Kangaroos? In MY lunch box?

[meredithp]

Waxing philosophical about the article "Ordering the Vegetarian Meal? There's More Animal Blood on Your Hands" and vegetarianism generally.

I'm never sure what to make of articles like this. Humans are omnivores. If I go back to eating meat, those mice and spiders will still die, because I will still eat grains and vegetables - but then the animals I'm eating will ALSO die. This article would make me rethink vegetarianism if we were carnivores, but we're not.

I'm also not a fan of being told what to eat. For my entire career as a vegetarian, some 21 years this month, I've been surrounded by meat-eaters. All my family and friends have been meat-eaters, and I have no desire to change that. Nor do I appreciate being told what to eat, in either direction. I am a vegetarian in the exact amount that is right for me - most people don't know I eat gelatin and dashi, but I do, because that's right for me. Being told vegetarianism isn't enough for the animals, and I have to go vegan, really grates my cheese. Similarly, I have a beef with being told bacon is wonderful and I'm missing out - I probably am, but I'd rather not eat piggies or any other animals. I have never told anyone else what to eat, and I appreciate the same courtesy.

And that this article cites Lierre Keith turns me off. I tried reading The Vegetarian Myth, but I couldn't get very far. She said vegetarians are like children, ignorant of how the world really works, and we should just grow up and eat meat already. If you're writing a persuasive essay, insulting your reader is a bad way to start. I never read any further.

So from what this article says, the only way to TRULY not harm animals is to not eat at all. Of course that's not realistic, so failing that, you should be a carnivore, because that hurts animals less than eating grains and such. But that's not realistic either. Given the choice between being a vegetarian and an omnivore, it seems to me the former is still the one that results in less harm to animals.

I'm open to having my view changed on this, because I learned while living in Japan that beef is really, really tasty. But until I see a persuasive argument, I'm sticking with my non-proselytizing style of vegetarianism while in the US. It's best for me and those I love.

Comments

[talkendo.livejournal.com]

I get why some people mix their food with animal ethics. Really. But this article (and every other one like it) forgets one very simple fact: it is IMPOSSIBLE (for most people; the degree of impossibility varies with privilege) under late-stage, imperial capitalism to consume ethically. You can try, and I'm not going tell anyone how deal with their food (except to leave me out of it).
But, every argument I've seen for that suggests that our ethics for and about animals should be an overriding concern in ordering our food, erases completely the people producing that food. From the industrial concerns that organize and control food production to the individual laborers (often migrant, often woefully underpaid and poorly treated) producing that food, the humans are not considered.
I can't get on board with any Ethical Diet without that consideration. And I don't know how to order a food consumption program AND consider the ethics (human and animal) and not resort to growing my own and feeding myself. For which I have neither the time or the inclination.
Ethics should be a concern. But making arguments for the purpose of convincing others about the relative ethical values of diets vis a vis animals kind of misses the forest for one particular very beautiful, endangered tree.
tl;dr: How does your proposed food program affect the PEOPLE involved in its production?

[woofiegrrl.livejournal.com]

Totally and completely fair question, and one I'm not equipped to answer. Based on the answers I do have, I choose vegetarianism. But this is one thing that would make me consider changing, if I had those answers and they lined up with what I feel is right. For now, I'll go with what I have - but you raise an excellent point.

[sunnydale47.livejournal.com]

The only solid statement in that article is that eating kangaroos would help. It's equivalent to eating venison in suburban areas -- with no natural predators allowed, deer have become pests, multiplying to a level beyond the carrying capacity of the land. As a result they not only destroy the ecosystem needed by native flora and fauna, many end up starving to death in lean years. To ameliorate the situation, many suburban areas (including most of the DC suburbs) cull deer by allowing sharpshooters and/or archers to kill some each year. The meat not wanted by the hunters themselves is usually given to food banks. If more people ate venison it would reduce the demand for industrially killed animals while improving the ecosystem. I imagine that the situation vis-a-vis kangaroos in Australia is analogous.

Other than that, the article is deeply flawed. Many of the statistics are presented in such a way that they are lies and damn lies, and much of the logic is fallacious. The author admits that cattle raised on rangeland are "finished" on feedlots; and even if the statistics for grass-fed cattle are true for Australia, the vast majority of cattle in the US are raised not by family farmers but by huge industrial agribusiness operations. Turning corn and grain into beef is far less sustainable than eating the grains themselves.

