It seems as though I was one step ahead of the New York Times yesterday when I posted about the image of Vegetarianism and Veganism throughout the country. Today's article, The Carrot Some Vegans Deplore, is about just that.
The article starts by discussing a vegan strip club in Portland, Oregon. The owner, a male vegan (or vegetarian... forgive me for not getting the facts perfect), decided to combine these two interests. He claimed that combining a very masculine place like a strip club with vegan food was a great way to introduce men to this healthy, conscientious lifestyle. Whether spreading veganism was actually his objective is unclear, but apparently the association between animal rights and women's rights is not a new one. The article referenced many other examples of women's bodies being exploited to highlight animal rights, or on the other side, women leading a vegetarian lifestyle in order to highlight their personal struggle. The article did mention and have quotes from the authors of Skinny Bitch, and discussed the ways in which this and other popular vegan items contributed to the gender discussion around this lifestyle.
Overall, I'm not sure the article gave many answers to the questions that I brought up in my post. It did, however, say a lot of the same things. Exposure, even if it comes in the form of extreme ranting or attached to sexually attractive women, is a good thing. If you buy into that, you could argue that the vegan lifestyle gets a disproportionally high level of exposure for the very small percentage of Americans who actually call themselves vegan. On the other hand, many of these issues of fairness and appropriate treatment (whether for men, women, people of color, or animals) should be closely linked in our minds, shouldn't they? Should PETA really sell their message by attaching it to a picture of an attractive, half naked woman?
At least now the NY Times has weighed in on the subject.
Showing posts with label Food Culture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Food Culture. Show all posts
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Acceptance of food restrictions
A woman with celiac's disease goes into a restaurant to eat and explains that she needs a gluten free meal. She orders a salad without crutons and explains how sensitive she is to food that is cross contaminated with gluten... but the overworked, slightly annoyed waiter with tired feet just goes back to the kitchen and picks up a pre-made salad, tossing the crutons into the trash on the way back to the table. The woman eats this "gluton free" salad and breaks out in a rash later that night.
A man who has chosen to follow a strictly vegan diet because of his political and moral beliefs is invited to celebrate his grandfather's birthday at a local steak house. The man calls ahead, explains his dietary preferences, and asks the restaurant if they can accommodate him. The restaurant understands and wanting to increase business agrees to do what they can. The night of the celebration the vegan man arrives, introduces himself to the waitress and is greeted with annoyance and irritation. The chef had to go out of her way and the waitress is bothered by "picky" customers. The man is served cold food and treated poorly because he was "difficult."
In both of these situations the diner has a difficult time eating in a restaurant, and the restaurant staff is annoyed by the specific requests and added hassle of meeting the diner's needs. The difference is that the first situation involves an innate dietary restriction while the second one is a chosen lifestyle. The question is... is there a difference? Should people who choose to restrict their diet based on different belief systems have a harder time doing that than people who are required to eat differently than the majority of the population?
Personal anecdotes:
I ate at my favorite brewery recently and I wanted to share the chili cheese fries with my brother who was visiting from out of town (for all you non-New Mexicans - chili cheese fries out here have a green chili pepper sauce on them, not the red bean and beef sauce that other parts of the country call chili). I know that most places make their chili sauce with a little bit of pork so I asked if the brewery had any vegetarian chili sauces. They didn't, but the waitress was super friendly, talked to the kitchen, and came back with a few suggestions that worked out very nicely. The vegetarian "chili" fries were quite tasty. Even though my dietary restrictions are voluntary, in this case I felt they were respected.
On the other hand... I was recently invited to an Easter dinner with a close friend and his family. I made sure that my friend let his family know that I was a vegetarian in advance and I offered to bring something to contribute to the meal. The situation seemed ok, but I received an email about the menu where my friend felt the need to inform me that the meat was really going to be very high quality, free range, natural meat. When I replied saying that I was indeed going to be eating vegetarian, he seemed surprised. I don't tell this story to pick on my friend or insinuate that he was being insensitive - I know he had valid reasons for giving me this information and questioning what I would do - but this situation does make it clear that there is a difference between how chosen diets are perceived versus compulsory ones. My friend never would have asked his uncle, who has a gluten allergy, if he was absolutely sure he didn't want any of the delicious bread.
