Should we give Halloween candy to kids?

[Foxx]

Ailén and Oxajil, thanks for your responses. I was going to write a detailed response to both of you, but as I was, I didn't like my answer and in this regard may be feeling cynical about America and with little hope for positive change (it's also been quite a long month for me and I've been a little down, which may be making my perspective more cynical and less realistic). I know you're both not in america now and I'm not sure how much time either of you have spent in the "belly of the beast", so I'm wondering if cultural differences are playing a part in our different perspectives, and also whether those differences are actually relevant.

The problem for me in getting clarity is that, by virtue of children and their parents permitting them to go trick or treating on Halloween in america, I think, they are asking for poison because from my recollection as a child (a couple decades now) that was the vast majority of what was available (I don't recall anything even remotely healthy even being offered, so it may have been 100%, though I really can't recall for certain) and, again from what I recall, that was exactly what I wanted and nothing else. But this is where I get stuck: I perceive them as asking for the greatest dopamine high they can get and getting it regardless of what you do (because everyone in america is so utterly asleep that candy is everywhere in abundance on Halloween), so I don't see anything positive that can be done because I think they probably won't want (or may even be upset at) the "less-evil" candy (which thoroughly reminds me of the false choice of the election...) and will still gorge themselves on volumes of poison anyway. But it's true that I also don't feel like I'm serving them by aiding them in getting that high. The only way I think that I might be objectively serving them in that regard is that they end up with enough excess candy that they overdo it and then want to stop and change--like hitting bottom. Or simply by giving them they're asking for--even if I understand the consequences it will have for them.

A thread that has been in my mind in considering this situation and which has influenced my thinking is this one:

http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,27933.0.html

and I also thought this recent post by anart on external consideration was relevant:

You cannot engage in the work with people in your private life who have no interest in or understanding of it. If you are pushing ideas, concepts or even attitudes onto the people in your private life then you are erring grievously. In your private life you are supposed to be acting with utmost external consideration, meaning you treat people in a way they want to be treated which makes life easier for them and for you. You do not try to awaken those who are deeply asleep, lest they turn and rend you to pieces.

Obviously it's not engaging in the Work with the various trick or treaters and their parents and is only a small and rather insignificant interaction, but with the pervasiveness of poison in america and the fact that most people do absolutely nothing to avoid it (in fact, they relish in it), isn't giving them this toxic candy treating them in the way that they want to be treated, in this circumstance?

That's my thinking, which is starting to sound like it's off from the feedback I've been getting, but I'd like to get some more clarity on why it's off, if that's the case. Thanks! :)

Also, for the record, for halloween a few days ago I was staying with my mom and she bought candy (I didn't do anything--I was working mostly that day) and we didn't get any trick or treaters.

 

[Chu]

I know you're both not in america now and I'm not sure how much time either of you have spent in the "belly of the beast", so I'm wondering if cultural differences are playing a part in our different perspectives, and also whether those differences are actually relevant.

I don't think they are relevant when you are taking about basic external consideration. If you use another more "universal" example, the same applies. Take for example the fact that most people like wheat and consider it healthy. This may not be the best example, but let's try. You have a friend stay over at your place, and he asks for breakfast. He wants toasts, and "has to have them every day" (and you just know he'll never change his mind, he is not interested in hearing any kind of truth, etc.). Do you go to the store to get some for him, or do you give him what you have, explaining that it's your favorite kind, or that you are allergic to gluten, or whatever (if he asks)? Are you being internally considerate by not giving him wheat? You could let him decide, though. If he wants his fix, he might go to the store himself.

There is nothing "cultural" in that example, but the same principle applies, I think. Refusing to give him poison doesn't have to mean imposing your view of why gluten is evil. You can be strategic and external considerate about it.

The problem for me in getting clarity is that, by virtue of children and their parents permitting them to go trick or treating on Halloween in america, I think, they are asking for poison because from my recollection as a child (a couple decades now) that was the vast majority of what was available (I don't recall anything even remotely healthy even being offered, so it may have been 100%, though I really can't recall for certain) and, again from what I recall, that was exactly what I wanted and nothing else. But this is where I get stuck: I perceive them as asking for the greatest dopamine high they can get and getting it regardless of what you do (because everyone in america is so utterly asleep that candy is everywhere in abundance on Halloween), so I don't see anything positive that can be done because I think they probably won't want (or may even be upset at) the "less-evil" candy (which thoroughly reminds me of the false choice of the election...) and will still gorge themselves on volumes of poison anyway. But it's true that I also don't feel like I'm serving them by aiding them in getting that high. The only way I think that I might be objectively serving them in that regard is that they end up with enough excess candy that they overdo it and then want to stop and change--like hitting bottom. Or simply by giving them they're asking for--even if I understand the consequences it will have for them.

But with that mentality, would you give a drug-addict friend some dope, because he is "doomed" anyway? I think you are confusing external consideration with a sense of doom that you yourself are having, and with "being nice", and that you have created a nice narrative to explain it off as "external consideration", when it isn't. If we just contribute to the system, we might as well drop the ball completely. You CAN be externally considerate all the while refusing to add poison into society.

