Closing Thoughts

Well, I certainly feel like I’ve learned a lot about why vegetarians give up meat. While I may not agree with everything they have to say (and certainly don’t plan on becoming a vegetarian anytime soon) I can certainly understand why they feel the way they do. I feel the best way to describe vegetarianism would be to compare it to a boycott of meat. By boycotting meat, vegetarians are trying to get the government and agribusiness to change their ways, to encourage human and animal rights. Unfortunately, I really don’t see this as the best way to get people involved in their cause. Efforts to spread the word about the abuses the meat industry makes get lost in the hard-line “don’t eat meat” message. At the same time, however, it’s hard to change an industry when you keep buying their product; if you continue to buy their product, you’re still supporting them!

Anyways, I’ve learned that vegetarians aren’t just crazy fanatics trying to recruit people into some kind of cult. They have a very clear and honorable political goal: they want to save animals, the environment, and ourselves from a reckless industry that cares nothing for their consumers as long as they continue to make money. They have a huge obstacle to overcome, however: meat is part of our cultural heritage; meat defines what being American is all about (hamburgers and hot dogs, anyone?). As long as PETA continues to challenge this staple of American culture, I doubt they will see the major changes they are looking for.

Hail to the Chief!

What story is complete with government corruption? The case for adopting a vegetarian diet is no exception, according to this article:

Sadly, the government agencies that we count on to keep massive factory-farming businesses in line are being bought and sold by the very corporations that they’re supposed to be monitoring—and with tragic consequences ("How the Government Fails to Protect Animals, Workers, the Environment, and the Public").

The meat industry donated $140 to politicians from 2000 to 2005; these politicians, in turn, fought against tougher regulation for the meat industry. To make matters worse, many government agencies that are supposed to keep the meat industry in line are filled with employees who have worked for or plan on working for major agribusiness corporations ("How the Government Fails to Protect Animals, Workers, the Environment, and the Public"). The obvious implication here is that these people are more concerned with serving their own interests and, in turn, those of agribusiness, rather than protecting consumers. Knowing that the people in government that are supposed to protect you are selling your health for personal gain is an incredibly disturbing thought:

The consequences for workers, the environment, public health, and animals can’t be overstated. Changes in the food-safety system have turned inspectors into paper-pushers who spend much of their time signing forms instead of inspecting animals and their carcasses, so filthy meat ends up on our dining tables. Inspectors are no longer required to monitor the “killing floor” for cruelty, so according to workers and inspectors, animals are routinely scalded or hacked apart while they are still alive ("How the Government Fails to Protect Animals, Workers, the Environment, and the Public").

Sure, some of this is probably exaggerated to make a point, but it is not an uncommon theme in government: politicians get money from a corporation or group, work to protect that group's interests, and retire to work as a lobbyist for that group. Suddenly, food no longer seems like an important part of our culture; it has become something to be marketed and forced on us. Perhaps this is another form of violence; only we, unlike the meat industry workers, are completely oblivious to it. Agribusiness treats us as consumers to market as much food as possible to; we, in turn, buy it up endlessly and justify their actions every time we eat at McDonald's (sorry, it's just so easy to pick on fast food, and McDonald's is the first to come to mind). Meanwhile, the government makes sure we remain ignorant.

Works Cited
"How the Government Fails to Protect Animals, Workers, the Environment, and the Public." GoVeg.com. PETA. 04 Dec. 2008 http://www.goveg.com/government.asp

Human Rights?

Who would have guessed that some vegetarians opposed meat-eating to protect human rights as well as animal rights? Certainly not me, but this article shows it is, indeed, true: slaughterhouse conditions are extremely unsafe for workers, and "nearly one in three slaughterhouse workers suffers from illness or injury every year, compared to one in 10 workers in other manufacturing jobs" according to the US Department of Labor ("Killing for a Living"). The article goes on to describe the putrid working conditions of slaughterhouse workers: poor training, improper safety equipment, terrible pay, and constant risk of being fired. Most (if not all) workers are poor, uneducated migrant workers; many are unable to read or write. There have also been reports of young children working in the factories; many have been killed in accidents. When workers are involved in accidents, they are fired if they attempt to report the injury or claim any form of compensation.