The question becomes, should there be a difference in how dietary restrictions are accepted and respected? Does it make a difference if it is chosen versus innate? Am I more responsible for the inconvenience my vegetarianism causes because I chose it... or should my choice be respected as a black and white, no-meat type of issue?
I'm sure that we can think of some parallels to draw in this situation. We'll come back to these questions.
A man who has chosen to follow a strictly vegan diet because of his political and moral beliefs is invited to celebrate his grandfather's birthday at a local steak house. The man calls ahead, explains his dietary preferences, and asks the restaurant if they can accommodate him. The restaurant understands and wanting to increase business agrees to do what they can. The night of the celebration the vegan man arrives, introduces himself to the waitress and is greeted with annoyance and irritation. The chef had to go out of her way and the waitress is bothered by "picky" customers. The man is served cold food and treated poorly because he was "difficult."
In both of these situations the diner has a difficult time eating in a restaurant, and the restaurant staff is annoyed by the specific requests and added hassle of meeting the diner's needs. The difference is that the first situation involves an innate dietary restriction while the second one is a chosen lifestyle. The question is... is there a difference? Should people who choose to restrict their diet based on different belief systems have a harder time doing that than people who are required to eat differently than the majority of the population?
Personal anecdotes:
I ate at my favorite brewery recently and I wanted to share the chili cheese fries with my brother who was visiting from out of town (for all you non-New Mexicans - chili cheese fries out here have a green chili pepper sauce on them, not the red bean and beef sauce that other parts of the country call chili). I know that most places make their chili sauce with a little bit of pork so I asked if the brewery had any vegetarian chili sauces. They didn't, but the waitress was super friendly, talked to the kitchen, and came back with a few suggestions that worked out very nicely. The vegetarian "chili" fries were quite tasty. Even though my dietary restrictions are voluntary, in this case I felt they were respected.
On the other hand... I was recently invited to an Easter dinner with a close friend and his family. I made sure that my friend let his family know that I was a vegetarian in advance and I offered to bring something to contribute to the meal. The situation seemed ok, but I received an email about the menu where my friend felt the need to inform me that the meat was really going to be very high quality, free range, natural meat. When I replied saying that I was indeed going to be eating vegetarian, he seemed surprised. I don't tell this story to pick on my friend or insinuate that he was being insensitive - I know he had valid reasons for giving me this information and questioning what I would do - but this situation does make it clear that there is a difference between how chosen diets are perceived versus compulsory ones. My friend never would have asked his uncle, who has a gluten allergy, if he was absolutely sure he didn't want any of the delicious bread.
The question becomes, should there be a difference in how dietary restrictions are accepted and respected? Does it make a difference if it is chosen versus innate? Am I more responsible for the inconvenience my vegetarianism causes because I chose it... or should my choice be respected as a black and white, no-meat type of issue?
I'm sure that we can think of some parallels to draw in this situation. We'll come back to these questions.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Smorgasboard of Links
This has been a great week for interesting little articles about nutrition and food culture in the US. This post is dedicated to pointing a few of the highlights out. If you're sitting at work and you're board, I highly recommend these articles. (I suppose I would recommend them even if you're not bored and you're not at work... but who really reads blogs when they have something better to do?? ha!)
Tear Up the White House Lawn!
This comes from TakePart.org... a neat site that has articles on a ton of different topics. In this article they suggest that the next president should tear up the White House lawn and plant a garden in order to set a better example for Americans. Gardening, after all, not only encourages people to eat their fruits and veggies but it also forces people to get outside and get active. I would love a president with a green thumb, but could it ever happen? Would the large veggie corporations in California and Florida send hit men to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and replace a strawberry patch with a neatly packaged container of organic spinach? I don't know...
