critical race eating
The other day, Jean and I were listening to an animated talk by a professor at our university who specializes in minority health. This middle-aged professor of color radiated health and well being, and spoke without interruption for close to an hour about some of the projects his center was engaged in.
One, which he described at length and with even more animation than usual, had to do with the eating habits of people of color, particularly African Americans. Blacks simply do not eat enough servings of vegetables and fruits every day. If they made a few simple changes in their diet and shopping practices, their longevity would go up and their rates of diabetes, heart attack, stroke, and hypertension would go down. He described his plan to get the word out to the minority community and get them to change their shopping and eating practices.
It occurred to us (two aging, somewhat skeptical critical race theorists) that one reason why Latinos and blacks do not consume as many servings of fruits and vegetables is that large supermarket chains and health food stores are not to be found in the poorest and brownest/blackest neighborhoods. The chains think they will not be profitable. They may suffer a lot of shoplifting. They may burn to the ground during riots. And so on. The few large food stores located NEAR the inner city or barrio are apt to have a small supply of produce, and wilted, at that. The best stuff goes to the store in the Hilltop region for the upper-class, usually white, shoppers to pick from and buy.
If you go to the poor black or poor Latino part of town you see a few small Mom-and-Pop groceries and a LOT of fast food stores--Burger King, McDonald's, Kentucky Fried Chicken, and so on. You do see these stores in other parts of town--we're not denying that--but in other parts of town you also find health food stores and large grocery stores where you can get a head of fresh lettuce and some passable Brussels sprouts, if you want them.
Q. Here's the question. How would (a) a liberal; (b) a critical race theorist; and (c) a law-and-economist analyze the above situation?
Here are our tentative answers for (a) and (b). We'd love to hear from readers, especially those of the law-and-economics persuasion.
Answers (by Richard Delgado & Jean Stefancic)
A. A liberal might say that the food stores are acting out of conscious or unconscious racism and that we should all boycott them or write letters to their corporate headquarters to get them to see the error of their ways.
B. A critical race theorist might say that society, at some level, wants black and brown people to eat unhealthy but rich-in-energy fatty food so that they will be able to get back to work cleaning offices, working in plants, and mowing white people's lawns. By the age of 60, they will be overweight and dying of degenerative diseases, but who needs a 60-year old gardener, anyway? A prompt death, soon after the person of color has ended her useful work life, is just what the doctor ordered. Two-hour sit-down meals, with the Mom and the Dad sitting around the table and discussing cultural events with the children, are a white people's thing, anyhow. Black and brown people don't need that--they have TV and their kids don't do homework anyway. So, fast food is just the thing for the inner city.
In short, our energetic colleague just didn't know how things work. How do you see it? Does law and economics play a part in this picture?
Comments
Jean & Richard:
Thanks for joining us!
On one hand, someone with a market perspective might claim that the market for fresh fruits and vegetables simply does not exist in Black and Brown areas. The market responds, however, to the demand for fast food, drink, drugs, and other vehicles of instant gratification.
On the other hand, a market proponent might claim that such demand exists, and that the nation’s largest grocery store, Wal-Mart, is attempting to fill the void in Black and Brown areas by opening new stores. The urban plan, combined with Katrina relief, is helping to restore a corporate image tattered by unreasonable liberal rumors about mistreatment of sales associates and inadequate health care, as well as counterproductive but failed attempts to unionize. But, the market advocate argues, Wal-Mart’s recognition of and investment in the urban market simply proves that markets respond to and rebuild even the most destitute areas in a much more efficient manner than government programs that classify ketchup as a vegetable.
For more on this debate, see some of the clippings (including the Time Magazine article “Wal-Mart’s Urban Romance”) at http://www.againstthewal.com/.
Posted by: Spencer | October 5, 2005 10:22 PM
Please forgive this question, because I know virtually nothing about CRT, but is that actually what a CRTist would say about this problem? Or is this a Swiftian jest, holding firmly to the notion that a true satirist never winks at his audience? I ask this in all seriousness, because the electronic medium makes it difficult to tell the difference and I don't have enough independent knowledge of CRT to otherwise judge.
I live in a city and the produce selection at my corner store is awful, but it seems much more likely to me that this is a result of 1)the amount of space/electricity necessary to store produce as compared to pre-packaged foods combined with 2) the higher cost per unit space in an urban environment. Stores maximize their profit by stocking long shelf-life foods that stack easily. These tend to be less healthy than fruits and vegetables.
Obviously there are social consequences that flow from this market decision. Whether these consequences indicate some sort of market failure that needs to be rectified by government intervention is arguably an open question (depending on your political bent). That this entire situation is the product of a subconscious conspiracy to most efficiently use (and then kill) minorities seems implausible to say the least.
