March 19--Here's a quiz.
If there's one thing Americans love it's:
A) Eating food that has more calories than the galaxy has stars.
B) Having uncomfortable conversations.
If you answered "B," you're crazy. We hate uncomfortable conversations.
It doesn't matter whether it's with a spouse, co-worker or complete stranger, broaching a touchy subject with anyone is about as much fun as eating raw broccoli. Which, come to think of it, is something we should consider doing, given that the quiz's correct answer is "A."
We love our luscious sweet and fatty foods, served up fast so the instant gratification can be instant-er. But now Starbucks has driven a wedge between us and our 640-calorie Iced White Chocolate Mocha with whipped cream.
The company's widely mocked "Race Together" program, which encourages Starbucks employees to launch discussions about race relations with customers, has the potential to make us think twice before popping in for a caloric shot of caffeine.
Will the barista ask me to weigh in on why a disproportionate number of young black men are incarcerated on drug charges when the majority of drug users are white? My desire for a Frappuccino could result in a conversation that makes me squirmuccino.
Some praise Starbucks for having the guts to grapple with a serious social issue, others think it's a ham-handed (note to self: eat some ham, possibly fried) attempt at corporate goodwill rolled out by a company that has predominantly white executives and a proclivity for plunking stores down in freshly gentrified neighborhoods.
Whatever the motivation, it got off to a bad start. Highlighting our aforementioned aversion to difficult conversations, Starbucks' senior vice president of communications deleted his Twitter account after the online reaction to the Race Together campaign turned negative. Perhaps if his access to lattes was hanging in the balance, he would have stuck it out longer.
I'm all for getting people to talk about race. In fact, I'm all for getting people to talk about everything, whether it's poverty or abortion or health care or a problem in a marriage. I just don't think a coffee shop counter is the best venue for those conversations, or that baristas -- who I love and value more than most people in life -- are the people to shoulder the conversation-starting responsibility.
But there is a possibility that fear of awkward conversations could help us avoid an entirely different issue: obesity. Earlier this month, Bloomberg reported that "unpublished research shows medical expenses linked to being extremely overweight have skyrocketed. Experts say the damage is augmented by reduced productivity, wider gender and income inequality and even higher transportation costs."
It's a problem. And it's one we don't want to talk about, in part because we're too busy finding new things to wrap in bacon and eat. There have been attempts to address our sugar lust and unwillingness to eat well, everything from fast food chains offering up healthier menu options to a suggestion last month from a government panel of nutrition experts that sweets and snacks be taxed higher than other foods.
Clearly the fast-food health food hasn't taken off, and the tax concept is destined to fail.
John Cawley, an economics professor at Cornell University, told Bloomberg: "It's a misreading of the evidence to think that a modest tax on a narrow category of food or drinks would have a substantial impact on calories or weight. It would probably have to be a broader and bigger tax to really change people's behavior, and I don't know whether that's politically feasible."
It's not. But perhaps what is feasible is getting other food and drink shops to follow Starbucks' ostensibly progressive lead.
Imagine this: "Hi, welcome to Wendy's. Can we interest in you in a refreshing Frosty? Also, what are your thoughts on same-sex marriage?"
Or: "OK, so you'd like one Big Mac, a large fries and an Oreo McFlurry. That's coming right up, as soon as you share with me your opinion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict!"
If every eatery is inspired by Starbucks' bold move, then all the elephants in the room will be up for grabs. With the exception of our eating problem.
And that problem will be eradicated by our sudden unwillingness to set foot in fast-food restaurants for fear of having to talk about uncomfortable issues!
It's the perfect solution.
Well, perfect except for the fast-food companies that will lose all their customers. Maybe the tough conversations should only be with people ordering unhealthy food. Salads would be available chat-free.
That way we can avoid life's serious problems and get fit in the process.
It's like having your cake and eating it too. Except the cake is made of iceberg lettuce. And it tastes, peculiarly, like fear.
rhuppke@tribpub.com