Explosive Truth about Twinkies
This article, also originally posted on TakePart.org but the link is from the repost on EatingLiberally.org, talks about the book by Steve Ettlinger called Twinkie, Deconstructed. It also has a great You Tube clip of a 1960 Twinkie commercial in which a mom talks about how important it is to serve the children Twinkies. "They're only young once!" she says... I thought this was really interesting especially after reading the chapter in Wansink's book about comfort food and where we develop certain predilections towards snacks, desserts, or entrees.
Free Lunch
This article is from the New York Times this week and is can be tied into my last post on conspicuous consumption and how it affects food choices. In the article they talk about how many students who receive free lunch do not eat it because they don't want to be seen eating it. Free Lunch is not cool. This makes perfect sense. Certain food is seen as a status symbol so despite the fact that these students may be hungry, they will pass. Very interesting.
Tear Up the White House Lawn!
This comes from TakePart.org... a neat site that has articles on a ton of different topics. In this article they suggest that the next president should tear up the White House lawn and plant a garden in order to set a better example for Americans. Gardening, after all, not only encourages people to eat their fruits and veggies but it also forces people to get outside and get active. I would love a president with a green thumb, but could it ever happen? Would the large veggie corporations in California and Florida send hit men to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and replace a strawberry patch with a neatly packaged container of organic spinach? I don't know...
Explosive Truth about Twinkies
This article, also originally posted on TakePart.org but the link is from the repost on EatingLiberally.org, talks about the book by Steve Ettlinger called Twinkie, Deconstructed. It also has a great You Tube clip of a 1960 Twinkie commercial in which a mom talks about how important it is to serve the children Twinkies. "They're only young once!" she says... I thought this was really interesting especially after reading the chapter in Wansink's book about comfort food and where we develop certain predilections towards snacks, desserts, or entrees.
Free Lunch
This article is from the New York Times this week and is can be tied into my last post on conspicuous consumption and how it affects food choices. In the article they talk about how many students who receive free lunch do not eat it because they don't want to be seen eating it. Free Lunch is not cool. This makes perfect sense. Certain food is seen as a status symbol so despite the fact that these students may be hungry, they will pass. Very interesting.
Monday, March 3, 2008
Wine Snobs and Conspicuous Consumption
Currently I am reading two books. The first one I started is Appetite for Profit by Michele Simon. While I tend to agree with much of what Simon discusses in the book, I am having a hard time getting through it because the organization is too S for my tastes (according to multiple Myers-Briggs tests I am a very strong N... not a surprise to anyone who has had a real conversation with me) and I feel that she is repeating the same argument over and over again. Corporations cannot be trusted to do anything in the interest of public health because they are more concerned with profit. I get that. But anyway... because of great recommendations I plan to continue through Simon's book... but while I do that I decided to start Brian Wansink's Mindless Eating.
First, a little background, Wansink is currently a professor of consumer behavior at Cornell University. This specialization has him dabbling in the fields of Economics, Behavioral Psychology, Business, and a variety of other fascinating subjects. (He also just happens to be a professor in the Applied Econ program that keeps floating around in the back of my head as a possibility here soon...) But, Wansink conducts experiments at his Food and Brand Lab where he tries to figure out how different environmental factors influence what and how much we eat. Mindless Eating is a great book for anyone who is trying to lose weight, because it points out a number of unhealthy habits we have. Eat on smaller plates. Eat slowly. Create a positive atmosphere. Replace short fat drinking glasses with tall skinny ones. All of these can be used to effectively trim calories from your daily consumption. More than just a diet book, however, it is very interesting and slightly depressing to realize vulnerable our food choices are to environmental factors. I also love the fact that this book applies quantitative, scientific analysis to our food choices.
