|The awesomeness of my cellphone pictures astound me.|
This is on my pack of Christie's Fudge-Drizzled Caramel Popcorn.
(Before you accuse me of going retro and getting back my fatty status, it's one of their 100 calorie packs - a small portion that I have as a dessert to finish off my lunch - it isn't a bucket-full or something.)
Now I can understand Kraft, (who owns Mr. Christie heart and soul) wanting to protect themselves by putting the first portion of that message on the package. Caramel Corn isn't meant for 3 year olds and under, and if you are giving it to them, I don't think a warning on a package is going to change you.
It's the second portion of the message that confounds me. "Older children should be seated and supervised while eating." Holy shit - it makes this stuff sound dangerous. What puzzles me is the obvious question: What parent out there would let their 6 year old run around while eating a choking hazard anyway?
"Hey Susie-May, you look peckish - why don't you have some o' this here Caramel Corn while yer hanging upside down at the playground?"
"But I'll have to stop juggling my pet Rattler if I do that, Pa!"
"Hmmm - that's a pickle... why not just do both at the same time?"
"Geez, Pa - that'd be swell!"
Next to that, I think most people are reasonable enough when it comes to giving their kids food. (I said most, not all - I guess there are idiots out there.)
But the part about older children being "Seated and Supervised" just seems silly. I should make sure my 9 year old sits and eats his food? If he's not doing it already, I've failed as a parent, and I haven't seen him doing handstands at the dinner table, so I guess the message has sunk in.
How would that go with a teenager? I'm sure if my Dad had told me to sit so he could supervise me while I ate my snack, I would have thought he was nuts and ignored him.
But Kraft has to protect themselves from the stupid and litigious out there, who don't want to take blame or responsibility for anything.
And thus the package warning is born.