In class, we discusssed dominant discourses on food. We spoke about the two major discourses: food as poison, and food as medicine. The most frequent discussions revolved around eating healthy and loosing weight. The media and health professionals are the two main participants within this discourse. Dominant discourse is a debate or talk in society about a sepcific topic. I also thought it was an 'assumed' idea, not only because of the boundaries of discourses discussed in class, but also because of a specific part of Fouault's definition from one of the links: "Discourses tend to be invisible--taken for granted as part of the fabric of reality." (Link D) I googled 'food,' and the first site that came up was about eating healthy. This already reflects the dominant discourse of food as a medicine and health.
I found an article that grabbed my attention on CNN.com: "The Superfoods you need now." This article was completely within the dominant discourse of food as a medicine. It wrote what I expected: what to eat to be healthy. And, like expected, the only people quoted were people who were experts in this area like: "Elizabeth Somer, R.D., author of "Eat Your Way to Happiness," and "Frances Largeman-Roth, R.D., Health's Senior Food and Nutrition Editor and author of "Feed the Belly." These people wrote recommendations about what to eat basically to stay healthy. The aritcle mentioned, "Yet according to government research, more than half of women in their 20s get less than the 1,000mg of calcium they need daily to do that." (The superfood you need) This articles (like any other health article) then wrote specific ways to solve these problems. But, what certain readers would not realize is that the voice of the actual eaters are not quoted at all. Certain readers wouldn't realize that this article pushes people to eat a certain way, but changing one's diet is not an easy thing.
Below is the link to the article I found these quotes from:
(http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/09/24/health.superfoods.you.need/index.html?npt=NP1)
Honestly, I don't think people really think of food as a type of 'reform.' I also didn't think much of the idea, until it was discussed in class. It seems as though most people do not recognize the dominant discourses about food because its not an idea most people think about deeply. Most people are brainwashed without realizing the dominant discourse of food as either poison or medicine. When I think of reform, I think about fighting for equality and rights...not about food. I think the writers of these articles notices the alarming obesity rates and the health problems people face because of their diets, but don't consider the whole 'we need to eat more healthier' idea as a reform. Some articles even mention that people cannot control others about their food decisions, so the obesity crisis is unstoppable. I also agree with those ideas, because changing people's diets aren't an easy thing to do, and the government definitly does not have the right to take away certain foods just because they are unhealthy. News and the media just state we are in a 'food crisis' but there's no real movement toward improving it-and I agree. I think it is just a potential reform, that will never make much change because people do not take it as seriously as the news and health professionals say.
I am unsure, but I guess a person whose ideas gets shaped by "mass-media-propagated dominant discourse," would be moved by the health articles about diets and eating organic foods. I'd imagine this person would go to organic restaurants or whole foods to eat their meals. This person may end up getting wrapped up in this whole idea of 'eating healthy' and force themselves to avoid anything considered 'unhealthy.' (Examples would be McDonalds and other fast food places.)
No comments:
Post a Comment