I just finished reading a chapter entitled "Name Game." Wansink talks about how our enjoyment of food is shaped significantly before we taste it by the name of the menu item or the label on the bottle of wine. He provides a number of references to support this claim. He ends up talking about wines, citing the fact that very few people can actually distinguish good wine from great wine, and most choose a bottle by first choosing a price range. "Well, this is a nice party and she's a good friend so I should spend about $15 on the bottle of wine I bring..." As often as I am currently surrounded by people who talk as if they could distinguish a California Merlot from a Chilean Cabernet... I'm not so sure they could. I'm not ignorant when it comes to wine, but I know my palette cannot make that distinction. Wansink brings this point up and argues that the enjoyment is influenced by expectations, but another big red wine flag went up for me as I was reading this part.
How closely can Veblen's theory of conspicuous consumption be applied to our eating decisions? (For a quick, game theory enhanced overview of this theory check out my college project Conspicuous Consumption, I would also highly recommend reading up on the "Special Applications" at the bottom of the page!) Isn't choosing the wine to bring to a party based on price an example of someone who is trying to consume in order to fit into a certain social group? Wansink also discusses how eating in groups tends to encourage both heavy eaters and light eaters to forgo their extreme habits and mirror the habits of the group (discussed in "Mindless Eating Scripts" page 96). Another example in which people are literally consuming in a way that helps them attain a certain status or acceptance. This is exactly what Veblen was referring to except food consumption actually goes into your body as opposed to consumption of clothes, vehicles, or houses which just goes around it.
I have little doubt that these conspicuous consumption ideas can be applied to wine snobs, organic eaters, vegetarians, locavores, or a variety of other high end labels that people define themselves with. We may not readily admit it, but there is a level of pride and belonging when one chooses to shop at Trader Joe's every week or decides to order the garden burger instead of the prime rib sandwich. But I'm not sure one could apply this idea as easily to the populations who struggle with obesity. Does a young man of color choose to gorge on Whoppers and fries and become obese because he wants to identify with a certain social group? I don't know. I suppose I just need to do more research to see how Veblen addresses those at the other end of the conspicuous consumption spectrum.
First, a little background, Wansink is currently a professor of consumer behavior at Cornell University. This specialization has him dabbling in the fields of Economics, Behavioral Psychology, Business, and a variety of other fascinating subjects. (He also just happens to be a professor in the Applied Econ program that keeps floating around in the back of my head as a possibility here soon...) But, Wansink conducts experiments at his Food and Brand Lab where he tries to figure out how different environmental factors influence what and how much we eat. Mindless Eating is a great book for anyone who is trying to lose weight, because it points out a number of unhealthy habits we have. Eat on smaller plates. Eat slowly. Create a positive atmosphere. Replace short fat drinking glasses with tall skinny ones. All of these can be used to effectively trim calories from your daily consumption. More than just a diet book, however, it is very interesting and slightly depressing to realize vulnerable our food choices are to environmental factors. I also love the fact that this book applies quantitative, scientific analysis to our food choices.
I just finished reading a chapter entitled "Name Game." Wansink talks about how our enjoyment of food is shaped significantly before we taste it by the name of the menu item or the label on the bottle of wine. He provides a number of references to support this claim. He ends up talking about wines, citing the fact that very few people can actually distinguish good wine from great wine, and most choose a bottle by first choosing a price range. "Well, this is a nice party and she's a good friend so I should spend about $15 on the bottle of wine I bring..." As often as I am currently surrounded by people who talk as if they could distinguish a California Merlot from a Chilean Cabernet... I'm not so sure they could. I'm not ignorant when it comes to wine, but I know my palette cannot make that distinction. Wansink brings this point up and argues that the enjoyment is influenced by expectations, but another big red wine flag went up for me as I was reading this part.
