|
||||||||
Meat-eater Why? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#276 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 224
|
Quote:
I think I pointed this out earlier - the animals that humans habitually eat are, as far as I'm aware without a single exception, herbivores. Why would that be, I wonder?
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#277 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,242
|
Quote:
I think I pointed this out earlier - the animals that humans habitually eat are, as far as I'm aware without a single exception, herbivores. Why would that be, I wonder?
Quote:
I wonder....?!
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#278 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here <-------------
Posts: 6,644
|
Quote:
Meat eaters often complain that veg/ans (time-saving general all purpose term for vegetarians and vegans alike!) preach or proselytise to them or at them (see this thread, for example - or indeed any thread where the subject comes up), and no doubt in some cases this is true: if you have an absolutely passionate belief that something is about as deeply and utterly wrong as anything ever has been, it's not exactly unexpected that people feel the need to share it. When people feel that a great moral evil is being committed they're not usually quiet about it.
On the other hand, there seems to be something about veg/ism entiorely in the absence of evangelism which in and of itself rubs some - some, not all - meat eaters up the wrong way no matter a veg/an does, if anything at all in fact. For instance - and I pick here an example with which I think many a veg/an will find themselves nodding in agreement - suppose you're at a dinner party or in a group in a restaurant and you announce that you can't eat such-and-such a food because it contains nuts and you're allergic to nuts - potentially a very serious business indeed - or shellfish. If it's clear that your dietary choices are dictated by medical need, chances are that in practically every single case you'll receive supportive comments and nods of genuine sympathy, understanding and concern. Next suppose that in the same scenario you announce that you don't eat such-and-such a food because it goes against your religious beliefs - pork with Jews and Muslims, for instance, or being vegetarian as many Hindus and Buddhists are. Even though British society manages to be highly multicultural and thoroughly secular simultaneously, I would bet good money that for the most part this explanation would be accepted in good faith (no pun intended) and left at that, in the vast majority of cases accepted with respect. Now suppose that you announce that you're a veg/an for moral reasons - nothing at all to do with a food allergy, nothing at all to do with religious observance, simply that you find the eating of meat immoral. Something about this seems to arouse a towering and righteous indignation in some people (and it's a personality type in general I'm referring to here, not just the fact that that personality type eats meat) who feel that it's their bounden duty to explain, at considerable length and often in the most forceful if not downright aggressive terms, backed up with all manner of urban myths and logical fallacies, why this choice is according to them utterly wrong. The mere existence of a veg/an in their midst seems to be a standing rebuke or a personal affront. It's easy to play the armchair psychologist here but I think a pretty strong case could be made that, for some people, the fact that some other people refrain from eating animal produce (and are happy and obviously healthy on it) seems to touch a raw nerve in some way. I base this theory on the testimony of umpteen people who like the vast majority of us were raised to eat meat, wear leather, etc but who subsequently had some experience which forced them to re-evaluate their attitude towards animals as food. Very often I've heard such people - who became lifelong veg/ans - say that before making the change hearing other veg/ans articulate the case for veg/ism offended them or made them angry, argumentative, etc because it touched a chord and evoked a response based on some kind of semi-suppressed unease with with diet. This is not true of all, of course, but true of sufficiently many to have some merit as explanatory theories go, in my opinion. If you were to add "for moral reasons" to the statement, it becomes an implicit attack on the morals of the person you say it to. Frankly, if someone cares about why you became a vegetarian, they will ask. (In my experience, some do, some don't). It would be like asking someone about their religion. And, in the same way that people might well get annoyed by a religious person going on about their faith, a preachy vegetarian telling them about the 'horrors' of their meal isn't going to sit too well. Vegetarians/vegans to not have an exclusive moral high ground that they and they alone occupy - I have met rude, unpleasant and nasty people who eat meat. I have also met rude, unpleasant and nasty people who are vegetarians. So, my wife recognises that vegetarianism is her choice. She has never once felt the need to force it on me, or our children. Some of our meals are meat free - others we will have variations (so if we have a Sunday dinner, she will have all the veg etc, but something different to 'go with'). The children will make thier own decisions and choices when they want to, but all of them are aware of where their tea comes from, and not one of them has (yet) shown any concerns. So, why do I eat meat? Mostly, because I like it. And, while I realise that we have a moral responsibility to treat animals as well as we possibly can, I do not regard animals as morally and ethically equivalent to human beings. And I'll freely admit that they sit on a sliding scale - I care not a jot about the fly or wasp I kill. I will be upset when our pet rabbit dies. I would not put a cat in a bin. I only buy free range eggs. It's complicated - and I freely admit, it's more challenging to defend than the 'purer' stance of veganism. And I guess the reason we eat herbivores is that they are just easier to domesticate. It takes a link out of the food chain. Grass turns into food animal, which we eat. To eat a carnivore on a reasonable scale, you would need to have an intermediate step. Plus, of course, that vegetation tends to be easier to find when we started domestication. And ruminant animals tend to be a touch more docile than carnivores. |
|
|
|
|
|
#279 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 21,646
|
Quote:
I don't know - perhaps you can explain
|
|
|
|
|
|
#280 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,242
|
Quote:
I'll take a punt. It's because most humans are no longer hunter-gatherers, so we have selected species that we can domesticate. And it's much easier to select and breed animals that get their food directly from plants than having to support an entire food chain for them - with herbivores at the bottom.