Obviously it's not engaging in the Work with the various trick or treaters and their parents and is only a small and rather insignificant interaction, but with the pervasiveness of poison in america and the fact that most people do absolutely nothing to avoid it (in fact, they relish in it), isn't giving them this toxic candy treating them in the way that they want to be treated, in this circumstance?

That's my thinking, which is starting to sound like it's off from the feedback I've been getting, but I'd like to get some more clarity on why it's off, if that's the case. Thanks! :)

Well, what you are describing happens in absolutely every aspect of society. And I think the point is to Work within the system, but not FOR the system. Most people do absolutely nothing about anything (psychopaths, war, you name it). If you follow your Halloween reasoning, are you going to shut down, do nothing, just because it won't change a thing?

That said, I sometimes get into that mode, also. But in order to snap out of it, I remember that our duty is to do what is right. Whether that effects a change or not, we don't know. But we can do what is right because it is right. That's it. And in doing what is right, we also have a right to refuse to "poison" (add entropy). Sometimes that has to be done strategically, but so be it. We can and should respect other people's choices, but that doesn't mean adopting them.

Just my 2 cents, FWIW (and this thread has really gone off topic, sorry!)

 

[Chu]

I forgot to add:

A thread that has been in my mind in considering this situation and which has influenced my thinking is this one:

http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,27933.0.html

If you read that thread carefully, you will see that there is something different. It's the Law of three once again. There is good and evil, and the specific circumstance. If you need to "contribute to the system", but that this is done with a higher goal in mind, then that's very different. If your goal is, say, get enough money so that you CAN do what is right, it's a whole different story. But what does giving candy in Halloween have to do with any higher goal?

and I also thought this recent post by anart on external consideration was relevant:

Quote from: anart on Yesterday at 19:44:44

You cannot engage in the work with people in your private life who have no interest in or understanding of it. If you are pushing ideas, concepts or even attitudes onto the people in your private life then you are erring grievously. In your private life you are supposed to be acting with utmost external consideration, meaning you treat people in a way they want to be treated which makes life easier for them and for you. You do not try to awaken those who are deeply asleep, lest they turn and rend you to pieces.

Notice that you have twisted Anart's words to suit your narrative. What she wrote doesn't mean that you have to give candy! It just means that you can, for example, as I suggested, blame it on yourself (you don't have candy in your home, you are allergic, etc.). That is still "giving them what they want", which is, an illusion that they aren't doing anything wrong. OSIT.

 

[Foxx]

Thanks Ailén, that really clears things up!

But with that mentality, would you give a drug-addict friend some dope, because he is "doomed" anyway? I think you are confusing external consideration with a sense of doom that you yourself are having, and with "being nice", and that you have created a nice narrative to explain it off as "external consideration", when it isn't. If we just contribute to the system, we might as well drop the ball completely. You CAN be externally considerate all the while refusing to add poison into society.

I think that this is spot on and the core of what I was missing (though the rest of what you said was also really helpful)--the response I was writing as my previous response that made me stop and reconsider my thinking and then write the post I did was along the lines of 'they only want their dopamine high, so that's what I'll give them' ("stop: wait a minute--that really doesn't sound right") and the drug-addict example came to mind.

It has been a long, stressful, and frustrating past month with problems where the end still isn't really in sight, so I think I have been feeling some "gloom and doom" and that those feelings influenced my thinking (although if that thinking is also off then that would be good to know!), so thanks a lot for helping to clear that up. I'll work on not letting those feelings influence my thinking.

I'm sorry too for hijacking this thread way off topic!

 

[Ares]

Gertrudes
That's interesting, I kept having some experiences until about that age, where I would suddenly "wake up" (for the lack of a better expression) and realize, much to my surprise, that I was in a child's body and that I was female. I remember looking at my tiny hands and skirt, recognizing that I had a new body and thinking, "Oh, I'm still this young...". Most of these memories are from when I was still a baby and a toddler, I remember being on a baby chair and suddenly "waking up" realizing that I was in a room full of other babies, and then becoming aware that I was also inhabiting a baby body. These experiences faded gradually lasting until I was about 8, and then stopped entirely.

Gertrudes its amazing you remember this level of detail about your childhood. Its just a blur when I think about mine.

 

[Chu]

I think that this is spot on and the core of what I was missing (though the rest of what you said was also really helpful)--the response I was writing as my previous response that made me stop and reconsider my thinking and then write the post I did was along the lines of 'they only want their dopamine high, so that's what I'll give them' ("stop: wait a minute--that really doesn't sound right") and the drug-addict example came to mind.

It has been a long, stressful, and frustrating past month with problems where the end still isn't really in sight, so I think I have been feeling some "gloom and doom" and that those feelings influenced my thinking (although if that thinking is also off then that would be good to know!), so thanks a lot for helping to clear that up. I'll work on not letting those feelings influence my thinking.