Clearly, this article appeals to our sympathy for other humans. However, it also reminds me of structural violence, a term used in anthropology to describe the ways in which people are kept at a social and economic disadvantage. The workers in the slaughterhouse are kept powerless in three ways. It all starts with the employers and those in power: if an employee gets injured in an accident, their employers threaten to fire them. This in turn discourages the employees from reporting their injuries, to the point where nobody even considers reporting injuries; they have just accepted this as the way things are. Lastly, the workers themselves conform to the violence by continuing to work despite the risks and discrimination they face. In the words of one factory worker:

They love you if you’re healthy and you work like a dog, but if you get hurt, you are trash. If you get hurt, watch out. They will look for a way to get rid of you before they report it. They will find a reason to fire you or put you on a worse job like the cold room, or change your shift so you quit. So a lot of people don’t report their injuries. They just work with the pain ("Killing for a Living").

It truly is disturbing to hear about such things, ocurring right here in the United States.

Works Cited
"Killing for a Living." GoVeg.com. PETA. 04 Dec. 2008 http://www.goveg.com/workerrights.asp

A Revelation

After thinking about that last post, I think I may realize why I think vegetarians are so "weird" and it's probably because, like I said earlier this morning, they're the "other," the thing that has values and beliefs different from my own. I guess I was, in a way, wary of another culture that I just didn't understand. But now, after looking at those beliefs in detail, I think I can understand them a little better and accept those different beliefs. While this probably won't change my eating habits a great deal, now I'm at least willing to listen to people when they tell me why they won't eat meat, instead of dismissing it as "crazy vegan propaganda." Now that this strange form of culture shock has ended, I can see that these are not people trying to undermine my beliefs, but people with their own values which make sense to them; I can safely say that my values (eating meat) probably seem foolish to them. While I will probably continue to look at why vegetarians oppose meat-eating, I will be a little less hostile from now on, and instead look more closely at the underlying logic, rather than dissect it like a skeptical cynic. On the other hand, maybe I will take this blog in another direction and instead look at how my view of vegetarians and vegans has changed; that was, after all, part of the reason I started my research. I wanted to understand vegetarianism, arguably a culture of its own, but I think I lost sight of that.

What Makes Animals Pet-Worthy and Food-Worthy?

Someone recently asked me why some animals make good pets and others do not. This is actually a valid question that I, admittedly, should have answered without needing to be asked. A lot of it comes down to our cultural values and accepted norms. After all, how many people keep pigs as pets (pigs raised to be slaughtered don't count)? If someone you knew did have a pet pig, what would you think of them? They'd be "different," some "other" that goes against what is normal. But since my logic behind this idea of "pet-worthy" and "food-worthy" animals is embedded in culture, let's look at American culture. I think it would be safe to say that most people are wary of cultural practices that are different from their own. What are some popular images of dogs and pigs in culture? Dogs are loyal and loving; they are "man's best friend." Movies such as Disney's 101 Dalmations portray dogs as the epitome of all that is good and right with the world; anyone who wishes dogs harm are evil incarnate (Cruella DeVille, anyone?). On the other hand, we commonly associate pigs with gluttony, greed, and filth. Who hasn't heard sayings such as "happy as a pig in filth" or "all men are pigs" (among others)? While some exeptions exist to the rule, the overarching cultural ideals we hold are that dogs are good and pigs are not.

The love of dogs in America is summarized nicely in this passage:

America is the land of the sacred dog. ... They roam the streets of major American cities at will, taking their masters about on leashes and depositing their excrements at pleasure on curbs and sidewalks. A whole system of sanitation procedures had to be employed to get rid of the mess. ... Within houses and apartments, dogs climb upon chairs designed for humans, sleep on people's beds, and sit at the table after their own fashion awaiting their share of the family meal. All this in the calm assurance that they themselves will never be sacrificed to necessity or deity, nor eaten in the case of accidental death (Sahlins, as quoted in Delaney, 283).

Dogs are practically worshipped in America, and it is this almost-sacred place we have for dogs that make them good pets. Pigs and other animals, however, are all culturally devalued and, therefore, acceptable to eat.

