Tuesday, February 12, 2008

I Love You But You Are Dumb: A Double Trouble Reponse

Let's talk about the many ways in which this article sucks.

First of all...what the fuck is up with the New York Times? Michael Pollan, Nina Planck, that horrible article about how women should eat meat...what is this, Pretentious Rich White Foodie Digest? Is it any wonder that half of the United States is sitting ignorant and quelled on their couches munching on Doritos and not giving a fuck, if this is the shite that's being published? God damn. Apparently the NYT staff went into hives after publishing the not quite so meat-friendly Bittman article, wimpy and noncommital as it was.

Anyway. The article quotes Anthony Bourdain, who, as far as I'm concerned, can take a long walk off a short pier. A pier below which there are sharpened toothbrushes coated with poison FIRE. I hate that man. He's just jealous because vegans are punker than he is...along with pretty much everything else.

Returning the compliment, many vegetarians say they cannot date anyone who eats meat. Vegans, who avoid eating not just animals but animal-derived products, take it further, shivering at the thought of kissing someone who has even sipped honey-sweetened tea.

Yeah, we're shivering in our little pleather bootses, alright.

While some eaters may elevate morality above hedonism, others are suspicious of anyone who does not give in to the pleasure principle.

June Deadrick...said she would have a hard time loving a man who did not share her fondness for multicourse meals including wild game and artisanal cheeses. “And I’m talking cheese from a cow, not that awful soy stuff,” she said.

Yes, because obviously pleasure should be given precedence over ethical responsibility and morality. Hey hey, June, since you don't have to give a damn, why not just start having the veal calves shipped directly to your house. They are a by-product of the dairy industry, after all.

She prepares vegan meals and averts her eyes when he adds anchovies or cheese. And she does not show disapproval when he orders meat in a restaurant.

“I’m not a vegangelical,” she said. “He’s an adult and I respect his choices just as he respects mine.”

How the fuck did vegangelical become a word? I hate the way people associate veganism with religion. Does it make it easier for them to ignore, if they pretend it's based on quaint superstitions and a sky-being of choice? Open your eyes. Veganism isn't religion, because if it was, I would be pooping on it. You don't need faith to realize that no animal actively desires to be eaten at your BBQ. (And I know that this woman is just trying to distance herself from asshole vegans who are jerks to everyone and don't think about the fact that for most of them, THEY were omnis at one point...but when mainstream folks see a buzzword like that, THAT is what is going to stick in their minds when they think of vegans, they're going to think it represents the entirety of us.)

" So, she cooks vegetarian dinners and makes lunches for herself and her daughter that include meat. She and her daughter have “meat parties” when Mr. Benson goes out of town, she said.

“There’s this feeling that if we eat the same thing then we are the same thing, and if we don’t, we’re no longer unified,” Dr. Zerbe said."

MMMMMM. Smell that? That fresh, hot, steaming CRAP. Srsly? Meat parties? Ugh. If you really need to eat the 'same thing' ('thing?' That's a cow, dear. Yes, you are eating a once living animal's muscle tissue and fat) to feel unified as a family, perhaps your issues lie elsewhere.

This article masquerades as a promotion and celebration of people's food preferences and differences. The problem is, the thinly-veiled derision directed at vegans and vegetarians portrays veganism - i.e., leading an animal-friendly life - simply as pickiness, stubbornness, and simply a food preference rather than a moral imperative.

The point I'm trying to make is exactly the one that the slew of writers, and I use that term loosely, for the NYT don't seem to get: this isn't about pissing other people off for the hell of it, this isn't about fashion or greenwashing, this isn't about making things difficult, and it's most definitely, certainly, not about pickiness - it's about living your life ethically, about making compassionate choices wherever possible. about not supporting an industry that promotes and sells suffering, and improving the state of the earth, the lives of the 10 billion animals that are slaughtered every year*, and our own health and well-being. The NYT, and people in general, belittle compassionate choices, because they know that, and they feel guilty.

* That's not including the fishes or any sea creatures which are killed each year as well. Think about it.

Sister pretty much summed that up quite nicely. But I have the edit button, so you get my two cents as well!
First - did anyone notice, before the mention of anything vegan, that there was a celiac woman who was dating a guy who was apparently too fucking in love with bread to respect her wheat allergy? What the balls? I mean, sure, I love certain foods, but no food is worth a great friendship, or a relationship. I thought I could never give up sushi, but I gave it up, and it wasn't as hard as I thought - I know I'd be willing to give up a food I like to be with a *person* I like. Not paying attention to someone's dietary restrictions is totally asinine - oh, but Veganism is a CHOICE, so clearly we don't count.
Food is fleeting and temporary (and delicious, yes...but...) so why would you want to ever date a guy (or woman) who found the taste of a certain food more important than you are? I'd never want to date someone who thought the taste of meat was more important than being with me. Wtf, society! Epic failure.

1 comment:

Daniel said...

That's 10 billion animals slaughtered annually in the US alone. The number for the entire world is estimated around 50 billion.