I wasn't quite sure of the reason for the sarcastic comments and laughter |
|
|
|
|
|
#281 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,119
|
Quote:
If you were to add "for moral reasons" to the statement, it becomes an implicit attack on the morals of the person you say it to. Frankly, if someone cares about why you became a vegetarian, they will ask. (In my experience, some do, some don't).
|
|
|
|
|
|
#282 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,142
|
Quote:
Meat eaters often complain that veg/ans (time-saving general all purpose term for vegetarians and vegans alike!) preach or proselytise to them or at them (see this thread, for example - or indeed any thread where the subject comes up), and no doubt in some cases this is true: if you have an absolutely passionate belief that something is about as deeply and utterly wrong as anything ever has been, it's not exactly unexpected that people feel the need to share it. When people feel that a great moral evil is being committed they're not usually quiet about it.
On the other hand, there seems to be something about veg/ism entiorely in the absence of evangelism which in and of itself rubs some - some, not all - meat eaters up the wrong way no matter a veg/an does, if anything at all in fact. For instance - and I pick here an example with which I think many a veg/an will find themselves nodding in agreement - suppose you're at a dinner party or in a group in a restaurant and you announce that you can't eat such-and-such a food because it contains nuts and you're allergic to nuts - potentially a very serious business indeed - or shellfish. If it's clear that your dietary choices are dictated by medical need, chances are that in practically every single case you'll receive supportive comments and nods of genuine sympathy, understanding and concern. Next suppose that in the same scenario you announce that you don't eat such-and-such a food because it goes against your religious beliefs - pork with Jews and Muslims, for instance, or being vegetarian as many Hindus and Buddhists are. Even though British society manages to be highly multicultural and thoroughly secular simultaneously, I would bet good money that for the most part this explanation would be accepted in good faith (no pun intended) and left at that, in the vast majority of cases accepted with respect. Now suppose that you announce that you're a veg/an for moral reasons - nothing at all to do with a food allergy, nothing at all to do with religious observance, simply that you find the eating of meat immoral. Something about this seems to arouse a towering and righteous indignation in some people (and it's a personality type in general I'm referring to here, not just the fact that that personality type eats meat) who feel that it's their bounden duty to explain, at considerable length and often in the most forceful if not downright aggressive terms, backed up with all manner of urban myths and logical fallacies, why this choice is according to them utterly wrong. The mere existence of a veg/an in their midst seems to be a standing rebuke or a personal affront. It's easy to play the armchair psychologist here but I think a pretty strong case could be made that, for some people, the fact that some other people refrain from eating animal produce (and are happy and obviously healthy on it) seems to touch a raw nerve in some way. I base this theory on the testimony of umpteen people who like the vast majority of us were raised to eat meat, wear leather, etc but who subsequently had some experience which forced them to re-evaluate their attitude towards animals as food. Very often I've heard such people - who became lifelong veg/ans - say that before making the change hearing other veg/ans articulate the case for veg/ism offended them or made them angry, argumentative, etc because it touched a chord and evoked a response based on some kind of semi-suppressed unease with with diet. This is not true of all, of course, but true of sufficiently many to have some merit as explanatory theories go, in my opinion. HOWEVER, if a veggie or vegan starts going on at how bad I am for eating meat, I will retaliate by pointing out that they are just as bad as I did earlier with you, because quite frankly you were preaching and being just as hostile as you accuse meat eaters of being. |
|
|
|
|
|
#283 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,924
|
Quote:
I'm a veggie for my own personal reasons but I have found that the majority of people I tell seem to be offended at this. They act as if I am hurting them by not eating meat.
