Article on Explaining (or not) Vegetarianism to Others ;=)

[Guest guest]

This came in from SoFlaVegans. I'm posting it in full for the benefit of those

of

you who do not read their mail online ;=)

 

Best, Pat ;=)

-------

Are You Vegetarian Enough?

And other ethical head games carnivores love to play with meatless

eaters

By Elisa Camahort

 

Guilt Trip: Some meat eaters try to convince vegetarians that

whatever ethics or morals they have around meat are negated by, say,

the wearing of leather shoes. It's neither logical nor classy, but it

still can throw new veggies for a loop.

 

http://www.metroactive.com/papers/cruz/02.23.05/dining-0508.html

 

People have a tendency to categorize. We put things into neat

packages, the better to understand them. Every time I talk to someone

about vegetarianism they say with a nod, " You're an ethical

vegetarian. " Ethical as opposed to a " religious " or

" health-conscious " vegetarian. (I will leave aside for another column

how interesting it is that people separate " religion " from " ethics "

so easily!)

 

I've honed my explanation over the years. The more complicated your

answer, the more people want to find the exception, the area where

you fail, the way they can topple your convictions.

 

I used to say: how you spend your money every day is your economic

vote. I don't want to contribute my vote to industries that

participate in practices that I find objectionable. I find the

suffering and death of sentient creatures objectionable, and it

applies to any creature that feels pain analogous to what I feel.

 

But what if someone else pays? Then it's not your economic vote; it's

theirs. Or what if there's no suffering, if the animals were plucked

from their natural habitat and then sedated, so that they never felt

a moment's pain or anxiety? Or how do you justify industries that may

cause suffering, as long as there's no death--like the dairy and egg

industries? Aren't you just a mass of inconsistencies?

 

I don't think those are necessarily good points, but they are good

motivators to hone my ethos. So, while the economic vote is something

I believe--and explains why I won't buy my Carnivorous Significant

Other meat products--it's not concrete enough. And while the pain and

suffering criteria is valid, it doesn't go far enough.

 

Now I say: I don't want to be responsible for the death of other

creatures.

 

Doesn't matter who pays.

 

Doesn't matter if they suffer.

 

Doesn't matter if it's a gift from or for someone.

 

Doesn't matter if it's just a byproduct of an animal that would have

been dead anyway.

 

And I freely admit that my use of dairy and egg products, much as I

try to buy organic, cage-free versions, is not ideal. I avoid wool

for the exact reasons I should be avoiding dairy and eggs. I can only

admit my lack of perfection and hope that the next time I try

veganism, I succeed.

 

" Ethical " vegetarians can also raise an issue that might resonate

with more people: what about humans? Would it motivate you to be a

vegetarian if you knew it would help humans? Most of the vegetarian

" bibles " out there, from Lappe's Diet for a Small Planet to Robbins'

Diet for a New America do not focus solely on cuddly animal victims.

They talk about world hunger; they talk about environmental

degradation; they talk about cancer and heart disease. They expose

the very real costs to the human race for our meat-centric diets.

Some of that might drive you from a personal health perspective, but

certainly some of that might motivate you for ethical reasons to take

better care of the entire world and the people living on it.

 

This has been percolating in my brain since I read a recent New York

Times editorial that talked about the slaughterhouse environment

being deadly ... for the workers. They are usually underpaid

immigrants; they aren't working lawful shift lengths or given proper

breaks; they are driven to work fast with complicated, dangerous

machines; they suffer a high accident rate. In other words, if eating

meat doesn't kill them, producing it just might.

 

Sure, people choose to be there in the slaughterhouse, unlike the

animals. Probably in the same way people choose to be homeless,

choose to be addicted, choose to be locked into a Wal-Mart at night,

or choose to leave their poverty-stricken country with some

oppressive regime in power.

 

Sure, people make their living running these cruel, oppressive animal

factories. Then again, people make their living dealing smack,

stealing cars, defrauding small investors. Doesn't make it right.

 

It certainly would be easier to say I'm a religious or

health-conscious vegetarian. We yearn for black and white, right and

wrong, compartmentalized and categorized choices--and reality just

isn't so easy. But ignoring the reality, for both animals and the

human race, seems a lot harder.

-----------