Well, you know what could be good in that case, i.e. network the real problems! :) Feeling some "gloom and doom" is natural, but as you said, letting it itfluence your thinking does no good. We need to learn to channel that frustration into something creative that allows us to do what is right. The rest, well, we can't control. Laura often quotes this: "God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference." I think we forget that too easily sometimes. I'm guilty of that too, more often that I'd like to be.

Glad the feedback helped.

 

[Laura]

If I was living in the US still, I would do the same that I always did on Hallowe'en: get good candy and give it to the kids asking for it. Period. What I do is one thing, I'm not here to impose that on anyone who is not asking.

There are things you can change, things you can't change, things that are your responsibility, things that are not. You just need to figure out what is which in any situation.

 

[Josi]

Also, I want to say we do not know what the parents may do to handle the candy the children receive. A client of mine yesterday said that her two kids traded all their candy for a toy. So, they had the fun of trick or treating without any harm.

 

[Beau]

This discussion now has its own thread since it diverged so much from the original thread.

If I remember back to when I went door-to-door on Halloween looking for candy, I know I was looking for very specific things like candy bars or sweet tarts and when I got an apple or, god forbid, candy corn, I was usually pretty bummed. But I do think the idea of giving them good candy that isn't mass-produced GMO poison is a good one. If only more people did that...

 

[Foxx]

This discussion now has its own thread since it diverged so much from the original thread.

Thanks Heimdallr!

Well, you know what could be good in that case, i.e. network the real problems! :) Feeling some "gloom and doom" is natural, but as you said, letting it itfluence your thinking does no good. We need to learn to channel that frustration into something creative that allows us to do what is right. The rest, well, we can't control. Laura often quotes this: "God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference." I think we forget that too easily sometimes. I'm guilty of that too, more often that I'd like to be.

Yeah, the wisdom was definitely eluding me in that case (and I'm sure eludes me other times as well). I think you're right too--since this feeling influenced my thinking, it's time to network about it. I'll get my thoughts together and start a topic, which should happen within a week (busy next few days plus getting thoughts together). Thanks for the reminder :)

Glad the feedback helped.

Very much so--thanks again!

 

[Mrs. Peel]

If I was living in the US still, I would do the same that I always did on Hallowe'en: get good candy and give it to the kids asking for it. Period. What I do is one thing, I'm not here to impose that on anyone who is not asking.

There are things you can change, things you can't change, things that are your responsibility, things that are not. You just need to figure out what is which in any situation.

Yeah, that's what we did. Trick or Treat was postponed because of Hurricane Sandy, and rescheduled for Nov. 3. We got six children, less than previous years, probably because of the postponement. There was lots left over and my husband took it to work.

The Trick or Treaters aren't interested in healthy treats. Parents won't let them touch anything home-made usually, because everyone is paranoid about some wacko who might be trying to poison the children or stick razor blades in apples. My mom used to make popcorn and stick it in little sandwich bags which would get tossed out, no matter how many times I tried to explain it to her.

The alternative is to not put on the porch light (the universal sign that you participate in TorT) and don't participate. Then you run the risk of having some petty damage done (egg throwing, etc), but I noticed the little kids are with parents who keep an eye on them.

 

[loreta]

I remember my first Halloween, how happy I was to receive candies. Naturally I am an addict to candies even if I don't eat them anymore and in part I am an addict because of Halloween. Addicted to the rest of my life with sweet, even if I follow our diet. Halloween is the holiday of candies. Later, when I was giving instead of receiving, I gave candies, naturally. I was not aware of the danger of sugar. The fun to see the kids with costumes is very nice. In the country where I live there is no Halloween but if I had the chance to participated I would give peanuts, nuts, biscuits instead of candies because I know that candies are bad.

 

[Laura]

if I had the chance to participated I would give peanuts, nuts, biscuits instead of candies because I know that candies are bad.

Peanuts, nuts, and biscuits are about as bad as candies. I just remembered which kind of candy kids really liked getting, the ones they would say "wow!" over, and those are the ones I gave. Might as well make 'em happy if you can't save 'em.

 

[loreta]

Might as well make 'em happy if you can't save 'em.

Yes, you are right. And making them happy you are also making yourself happy. It is just one night, after all.

 

[lwu02eb]

Ailén, thank you for your input in this post. You stated much more clearly and objectively what I was trying to get across. I too believe that we can be externally considerate and not participate (i.e. not perpetuate behaviour which does not appear to contribute to higher aims). In fact, I think that Halloween/ its equivalent is a form of very insidious conditioning of children to behave in societally acceptable ways for material reward.

I would struggle to support that without feeling like a hypocrite when later I will reflect wearily on the human condition (mechanical, destructive, reward based behaviour). Perhaps that is internally considerate or selfish, I'm not entirely sure. It doesn't feel like it is to me when I'm not standing in the doorway ranting and raving at people, I'm simply saying politely "sorry I don't have any candy but have a great night, and fab costumes by the way!".