Guest guest Posted September 2, 2003 Report Share Posted September 2, 2003 The topic of stereotypes is always a fun one. I am puzzled by the stereotypes I encounter among vegetarians. I've been veg since the age of 5, so it amuses me that someone has to be a recent convert. At social events in this area, and having lived in a bunch of areas, I get questions like " Were you already a vegetarian when you lived in XYZ? How was it to do that? " As if it should have been any more difficult in one place versus another. I am also amused that people have to have one of a few sets of reasons for becoming vegetarian - " animal welfare " , " health " , " religion " seem to be major heading topics. How about because it's just logical and a more optimal decision? I know this sounds geeky, but other paths are just sub-optimal - meat consumption requires a great deal of energy in the production process, meat production has a greater burden upon an economy (more restrictions the making of food, more subsidies, higher costs inherent in moving up the food chain), the activity requires moral contortions, and of course eating meat isn't good for one's long term well-being. None of these considerations falls under a distinct banner like " health " or " animal welfare " . As for stereotypes, my brother (he claims that he became a vegetarian at the same time, which would have made him 2 years old; I think it was a year or so later...sibling rivalry) and I enjoy turning stereotypes upside down in many quiet but effective ways. In many ways, our lives have shown that many views of vegetarians aren't uniformly accurate. Additionally, having chosen this path at an early age, it's not a situation that we regard as anything other than the status quo, and that any other facet of life is independent of this. Oh, except we might both be guilty of retaining a stereotype that vegetarians are probably smarter than the average population. Anyone care to debunk that? Cheers, David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 2, 2003 Report Share Posted September 2, 2003 On Tuesday, September 2, 2003, at 12:14 AM, David Purdy wrote: > How > about because it's just logical and a more optimal decision? I know > this > sounds geeky, but other paths are just sub-optimal - meat consumption > requires > a great deal of energy in the production process, meat production has > a greater > burden upon an economy (more restrictions the making of food, more > subsidies, > higher costs inherent in moving up the food chain) That falls under the 'environmental concerns' banner. So, at age 5 you were an environmentalist? tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 2, 2003 Report Share Posted September 2, 2003 > - David Purdy <snip> > having lived in a bunch of areas, I get questions like " Were you > already a vegetarian when you lived in XYZ? How was it to do that? " > As if it should have been any more difficult in one place versus another. <snip> In some ways it is more difficult in some places. The bay area is, relatively speaking, quite vegetarian friendly, and sometimes I become complacent about that until I travel to places in Colorado and New Mexico. There are places where it seems like every item on the menu in every restaurant in the city has some chunks of dead animal in it. I guess it goes well with the cigarette that they'll suck on at the table when they're done (something else I love about CA). And a vegetarian restaurant? Puh-leeez! Why would anybody open a restaurant that didn't serve dead animal entrees? Personally, I think it's muuuuuuch easier to be vegetarian here in the bay area. Thanks for reminding me of that. --Brian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.