I would never sit a meat-eater down and list why they shouldn't eat meat yet some meat-eaters feel they can do that to me. Double standards methinks. I wish certain meat-eaters would accept that veggies don't want/like to eat meat and leave us be! Ironically my personal (and genuine!) experiences tend to match yours... except it's the vegans who seem utterly incapable of accepting other people's lifestyles and this thread adequately proves it really. Add to that the numerous other threads I’ve read created by vegans via a variety of discussion boards in order to moan about meat eaters and call them 'murderers', etc (you know, the usual melodramatic cobblers) It was also a gaggle of vegans you may recall who were responsible for creating and distributing bizarre and inaccurate propaganda to schools a few years back that claimed that kids who drink milk will break out in acne and be really unpopular/bullied, etc. That single example is not the actions of a collectively sane, content, group of people imo. Yup, it wasn't eating meat that time, simply drinking milk was considered 'offensive' by some! As I stated above, on the whole meat eaters are content with their dietary preferences and I for one have absolutely nothing against a vegetarian lifestyle because it has absolutely no impact on my life... but can vegans really say the same about meat eaters? The plethora of threads demanding people change their lifestyles suggests 'no'... And as lots of other people on this thread have already stated: 'I eat meat because I like it'... deal with that, dietary puritans! |
|
|
|
|
|
#284 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 224
|
Quote:
You know, I have a funny feeling that you just made that up, didnt you?!
Ironically my personal (and genuine!) experiences tend to match yours... except it's the vegans who seem utterly incapable of accepting other people's lifestyles and this thread adequately proves it really. Add to that the numerous other threads I’ve read created by vegans via a variety of discussion boards in order to moan about meat eaters and call them 'murderers', etc (you know, the usual melodramatic cobblers) It was also a gaggle of vegans you may recall who were responsible for creating and distributing bizarre and inaccurate propaganda to schools a few years back that claimed that kids who drink milk will break out in acne and be really unpopular/bullied, etc. That single example is not the actions of a collectively sane, content, group of people imo. Yup, it wasn't eating meat that time, simply drinking milk was considered 'offensive' by some! As I stated above, on the whole meat eaters are content with their dietary preferences and I for one have absolutely nothing against a vegetarian lifestyle because it has absolutely no impact on my life... but can vegans really say the same about meat eaters? The plethora of threads demanding people change their lifestyles suggests 'no'... And as lots of other people on this thread have already stated: 'I eat meat because I like it'... deal with that, dietary puritans! You've really pissed me off. |
|
|
|
|
|
#285 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,924
|
Quote:
Where have I called somebody else 'evil' or 'nasty' for eating meat?? You must be confusing me with someone else.
I didn't say it as fact that I will definitely live longer than you, I said that vegetarians/vegans on average live longer than meat eaters. I said it as a response to someone who suggested that a human can't have a healthy lifestyle without meat, when it's clear they can otherwise I would be dead as well as millions of other vegetarians/vegans in the world. Presumably the main goal of many vegans is to convert people to an 'approved' diet (i.e. no meat and potentially no dairy products either). But how exactly are you going to convert these meat eaters to a vegetarian diet when it appears that the prime motivation for eating meat in the first place is simply because it tastes good? The tactics employed for this lofty goal so far appear to amount to little more than name calling, unsavoury insinuations and general insults. I for one can always be persuaded by a cogent argument, but if, as a meat eater, I’m just going to just be called a ‘murderer’ and the like by people who clearly have ‘issues’… then I’m afraid I shall remain a carnivore… and happy! Must try harder! |
|
|
|
|
|
#286 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here <-------------
Posts: 6,644
|
Quote:
Yes, I think that this is it, exactly. However, I think every veg/an will be familar with the experience of somebody caring very much why they ought not to be, even when they've said absolutely nothing whatsoever about their diet other than something like "No thanks, I'm a vegetarian" or "I'm a vegan, actually, so I don't eat X, but thanks anyway."
|
|
|
|
|
|
#287 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 622
|
This discussion still going on? Seems to me it's moved from why meat eaters eat meat, to insulting both sides, or some sort of attack.
