“There is no hunger in NZ”
There is no hunger in New Zealand
Hunger is a condition in which a person, for a sustained period is unable to eat sufficient food to meet basic nutritional needs. – Hunger statistics wfp.org
It could be argued that New Zealand is not a poverty stricken country. It depends entirely from which angle you’re looking in. Whether you are sheltered and unaware of your own privilege and by extension the mere definition of the word ‘hunger’, or if you’ve experienced hunger first hand and are well aware of its existence in NZ. Some people within society assume there is no hunger as New Zealand is not what is considered a third world country. Others would disagree, and argue that there absolutely is due to personal experience, the rapidly rising cost of living, some even will argue obesity is a form of hunger as the body is being ’starved’ of nutrients - unhealthy foods and takeaways being well accessible and cheap. According to my survey, 7/7 people thought hunger is an issue in NZ and had either experienced hunger first hand generally being a student with seldom money; hence having to give up food at times to pay for other necessities such as housing and bills. Most have seen hunger first hand and are well aware of its prevalence even in NZ. 6/7 participants also mentioned the cost of groceries, the Auckland and Wellington housing crisis, the issue of accessibility, poverty and priorities were all relative factors. (Hunger in NZ survey, 2017).
There are many differing opinions and strong misconceptions about the lower class and NZ families living in poverty. I would say one of the more common and harmful misconceptions are that low income families prioritise alcohol, drugs and addictions over healthy food for their families. That they should better utilise contraception and have their right to reproduce taken from them if they can’t pay the bills. A lot of this belief stems from stereotyping and in fact racism, as a large percentage of folk on welfare and within lower class is Maori. Many people believe that these low income families do have sufficient money to live but that they’re unable to be considered hungry due to their shoddy priorities. Others understand that welfare pays the absolute bare minimum, if not, below minimum required to survive within this economy. Many folk argue these families are not taking advantage of free services available such as free budgeting mentoring, food banks etc, but in fact food banks are hugely low on stock, and these organisations simply are not accessible to everyone. Location and transportation plays a huge role here, and these utilities often have long waiting periods. Lack of budgeting skills is argued to be detrimental to a family’s nutrition intake. Though, families on low incomes and welfare use budgeting on the daily - they are constantly prioritising certain necessities over other necessities week by week in order to survive. Budgeting skills will only assist to an extent. At the end of the day if an income does not cut it, debt persists regardless of any learnt skills one might adopt.
It is imperative a family has transportation and access available in order to do weekly grocery trips. Living further from town or a city’s centre is known to save money in housing, but this does mean more inconvenience when considering accessibility to a township, shops etc. Another point to acknowledge is that within the lower class population there will be working members within families working overtime at an attempt to make ends meet for everyone, and hence lacking the time to prepare substantial meals, and this is where the over-accessibility of fast food comes in. In many towns and cities in NZ you can find a fish and chip shop on every other block. It becomes very easy to adapt unhealthy diets lacking in nutrition. The argument that growing one’s own organic produce ‘for free’ is one of the most uninformed. It is not a particularly sustainable or realistic option for many folk at all – one would need a garden with healthy soil and a garden, to begin with, which is a luxury a strong number of people do not have. Gardening skills would be required, and crops take quite some time to grow, humans require three main meals per day. It doesn’t take much consideration to realise that growing vegetables as a means to sustain a nutritious diet for an entire family not only is non-viable, it is practically impossible.
When we take a look at how large fast food corporations are targeted at children via advertising and have a large part to play in the sponsorship of sports related events, it becomes alarming just how strong and manipulative of a force these companies really are. Providing nothing short of the most nutrition-less trashy excuse for ‘food’ available within our society, yet backing children on the soccer field, ‘rewarding’ their sporting successes with free cheeseburgers. Famous athletes who young children look up to and aspire to be also partner with similar companies. The All Blacks collaborate with companies that market sugar filled fluorescent beverages while KFC endorses multiple rugby teams. This may or may not contribute toward misunderstanding just how unhealthy these foods are, as being affiliated with sports makes for confusion.
Some families are struggling to get by because of the price difference between nutritional and unhealthy foods. Junk foods are usually more affordable than natural goods such as vegetables, dairy and meats. A bottle of two litre milk on average is priced at $3.70, meanwhile fizzy drinks are advertised more and generally on sale to appear more desirable not just financially. (Comparable living costs, 2017). Families on low incomes will buy more food for less money to save where they can, which unfortunately means the quality of food is lesser and their family members are not getting the food they deserve and perhaps require to stay on top of good health.