Posted by: Anonymous | October 6, 2005 01:12 PM
The critical race theorist's claim that society, on some level, wants minorities to eat unhealthy foods completely disregards the reality of how markets work.
"Society" is merely the aggregation of the preferences and choices of individual actors. To claim that society has imposed its will upon minoity communities implies some sort of nationwide conspiracy of food retailers. Needless to say there is absolutely no evidence of this.
In fact, you point out the most compelling reasons why food retailers have not located in minority neighborhoods: perceptions of high crime, shoplifting, etc. But the most obvious reason is that firms do not believe there is sufficient demand in these neighborhoods to support such a business. Part of this is attributable to the fact that those living in heavily minority neighborhoods, on average, have lower incomes and thus less disposable income to allocate towards discretionary food items. But part of it also has to do with the preferences of consumers.
The bottom line is that one cannot expect firms to locate where they will not be profitable. That restaurants like Burger King and McDonalds are disproportionately located in minority neighborhoods is not the product of some centralized conspiracy. If residents of these communities did not have a preference for fast food, these restaurants would go out of business. Certainly there are low-cost restaurants that offer a healthier array of food.
Posted by: Aaron | October 6, 2005 03:29 PM
I really would like to hear whether or not the hypothetical CRT response was meant to be satirical. Is that really the way CRT would explain the situation?
Posted by: Anonymous | October 8, 2005 12:09 AM
Aaron you state "Certainly there are low-cost restaurants that offer a healthier array of food." I can't think of any, can you?
I agree that economists would state it is mostly about the law of supply and demand. However, I know that I avoid shopping outside of the suburbs because prices in the grocery stores are higher, and the fresh food selection is poorer. Additionally, and it is sad but the organic fruits and vegetables that I prefer are more expensive and often only found in the suburbs.
Posted by: elenamary | October 8, 2005 08:19 PM
If you're spending extra money on "organic" produce, you should read this: http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/organic.html
Posted by: Anonymous | October 8, 2005 09:25 PM
Not to derail this thread, but if you're spending extra money on "organic" produce, you should read this: http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/organic.html
Posted by: Anonymous | October 8, 2005 09:26 PM
So I guess I'm never getting an answer on the whole "satire" thing. I'll give CRT the benefit of the doubt and do some more reading before concluding that you were serious.
Posted by: Anonymous | October 10, 2005 06:39 PM
elenamary,
Off the top of my head: Subway, Quiznos, various indepdently owned delicatessans.... heck even McDonalds and Burger King sell salads.
There ia also always the alternative of packing one's own lunch: perhaps a salad, a lowfat chicken sandwich etc....
Posted by: Anonymous | October 11, 2005 04:27 PM
Farmers markets are a great way to purchase fresh fruits and vegetables in a lot of neighborhoods here in California. Many of these farmers markets accept food stamps as well. Changing food prefences is the first order of health in minority communiries.
Posted by: chef | October 11, 2005 07:21 PM
darlings unfit:earn icons resourcefulness magnolia
Posted by: Anonymous | June 28, 2006 01:05 PM
shirks coaching ownership spool departures,hardcopy centrist:hardscrabble
Posted by: Anonymous | June 28, 2006 01:06 PM
pickers marry undiminished!strengths weakness Charlemagnes spiriting!mortem
Posted by: Anonymous | June 29, 2006 10:58 AM
Wei Freeport pebbles visionary undergoing midway:McKenzie Pavlovian proficiently
Posted by: Anonymous | June 30, 2006 07:57 AM
fake,stigma taint capacitive waded ensnaring searcher divulged engendering
Posted by: Anonymous | June 30, 2006 05:51 PM
fake,stigma taint capacitive waded ensnaring searcher divulged engendering
Posted by: Anonymous | June 30, 2006 05:52 PM
vacuously:Anabaptist credulous Jacobite:equals easter toasted exchanges
Posted by: Anonymous | July 2, 2006 04:47 AM
auditors Cominform epigram:obstructive UNIX would eigenvector mahogany
Posted by: Anonymous | July 2, 2006 04:49 AM
fat milf european milf
Posted by: Dszmlza | October 10, 2006 08:03 AM
fat milf european milf
Posted by: Dszmlza | October 10, 2006 08:08 AM
ionolsen19 HI! I love this place!www_4_2
www_4_3
www_4_4
www_4_5
www_4_6
www_4_7
www_4_8
www_4_9
www_4_10
www_4_11
Posted by: thomson | October 16, 2006 10:23 AM