It's simple really, ve/gans feel that it si morally right not eat meat and fair enough. Meat-eaters, well me at least, see an animal as an animal when it's alive, and some of them food when dead. I have no feelings toward them having to have died to feed me, and while I understand not eating them because of sentiment or compassion about them, I don't see that being an issue. It's that simple. |
|
|
|
|
|
#288 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 224
|
I'm a happy veggie and wouldn't dream of slagging off someone just because they eat meat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#289 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,142
|
Quote:
I was having a nice calm discussion with MamboJimbo when I was suddenly accused of lying. I haven't attacked any meat eaters. People can eat what they like.
We were discussing how some meat eaters take it upon themselves to bully veggies. I'm sure some veggies lecture meat eaters but I haven't seen that first hand so can't comment. |
|
|
|
|
|
#290 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 224
|
Quote:
I don't think she meant lying as such, I think she meant more that you might have been exagerrating. I shouldn't speak for her, but that's just how I read it. In terms of veggies lecturing meat eaters, have you not read this thread?
When I said I haven't witnessed it first hand, I meant actually witnessed a veggie lecturing a meat eater in real life, not on a forum. All the veggies I know are fine with people having their own opinions. |
|
|
|
|
|
#291 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: South Wales/Gran Canaria
Posts: 8,301
|
Quote:
How many human beings are killed by animals worldwide every year?
How many of those are killed to be eaten? I submit that this is a vanishingly tiny number. Nor are we dominated entirely by our instincts - we're supposed to have reason and intelligence. Very, very easily ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#292 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 4,893
|
Quote:
When I said I haven't witnessed it first hand, I meant actually witnessed a veggie lecturing a meat eater in real life, not on a forum. All the veggies I know are fine with people having their own opinions.
Although to be fair the programme sets up conflict all too often. I'd much prefer to see a Vegetarian or Vegan group get together. |
|
|
|
|
|
#293 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 622
|
Quote:
My intelligence and reasoning tells me that meat is good for me and tastes wonderful
![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#294 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 224
|
Quote:
Have you ever watched Come Dine With Me?
Although to be fair the programme sets up conflict all too often. I'd much prefer to see a Vegetarian or Vegan group get together. |
|
|
|
|
|
#295 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 4,893
|
Quote:
Again, I mean in REAL LIFE. Not on a television programme.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#296 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,119
|
Quote:
My intelligence and reasoning tells me that meat is good for me and tastes wonderful
Quote:
Are you saying:(a) It is a fact that neo-wales's intelligence and reasoning, in his opinion, tells him that meat is good for him and that it tastes wonderfulas far as he is concerned, or (b) It is a fact that meat is good for anyone and tastes wonderful? Because (a) sounds like mere reiteration of a statement of the obvious, whereas (b) is very questionable to say the least. |
|
|
|
|
|
#297 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 622
|
Quote:
Are you saying:
(a) It is a fact that neo-wales's intelligence and reasoning, in his opinion, tells him that meat is good for him and that it tastes wonderfulas far as he is concerned, or (b) It is a fact that meat is good for anyone and tastes wonderful? Because (a) sounds like mere reiteration of a statement of the obvious, whereas (b) is very questionable to say the least. |
|
|
|
|
|
#298 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 224
|
Quote:
So how is it not Real Life when someone expresses that they wish to convert people and show little tolerance to meat eaters? It is them showing their opinions. (By the way, I do also accept that the attitude of some of the people on there towards vegetarians is not acceptable).
I don't consider television programmes or forums to be an aspect of my real life. Just because I watch EastEnders, doesn't make me a Londoner. |
|
|
|
|
|
#299 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 4,893
|
Quote:
What I meant by real life is that it hasn't happened in my real life.
I don't consider television programmes or forums to be an aspect of my real life. Just because I watch EastEnders, doesn't make me a Londoner. |
|
|
|
|
|
#300 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 224
|
Quote:
That does not stop it being real life, and reflecting peoples views. It may attract the more extreme element because they wish to broadcast their views nationally, howver it does demonstrate that there are 'real' vegetarians who try and force their views and/or feel morally superior. Although we can tell that from Mambo Jimbo's views anyway.
I simply said that I have never witnessed a vegetarian bullying a meat-eater about what they eat in my actual real life. Yes I've seen it on television, films, the written word etc, but I haven't ever been involved in that sort of conversation for real. That is all I was trying to say. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 17:57.