How closely can Veblen's theory of conspicuous consumption be applied to our eating decisions? (For a quick, game theory enhanced overview of this theory check out my college project Conspicuous Consumption, I would also highly recommend reading up on the "Special Applications" at the bottom of the page!) Isn't choosing the wine to bring to a party based on price an example of someone who is trying to consume in order to fit into a certain social group? Wansink also discusses how eating in groups tends to encourage both heavy eaters and light eaters to forgo their extreme habits and mirror the habits of the group (discussed in "Mindless Eating Scripts" page 96). Another example in which people are literally consuming in a way that helps them attain a certain status or acceptance. This is exactly what Veblen was referring to except food consumption actually goes into your body as opposed to consumption of clothes, vehicles, or houses which just goes around it.
I have little doubt that these conspicuous consumption ideas can be applied to wine snobs, organic eaters, vegetarians, locavores, or a variety of other high end labels that people define themselves with. We may not readily admit it, but there is a level of pride and belonging when one chooses to shop at Trader Joe's every week or decides to order the garden burger instead of the prime rib sandwich. But I'm not sure one could apply this idea as easily to the populations who struggle with obesity. Does a young man of color choose to gorge on Whoppers and fries and become obese because he wants to identify with a certain social group? I don't know. I suppose I just need to do more research to see how Veblen addresses those at the other end of the conspicuous consumption spectrum.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Opting Out
I have been slowly telling my friends and my family about my decision to become a vegetarian. Reactions have not been out of the ordinary, but one conversation did leave me with something to think about. A friend of mine reacted by talking about how radical being a vegetarian seems in the context of American society. He views vegetarians as individuals who are very separate from the mainstream. The concept of vegetarianism has never been a foreign one to me and I have been surrounded by a handful of vegetarian friends for as long as I can remember. I am well aware of the fact that a typical American meal contains at least one large chunk of animal protein, but I would never have classified vegetarianism as "extreme" or "radical."
My vegetarian days are still very limited, but I am already starting to see how making this dietary decision places me on the very edge of mainstream culture. My students (most of whom are Navajo and butcher their own sheep) do not understand what a diet without meat consists of. Fast food restaurants (with the exception of Burger King) do not have vegetarian options. Other restaurants may have a few vegetarian options, but in the state of New Mexico everything is covered with chili and the chili is generally made with pork. As a meat eater, these are things that I may not have noticed before. Eating vegetarian is a conscious decision that takes some work and forethought to do successfully because the world is not always set up to accommodate this choice.
While avoiding meat is a very clear example of "opting out" of American food culture, there are many others as well. Thinking about Michael Pollan's prescriptions for eating healthier, all of them would entail "opting out" of food culture to an extent. Avoid processed foods with five or more ingredients - I don't know a single student who would turn down a bag of hot Cheeto's for that reason. Learn to cook - For many, cooking is a special occasion, it's not a daily occurrence. Convenience trumps the process of preparing food for most people. If one chooses to follow either of these two rules, they will be required to opt out of mainstream culture. This is radical. This is extreme. It doesn't take a vegetarian diet to cross over to the rebellious side of American food culture.
The question this leads me to is this: what does it take for people to opt out of a harmful food culture? Do they learn it at home? Do they learn it from coworkers and peers? Do they stumble across an article or a book that will change their mind? Or, will opting out always be simply a radical and extreme action... meaning in order to improve the general American's diet we'll have to change the food culture? If so, how in the world do we do that?
My vegetarian days are still very limited, but I am already starting to see how making this dietary decision places me on the very edge of mainstream culture. My students (most of whom are Navajo and butcher their own sheep) do not understand what a diet without meat consists of. Fast food restaurants (with the exception of Burger King) do not have vegetarian options. Other restaurants may have a few vegetarian options, but in the state of New Mexico everything is covered with chili and the chili is generally made with pork. As a meat eater, these are things that I may not have noticed before. Eating vegetarian is a conscious decision that takes some work and forethought to do successfully because the world is not always set up to accommodate this choice.