Works Cited
Delaney, Carol. Investigating Culture. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2004.

One Hundred and One Dalmations. Dir. Clyde Geronimi, Hamilton Luske, Wolfgang Reitherman. Perf. Rod Taylor, Betty Lou Gerson. Walt Disney Productions, 1961.

A Vegetarian Environment

According to this article, the two primary ways meat-eating ruins the environment are wasting resources and polluting.

Wasted Resources

Land:
Raising animals for meat involves a great deal of land for grazing and growing crops to feed animals. In the United States, forests are cleared in order to make room for the space needed to grow these crops or allow animals to graze. However, "[v]ast tracts of land are needed to grow crops" for farm animals. Admittedly, I'm no expert, but won't it take just as much (if not more) farmland to feed everyone in the United States? The destruction of forests also endangers many plant and animal species. According to the article, rain forests are often destroyed in other countries to make room for farmland. Obviously this is bad, but there are problems involved with telling other countries what they can and can't do. However, I'm not going to get involved with foreign affairs and international relations at this time.

Food:
Producing food from animals is "grossly inefficient" because animals must eat vast quantities of food to produce enough food to feed humans. This is true, and I won't argue against it. But, don't animals provide nutrients that are difficult to find in fruits and vegetables? I know that cats could only live as vegetarians with many vitamin supplements, would this also be true for humans? Personally, I don't want to be dependent on vitamin supplements for the rest of my life.

Energy:
This is straight-forward enough: raising farm animals wastes energy in the form of fossil fuels used to transport food for the animals, transport animals to be slaughtered, transport the meat to the supermarket, etc.. Of course, won't growing enough crops for the United States waste energy, too? Crops will need to be transported, tractors will need fuel, ... A similar list of wasted fossil fuel energy could probably be developed for a vegetarian society.

Water:
The water required to grow crops, provide drink for animals, clean animals and their living space, are all massive wastes. They anticipated my argument, mostly. The article only takes into account current water demands for crops; much more water would be needed to grow enough food to provide for everyone in the country.

The article also counts rain forests and animal cruelty as wasted resources, but I already discussed those issues.

Pollution

The animals we eat produce feces. Lots and lots of feces. These feces pollute the land, water we drink, the air we breathe, and contribute to global warming. While some of their claims may be a bit exaggerated, there's really not much I can say otherwise...

Works Cited

"Meat and the Environment." GoVeg.com. PETA. 24 Oct. 2008 http://www.goveg.com/environment.asp.

Vegetarians: Healthier?

According to GoVeg.com, a vegetarian diet promotes good health, a longer lifespan, and a stronger immune system. Here's a list of benefits:

Healthy vegetarian diets support a lifetime of good health and provide protection against numerous diseases, including our country’s three biggest killers: heart disease, cancer, and strokes. The American Dietetic Association states that vegetarians have “lower rates of death from ischemic heart disease; … lower blood cholesterol levels, lower blood pressure, and lower rates of hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and prostate and colon cancer” and that vegetarians are less likely than meat-eaters to be obese.

Okay, I guess I can believe most of that. Meats are fatty and all of that. I do have some issues with talking about obesity in meat-eaters, though, what with rampant anorexia and whatnot. To me, it sounds a lot like playing on people's fears of weight gain.

Vegetarian diets can also supposedly increase IQ. I was skeptical of this claim and did some extra research. According to this BBC article, vegetarianism does not promote higher IQs so much as children with higher IQs usually become vegetarians. Additionally, this "higher" IQ is only 5 points above the average IQ: 106 compared to 101 for men and 104 compared to 99 for women. It is also very important to note that there was no difference in IQ for "strict" vegetarians and "vegetarians" who also ate chicken and fish (I have news for those people: those are both meat). So parents, don't think that raising your children as vegetarians will cause them to grow up into the next Einstein.

Works Cited
"Eating for Life." GoVeg.com. PETA. 24 Oct. 2008 http://www.goveg.com/healthconcerns.asp.

"High IQ Link to Being Vegetearian." BBC News. 15 Dec. 2006. 24 Oct. 2008 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6180753.stm.