Svelt, silent Santa a sign of politically-correct times

The lifestyle police are at it again.

No longer content with mandating the choices and thoughts of their peers, society’s self-proclaimed saviors have expanded their focus. This holiday season the political-correctness crowd has a new target: Santa Claus.

Apparently, Santa Claus is setting a poor example for the millions of children world-wide who so love and admire him. While I would have expected the use of non-unionized elf labor to be the first complaint levied against the jolly icon, the Daily Mail last week broke the news: Santa must deal with his weight problem.

Throughout the United Kingdom, malls and shopping centers are demanding that Santa watch his diet and maintain a more svelte figure. This movement is in response to a recently released medical report that predicted more than 50 percent of the United Kingdom’s population would be obese by the year 2050. While this is an unfortunate statistic, mandating Santa’s pant size is a far cry from a practical response.

Simply put, children idolize Santa not because they want to be him, but because he gives them toys. Enterprising children hoping to emulate Santa would sooner don a red suit, give gifts and get a pet deer before attempting to gain a hundred pounds. But Fiona Campbell-Reilly, a spokeswoman for the Bluewater Shopping Centre in Greenhithe, Kent, remains oblivious, instead offering confused children this nugget of “wise” consolation: “He will still be the same lovable jolly man, but will be fitter and healthier.”

This development speaks to a larger problem, namely the belief that the citizenry is irresponsible and must be shielded from anything that could potentially be deemed harmful. Such a nanny-state mentality asserts and propagates the insidious myth that people cannot think for themselves. The dangers of obesity are well known and it is the responsibility of the individual to look out for his or her own well-being. It is absurd to believe that Santa Claus’s weight would have any effect, either positive or negative, on anyone’s health.

While the Brits are forcing Santa onto treadmills, the Australians are giving Santa sensitivity lessons. In the post-Imus era, it seems the “ho” hysteria has made its way to the Southern hemisphere. The Sunday Mail reported that Santas employed and training with Australia’s largest Santa supplier, Westaff Operations, were ordered not to use the traditional Santa laugh because “we were told it [ho] was a derogatory term for females and can upset people.”

Instead of his normal, jovial chuckle, Santas were moved to woo admirers with a lackluster, but enunciated, “Ha, Ha, Ha.”

Thankfully some Australians have maintained their sanity. Dr. Jackie Cook, senior lecturer of communications at the University of South Australia, said that any banning of “ho, ho, ho” would be nonsense: “Can we use a garden hoe anymore? Do we have to remove that? … Ho, ho, ho from Santa is going to be everywhere. It’s going to be in books, on Christmas cards and kids are going to come across it sooner or later.”

Westaff’s decision, thankfully, elicited a great deal of international criticism. Public opposition has since encouraged Westaff to reverse its mandate and once again allow Santas to use their traditional greeting of “ho, ho, ho.”

Western nations pride themselves on their tolerance and freedom. Such restrictions on the thoughts, appearances and attitudes of the members of society and, of all people, Santa, are a dreadful harbinger of things to come. When jolly old Saint Nick is deemed a bad influence on children something has gone terribly wrong.

Caroline May is a Will Rice College junior.

Back to top