Image 01 Image 03

Student Council Declares Ingredients in School Ice Cream Not Inclusive Enough

Student Council Declares Ingredients in School Ice Cream Not Inclusive Enough

“contains a beef gelatin additive”

This sounds absurd on its face, but that’s just because of the ‘student speak’ they’re using. Read the story.

Campus Reform reports:

Student council members: Ice cream is not ‘inclusive’ enough

Student council members at The University of Wisconsin-Madison are demanding the school change the ingredients in the official university ice cream, claiming that the current ingredients are discriminatory toward some minority students.

UW-M’s official ice cream, the Babcock, contains a beef gelatin additive, which according to the legislation, “renders certain communities such as the Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, and vegetarian unable to enjoy it without violating their beliefs.”

The legislation, titled “Ice Cream for All,” is already has eight sponsors, including the Chair, Vice Chair, and Secretary of the Associated Students of Madison Student Council. The ASM student council is comparable to a student government senate. The “Ice Cream for All” legislation will be voted on next Wednesday.

The ASM Student Council can only recommend changes to the university administration. Nothing that the ASM Student Council passes is, in fact, a definitive change.

The legislation states that the Babcock Ice Cream is an important tradition at UW-M, and “it would be a gross act of discrimination to continue to deprive some minority students” from eating the ice cream because of their religious beliefs. Sponsors of the legislation also added that issues like this play a part in the marginalization of students.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Deleted scenes from PCU

Sometimes we get so involved in the ‘them vs us’ partisanship that we don’t see the forest because of all of those stupid trees in the way. Why would a college want to serve a product that many of its students won’t eat? Don’t Jews and Muslims and vegetarians have a right to enjoy ice cream made without ingredients that are contrary to their beliefs? Or should the baker be made to bake that cake? Rather than complain about this, maybe they should be checking other ingredients than beef gelatin for the ice cream.

    PODKen in reply to TimothyJ. | September 15, 2018 at 7:34 pm

    On maybe they should just say … screw it … it’s not worth all the aggravation to make and sell this stuff … and discontinue the product.

    healthguyfsu in reply to TimothyJ. | September 15, 2018 at 11:38 pm

    Really bad take here. Gelatin is an ingredient in MANY foods. We’re not all going to eat provenance food or pay the insane amount for it, especially on a student budget.

Who’s forcing them to eat the ice cream? Is eating that particular ice cream a human right or something?

Who cares? Just leave things alone, for Pete’s sake.

Because there are noooooooooo other ice creams to be had…..
Good grief.

This is not a social justice issue, just a simple request, please get a different brand of ice cream. There are hundreds of brands. Why should they serve one so many people can’t eat? Muslims, Hindus, Jews and vegans can’t eat the ice cream. Why not switch?

Put another way, if the vanilla ice cream had peanut oil so that people with allergies can’t eat it, you wouldn’t be calling this a social justice issue.

    tom_swift in reply to Fenster. | September 16, 2018 at 4:20 pm

    Muslims, Hindus, Jews and vegans can’t eat the ice cream.

    . . . if the vanilla ice cream had peanut oil so that people with allergies can’t eat it

    You seriously equate these two situations?

    You’re a loon.

Of course, they could have just talked to the folks running the cafeteria, or sent an email, without passing a resolution. They could have handled this in 15 minutes.

tom_swift, does it make you feel good insulting strangers on the internet?

If people can’t eat the ice cream for whatever reason (kashrut, allergies, or it tastes bad), they could ask the cafeteria to serve something else. It’s a reasonable request. I think you can understand that.

    healthguyfsu in reply to Fenster. | September 17, 2018 at 9:55 am

    No, your equivalence is false. One case presents a health risk, the other does not.

    The practice of forbidding by-products is also inconsistently applied among those claiming to be of these religions in America…some care, some don’t. In any case, the “ask for options” approach is much more tactful than heavy-handed condemnation over an unintentional slight.

Why should there be a different brand of ice cream? If the whiners don’t like the current one, get a second kind. There is no need to replace the current one, unless this was never about the ice cream at all but rather about the exercise of power over the students who don’t care that the ice cream has beef gelatin.