Sesame Workshop writers are encouraging fad diets. Nothing edible is safe in excess; otherwise healthy choices can be chosen too often. Ever hear of vitamin-A overdoses turning carrot-lovers orange...or kidney stones hurting obsessive milk drinkers? (I've known people like that personally, believe it or not!) Kids need to learn the whole truth about overeating, not just fashionable parts of the truth.

The problem with obesity is that people don't know the difference between indulgence and gluttony. The kids that sued McDonalds went every day to eat the biggest meal, supersized. That's gluttony. Once and a while, eating places like that isn't too bad. Then of course there's the "no time" convieniance aspect. I praise the fast food chains for offering alternatives, like salads, even though Wendy's was the first one to get it right. But that's still no excuse to shove food down your throat, like your at some sort of contest.

When people deliberately overeat as the super-sizers did, they deserve to face the consequences; that includes getting their frivolous lawsuits thrown out of court. But the average preschooler seldom has a young adult's range of choices: caretakers decide nearly everything in his life, including what he eats.

Back on the main subject, I feel the worst part is they favor quantity over quality. I've noticed that some of the skits about health are quite well thought out, like The Man of LaMuncha and Omelet. Even "Stretch, Wiggle, Yay!" was a pretty well thought out idea. But it seems that the problem lies within the filler skits worst of all. Putting aside the fact I have NO RESPECT for the lousiness of the newer filler, it seems like they made a whole bunch, en masse, to keep nagging the same idea.

I agree that some of the new sketches are better than others: the Sleeping Beauty parody and "Dinner Theater" stories showed more thought and less nagging. "Stretch, Wiggle, Yay!" was cute and funny, not preachy like some of the health songs from last season. ("Mango Tango", if you'll pardon the pun, left a bad taste in my mouth.) But the pure fillers like "Fruit Dance/Veggie Dance" should have been left on the editing-room floor; I have no respect for that kind of "educational" TV either.