Popular belief aside, the facts are clear and statistics speak volumes. 28% of NZ children are living in poverty and 8% in severe poverty (child poverty monitor, 2017). Children are showing up to school with little to no food and begging their peers for a portion of theirs; while others are showing up to school with chippies, sugary bars, chocolate yoghurts, and no fruit or veggies. Government and charity organisations such as the ‘Kickstart breakfast programme’ are working with a few schools to provide kids with free breakfast meals and milk, though this scheme more often than not lacks accessibility and won’t be available as often as many children need it. (Kickstart 2017). A common opinion is that it’s the child’s parent’s responsibility to feed their children, which is fair enough, but it is vital we keep in mind this simply isn’t a possibility for many parents, hence why these programmes are put in place to begin with. The demand for these programmes is strong. It is plain classist and ignorant to deny these children the right to a full belly because their parents for whatever reason are unable to provide. This mentality is no different than denying children the right to health care, “Because their parents are below the poverty line”. Parents of hungry children feel utterly ashamed, but find solace in knowing there are charitable organisations contributing toward abolishing child hunger are out there.
There are mixed ideologies on where responsibility lies on the issue of hunger. Many can agree that the current National government could be doing a lot more to abolish hunger within NZ, or at least to reduce it, as opposed to cutting funding where it’s required. There should be more knowledge of the services the government do provide, and it’s important these services are well known and accessible to all, and that fresh produce and proteins are affordable, especially for New Zealanders on low income and welfare. Dialogue on this subject matter is incredibly important, as it draws attention to the issues we’re facing as a country and influences positive change and political revolution. How does a country abolish hunger or tackle any issue without first acknowledging there is an issue? Education is where it all begins. Rather than turning a blind eye and a cold shoulder to issues the privileged and the majority do not understand, we must admit there is a problem and face it together as one.
Bibliography
http://www.sightandlife.org/fileadmin/data/News/Hidden_Hunger_Index_Executive_Summary.pdf
http://nzccss.org.nz/work/poverty/facts-about-poverty/
http://www.childpoverty.co.nz/
https://www.newzealandnow.govt.nz/living-in-nz/money-tax/comparable-living-costs
https://www.consumer.org.nz/articles/food-companies-and-sport-sponsorship
https://kickstartbreakfast.co.nz/about
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11291345
Conformity; personal response
Conformity
The poem is about a misunderstood boy. A creative, who sees the world through the lens of his mood. He sees in colours, thinks in pictures,and even carries one around with him as if it were a friend. It appears he has difficulty learning in the style of his teacher, him being a visual learner. He is silenced and uncared for by the folks around him. He is struggling to get by his own way because the world around him is reluctant to accept him and his differences. I see a school and, by extension, a society failing its unique individuals constricting their creative freedom. The boys’ teacher told him, “Wear a tie like all of the other little boys”. I see a deeper meaning behind this sentence, to me it is symbolic of how a school puts students in moulds to turn out a certain way and to fit into the closed off idea of what a child should do; should be; how a child should look and behave. His only option is to conform to the society that once cast him out. Become a clone of them, draw airplanes and rocket ships like them. I see a boy who has been coerced into letting his true self go in order to see a change in how the people outside see to him. I really enjoyed the poem, it hit close to home. I too have often felt I’ve had to sacrifice and filter my creative outlet in order to fit in especially in a school setting. I can relate to this young boy, as anyone outside of the grey square that is normality and conformity is cast out. It sounds to me like he could likely be on the autism spectrum, as in the poem it says he sees in colours and it seems he has difficulty learning and has created his own style in which he finds great comfort in expressing himself. Generally autistic children are deeply creative and don’t function like children who are considered normal. This poem speaks volumes on how the system is failing creatives and children with learning disabilities. The fact it’s considered a disability to have a differing style of learning is reflective of this. As opposed to having teachers cater to all children, we’re having all children put into a mould they don’t necessarily fit. I think of all the amazing things a society could do with unique children if only we uplifted and celebrated them. The story of this young boy leaves a bad taste in my mouth for this reason. But it is a story that needs to be heard. He is tailor made into conformity.
If I can’t hold you in my arms, I’ll hold you in my heart
Until this lovely day dream can come true
Dildotastic
This is the best day of my life, I dropped my v expensive vibrator in the shower and after well over a year of the main motor being jammed IT POPPED BACK INTO PLACE AND IS NOW FUNCTIONING LIKE THE VERY FIRST TIME <3 Literally mouth wide open in amazement God lives?