While avoiding meat is a very clear example of "opting out" of American food culture, there are many others as well. Thinking about Michael Pollan's prescriptions for eating healthier, all of them would entail "opting out" of food culture to an extent. Avoid processed foods with five or more ingredients - I don't know a single student who would turn down a bag of hot Cheeto's for that reason. Learn to cook - For many, cooking is a special occasion, it's not a daily occurrence. Convenience trumps the process of preparing food for most people. If one chooses to follow either of these two rules, they will be required to opt out of mainstream culture. This is radical. This is extreme. It doesn't take a vegetarian diet to cross over to the rebellious side of American food culture.
The question this leads me to is this: what does it take for people to opt out of a harmful food culture? Do they learn it at home? Do they learn it from coworkers and peers? Do they stumble across an article or a book that will change their mind? Or, will opting out always be simply a radical and extreme action... meaning in order to improve the general American's diet we'll have to change the food culture? If so, how in the world do we do that?
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Made to order nutrition bars
You Bars - This is a site that allows people to custom order nutrition bars. They have a pretty wide selection of ingredients and supplements that can be added. The small, family owned business is located in California, produces the bars there and then sends them to the customers across the country. The bars are individually wrapped, can be named by the person who places the order, and come with a nutrition label on them.
Great things about this idea: I am quite familiar with the nutrition and meal replacement bars that are on the market right now. I really like the convenience of such products, but I'm usually turned off by the extensive list of ingredients. It's difficult to find a bar that offers the calories, protein, and whatever else I am looking for without tons of additives that I would like to avoid. You Bars seem like a great alternative. I can order these bars so that the carbohydrates are coming from honey and oatmeal instead of cornsyrup and sugar... and make sure they still have some protein in them. This is a great thing. Throwing a nutrition bar that is made from real food into my bag on the way out the door seems like a much better idea than reaching for a vitamin enriched candy bar.
Questions about this idea: Even if they are made with whole foods and organic ingredients, these are still meal replacement bars... supplements. These are designed to be eaten quickly and to specifically optimize what we are putting into our bodies. They are also made in California and shipped across the country... definitely not local for the majority of us. This product promotes and caters to the same patterns of convenience eating and nutritionism that so many other products on the market sell to, it just does this with higher quality ingredients.
Ultimately... I love having snacks readily available and if I could afford to pay the $40 for a box of 12 bars, I would order some "Becky Bars" right now. I don't think that expense is going to be very high on my priority list right now, BUT... I sure would love to get my hands on the recipes that this family uses! (And congratulate them on a great business idea)
Great things about this idea: I am quite familiar with the nutrition and meal replacement bars that are on the market right now. I really like the convenience of such products, but I'm usually turned off by the extensive list of ingredients. It's difficult to find a bar that offers the calories, protein, and whatever else I am looking for without tons of additives that I would like to avoid. You Bars seem like a great alternative. I can order these bars so that the carbohydrates are coming from honey and oatmeal instead of cornsyrup and sugar... and make sure they still have some protein in them. This is a great thing. Throwing a nutrition bar that is made from real food into my bag on the way out the door seems like a much better idea than reaching for a vitamin enriched candy bar.
Questions about this idea: Even if they are made with whole foods and organic ingredients, these are still meal replacement bars... supplements. These are designed to be eaten quickly and to specifically optimize what we are putting into our bodies. They are also made in California and shipped across the country... definitely not local for the majority of us. This product promotes and caters to the same patterns of convenience eating and nutritionism that so many other products on the market sell to, it just does this with higher quality ingredients.
Ultimately... I love having snacks readily available and if I could afford to pay the $40 for a box of 12 bars, I would order some "Becky Bars" right now. I don't think that expense is going to be very high on my priority list right now, BUT... I sure would love to get my hands on the recipes that this family uses! (And congratulate them on a great business idea)
Experimentation
Marion Nestle highlighted this family's experiment on her blog yesterday and I'm really interested in reading about how it is going. A family of five, parents and three boys under the age of seven, have cleaned out their cabinets and decided to follow Michael Pollan's advice about eating for 30 days. This includes very few processed foods and a whole lot of cooking. The family will be chronicling their experience on this blog: Fresh Mouth.
