VeggieBoards banner

1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,664 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
<a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/life/archive/2011/05/foodies-vs-darwin-how-meat-eaters-ignore-science/239127/" target="_blank">http://www.theatlantic.com/life/arch...cience/239127/</a><br><br><div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Unfortunately, the most influential voices in the so-called "food movement," concerned as they are with both taste and sustainability, disagree, even though they are in a position to push this paradox to the center of public debate. They view the ethics of slaughter as an issue best to avoid.<br><br>
What, after all, is to be gained by questioning one of humanity's most habitual acts? What benefit is there in alienating one's loyal base of omnivore followers? Why muddy the waters when you can win friends and influence palates with the latest brisket rub? With few exceptions, popular explorations of meat production and consumption studiously skirt the essential concerns underscoring our ingrained habit of killing animals to satisfy our tastes.<br><br>
Sure, food writers trip all over each other to express their righteous outrage over the many evils of factory farming. Wonderful. But not a single one has decided to take a shot at reconciling their outragean outrage that ipso facto acknowledges that an animal has inherent worthwith their promotion of heirloom birds, grass-fed beef, and fried pork bellies cut to perfection by "artisanal" butchers.<br><br>
The fact is, what's being butchered here is logic. Thinking, talking, and writing about meat almost necessarily evokes a wildly emotional response (just read the comments on my posts). But what's required right now isn't emotion, but reason. The food movement has taught us to doggedly investigate every facet of our food system. This noble imperative has led to an admirable increase in public awareness about the source and quality of everything we eat. But our collective effort to vet the food system of any and all abuse ironically slams on the brakes when reason get too close to the brink of animal rights.</div>
</div>
<br>
This is a great read, yet another awesome article from a mainstream news source.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,245 Posts
Thanks for posting this!<br><br><div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">The fact is, what's being butchered here is logic. Thinking, talking, and writing about meat almost necessarily evokes a wildly emotional response (just read the comments on my posts).</div>
</div>
<br>
So true. While carnists are quick to accuse veggies of basing abstinence from meat on sheer sentimentality, I have never seen more rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth emotionalism than that which issues forth from a carnist defending his love of bacon.
 

·
Riot Nrrrd
Joined
·
3,180 Posts
A little frustrating that it's two different topics squished together. Topics on a common theme, but part 1 (foodies) and part 2 (Darwinism) are only referenced as a single unit in the title.<br><br>
But the foodie bit could stand alone and would probably be better that way. The Darwin bits - a basic argument I agree with 100% - just don't gel for me.
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Top