The snake and mouse issue is a red herring. Industrially-raised cattle in the US are not grazed on natural pasture or rangeland, and in those places where they are, small animals basic to the ecosystem, like prairie dogs, are destroyed.

And don't even get me started on the cruelty of the way meat animals/birds are raised and slaughtered.

I applauded your choice to stop eating "anything with a face" (or even creatures without faces, like crabs), and still do. I got used to eating vegetarian while you lived at home; I still eat mostly vegetarian meals at home, and sometimes in restaurants too. I consider myself a "semi-vegetarian" -- I would guess maybe 2/3 for health reasons and 1/3 for ethical reasons.

I've always been proud of you for not preaching and for not objecting to what others at the same table are eating. You are fully entitled to the same courtesy from everyone else, whether they think you should eat/wear fewer animal products or more of them!

[woofiegrrl.livejournal.com]

Aha, I like the deer comparison! The article does state up front that it's focusing on Australia, but a lot of the online discussion I've seen has been trying to view it globally. Putting deer in the place of kangaroo makes that a little more feasible, but our farming practices are still pretty different.

And speaking of cruelty, I was looking into eating kosher meat a couple of months ago, because supposedly that's killing without cruelty. Then I saw Jonathan Safran Foer's video If This is Kosher... (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rf1eLjnGafk) (warning: graphic) and backed away from that idea.

I've been doing what works for me for 21 years. I like letting other people do what works for them. :)

[holyjesusboner.livejournal.com]

Did you eat Kobe Beef in Japan? Because that wouldn't be a fair representation of average beef. Kobe has extensive marbling, and the more marbling, the tastier--- if cooked right. Which isn't something you'll find in the grocery store because people think the marbling/ fat looks icky and overpriced. So you'd be stuck at getting the best beef in restaurants.
Ok, you probably didn't indulge in Kobe beef constantly, but I'm still curious if you tried it.

I always thought the gelatin thing was kinda hypocritical. Most cheeses over the years shouldn't be considered vegetarian when using animal-sourced rennet, but that's always been a hush-hush topic over the years. Gelatin bad, cheese good. More companies are moving away from animal rennet because of expenses, but still.

Overall I think the argument that vegetarians kill more is odd. What about all the displaced or killed organisms for raising livestock? Or the plant-based diet they consume-- lots of grain included. Doesn't seem possible a vegetarian human's food source kills more than a herbivore animal's food does when you need to add the actual food animal's death to the count.

I think the article was just trying to be edgy or shocking, so, meh! I say.

I've also dealt with far more people talking crap about vegetarians and vegans than I have remotely come across veg*ns preaching. And usually it's only after they've been attacked first.

[woofiegrrl.livejournal.com]

Actually, I never did have Kobe beef there! I told myself that if I made it to Kobe, I would have some, but I never did. I did have hamburgers (yum), steaks (even made my own), shabu shabu (droolworthy), and other sources of beef...and they were so good. I discovered I actually don't like chicken - none of the ways I had it were very appealing. Not a fan of fish, either, and the less said about shirako (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03LObz4BTqM) (sorry, shitty automatic captions) the better. But beef...ohhhhh beef was tasty.

And yeah, we like to look the other way on certain animal products, but not others. That's why I just say "yeah, I eat gelatin." I am nothing if not honest about my food choices. There are probably people who would call me a "semi-vegetarian" because I'm not omg super pure about it. Whatever, fuck 'em. I'll eat what I eat, you eat what you eat.

[crayonbeam.livejournal.com]

My mom claims I quit being a vegetarian when I lived in Sydney and heard that farmers shot kangaroos to protect crops and I said if the kangaroo was going to die I guess I'd eat it anyway. I dispute this story slightly in that I never actually ate kangaroo.

I tend to treat ethical vegetarians like religious folks and realize that we will disagree and that I will not change their mind and that it's probably rude to discuss it. I sometimes engage in conversation with folks who talk about vegetarian (or vegan) diets being healthier as I'm pretty evangelical about the evils of grains these days.

Telling someone what to eat isn't about kindness, though you can totally see how if someone feels strongly about saving animal lives, they will want to save as many as they can, very much like saving human souls. At any rate, my inner Miss Manners says that telling someone what they should or should not eat is not ok, unless you're a grandmother at a family meal and then I think it's probably in a law someplace.