Ultimately, I think any attempt to eat healthier and "opt out" of American eating habits is a good thing. I can also relate to this woman's feelings towards cooking and working so hard to eat well because I tend to follow the same diet plan that she and her family are currently following... and I do dishes constantly! And I'm only cooking for one! She brings up a great point in today's post about being detached from food because of our schedules. It takes a lot more time to eat whole foods than to heat something in a microwave. I have never had a family or kids to take care of so I know I can't really understand those demands... but I would like to think that it's more about priorities. As a runner, a lot of people will tell me that they would never have the time to run... I don't really believe that. I guess the same can be true of food, if it's a priority, you will get it done, if it's not... too bad.
Anyway... Good luck! I look forward to checking back in and hearing the stories coming from this family's kitchen!
Ultimately, I think any attempt to eat healthier and "opt out" of American eating habits is a good thing. I can also relate to this woman's feelings towards cooking and working so hard to eat well because I tend to follow the same diet plan that she and her family are currently following... and I do dishes constantly! And I'm only cooking for one! She brings up a great point in today's post about being detached from food because of our schedules. It takes a lot more time to eat whole foods than to heat something in a microwave. I have never had a family or kids to take care of so I know I can't really understand those demands... but I would like to think that it's more about priorities. As a runner, a lot of people will tell me that they would never have the time to run... I don't really believe that. I guess the same can be true of food, if it's a priority, you will get it done, if it's not... too bad.
Anyway... Good luck! I look forward to checking back in and hearing the stories coming from this family's kitchen!
Monday, February 18, 2008
Vegetarianism
This is my official announcement. As of Saturday, February 16th, 2008, I am officially a vegetarian. My last bite of meat was half of a Carl's Jr. burger on Friday night. I put all of the meat in my house in a bag and in the back corner of my freezer... I will probably be gifting it to my neighbor quite soon. I have two reasons for making this decision, and while I don't think it will be a permanent change, I am 100% committed to it.
First, I don't want to put bad food in my body. The animals used to produce this meat are not raised in a natural or a humane way, creating a situation where they are not only fed a disgusting diet, but they are medicated to prevent them from getting sick on that diet. I think this situation is wrong, but more so, I don't want to put the meat that results from these CAFOs into my body. If I lived in a place where I had more access to a local cattle farm or something similar I might be making a different decision, but vegetarianism works for now.
Second, I'm fascinated by food culture in the United States. I am currently choosing to opt out of US food culture in many ways (ex. eating a generally healthy diet with only a few Carl's Jr. exceptions). But, I am curious as to how difficult it will be to opt out more dramatically. How difficult is it to eat out if you're a vegetarian, how difficult is it to participate in other social eating situations as a vegetarian? What will my students say?
This is going to be a great experiment. I'm hoping to do this for at least six months... and then I'll reevaluate. I will keep everyone updated!
First, I don't want to put bad food in my body. The animals used to produce this meat are not raised in a natural or a humane way, creating a situation where they are not only fed a disgusting diet, but they are medicated to prevent them from getting sick on that diet. I think this situation is wrong, but more so, I don't want to put the meat that results from these CAFOs into my body. If I lived in a place where I had more access to a local cattle farm or something similar I might be making a different decision, but vegetarianism works for now.
Second, I'm fascinated by food culture in the United States. I am currently choosing to opt out of US food culture in many ways (ex. eating a generally healthy diet with only a few Carl's Jr. exceptions). But, I am curious as to how difficult it will be to opt out more dramatically. How difficult is it to eat out if you're a vegetarian, how difficult is it to participate in other social eating situations as a vegetarian? What will my students say?
This is going to be a great experiment. I'm hoping to do this for at least six months... and then I'll reevaluate. I will keep everyone updated!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
