I mentioned this morning that I am reading Courtney Martin’s Perfect Girls, Starving Daughters. I’ll try and say more about it once I’m finished, as I’m only through the first couple of chapters. It’s a grim go, early on — story after story of the bright, the beautiful, the dazzling consumed with self-loathing and tortured by body dysmorphia. It’s not a new story, but for those of us who have been dealing with this sort of thing for a while, it’s always a bit disheartening to realize that things aren’t getting any better. Still, a fuller review coming next week.
I was thinking about Courtney’s book a few minutes ago. Mondays are my long days here at the college; I teach four classes, and in order to fit those in as well as office hours, I get here around 8:00AM and won’t leave until close to 9:00PM tonight. Mondays, it goes without saying, are hard days to be a vegan. When I run in the mornings I rev up my appetite for the entire day, and though I try and pack a lot of food (nuts, fruits, veggies, tofu, juice) it only gets me so far sometimes. In the old days, I would go and grab a burrito or a chicken bowl at the “El Pollo Loco” franchise across the street. It filled me up if nothing else.
Half an hour ago, feeling peckish, I wandered into the little student cafe by my building. Tons of things to eat, but so few completely vegan choices. I settled for a little pre-packed bowl of melon and papaya (I’ll try and recycle the plastic container) and another banana. I thought about the slice of greasy, cheesy sausage pizza, and for a moment, I really wanted it.
There’s a trick to living a strictly vegan life. First off, as reading a book about eating disorders reminds me, I have to draw a bright and clear line between self-denial for the sake of self and self-denial for the sake of justice for my fellow creatures. I tell myself — and everyone else who will listen — I am NOT on a diet. This is not a temporary plan to lose weight, or something I’ll give up once marathon season comes to an end. This is a lifestyle choice — not to take into my body any animal products at all, to eat “raw” as much as possible, to avoid preservatives and high fructose corn syrup and all the rest of it. Whether it makes me thinner or fatter, makes me more pudgy or more defined, it can’t be about me anymore.
The funny thing is that being strictly vegan (off honey entirely) means that I am more attentive to what I eat than at any time in my life since I was crash dieting fifteen years ago. Back in 1992, I dropped from 175-145 the summer and fall after a divorce; on my 6′1″ frame, the 145 looked awful. I lived on small portions of junk food, and had no consciousness at all about whether or not animals were involved in producing what I was eating. I just wanted to have a body devoid of fat. Back then, I counted calories and fat grams obsessively. Today, I largely ignore fat and calorie information and read to make sure that what I’m eating is entirely plant-based and devoid of hidden dairy or egg traces. (Damn that sneaky caseinate!) I’m once again radically concerned with everything that goes into my mouth — but for a radically different reason.
But it’s hard not to focus on diet so much and not also think about how eating vegan (and doing a whole mess of runnin’) affects my physique and my overall appearance. The “is this about my ego, or is it really about the animals” question pops into my head almost every day, reminding me, as they told me in AA, to always “check my motives.” For anyone who has had an eating disorder, which I have certainly had, to move from casual vegetarianism to strict veganism is an experience that requires some regular self-examination.
It’s also hard to fight the urge to judge what other people put in their mouths. When I was exhibiting anorectic behavior, I got high as a kite on the bittersweet drug of self-denial. I did judge folks who ate a lot and didn’t work out. I spent years unlearning all that judgment, especially for my role as a feminist professor and youth mentor. I didn’t want the young people I worked with to torture themselves, to feel that overwhelming guilt over what they put in their mouths. I’ve wanted them to understand that they have a God-given right to joy, to delight in their own flesh. I’ve been adamant that feminism, food, and pleasure are all linked.
My feminism and my veganism, therefore, are in an uneasy alliance. On the one hand, they are natural allies. As many others have pointed out, there’s a link between patriarchal exploitation of women and human exploitation of animals. Men have used women to do unpaid work for millenia, and humans have used animals in the same fashion. The bodies of women are seen as “fair game” (a hunting reference) for predatory men, and pornography celebrates the idea that men are entitled to take delight (visual or otherwise) in the flesh of women who have little or no say in the matter. The meat industry teaches us that cows and pigs and fish exist solely to bring delight to our taste buds and satisfaction to our bellies. In patriarchal culture, the bodies of women and the bodies of animals exist to be consumed. Feminist veganism rejects the exploitation and abuse of living things; it counsels radical self-denial on the part of the consumer as a tool for liberating the consumed.
But women, particularly first-world women, eat plenty of meat. They also feel guilty about it, as Courtney Martin reminds us. The feminist in me wants the young women in my life to enjoy food, to reject the destructive cult of thinness. The vegan in me wants to curb and redirect the appetites of these very same young women. I don’t want them to have the pizza, the burger, the Milky Way bar, the mahi-mahi — not because I don’t want them to have pleasure but because that pleasure comes at the expense of a confined and tortured dairy cow, or a fish who died a slow, gasping death.
While historically meat and fish consumption might have been essential for survival, few Americans today would drop dead if they were forced to go vegan. They’d find life rigorously hard, at least many of them would. Hard, perhaps, in a way not dissimilar from the way a compulsive dieter finds her life hard. But the difference would be in the purpose of the self-denial.
So many feminist voices want our daughters and our little sisters to be less obsessed with calories and fat grams. We want our daughters to love their bodies, to delight in their flesh. We want them to stop readiing labels, and just eat what they want to satiety. But for me — and for other vegan feminist voices — that delight in guilt-free eating is highly problematic when it involves the exploitation of the victims of factory farming. Pleasure is a good. Overcoming crushing, unnecessary guilt is a good. But living, eating, and buying cruelty-free is also a powerful good.
There’s a book to be written here, or at least a longer article. I’ll muse on it some more. But I’m thinking that the phrase radical self-denial on the part of the consumer as a tool for liberating the consumed pretty much sums up my position on meat, dairy, and porn.
UPDATE: Stentor, who shares many of my concerns, has an interesting take here.
I know that consensual sex is sort of a “victimless [potential] sin”, but don’t you find a similarly challenging dynamic between your feminism and your Christianity, when it comes to women and sex?
This is not my name, but I am a former student of yours. Reviewing your four posts today, I am reminded why I used to have a mad crush on you, but also why you drove me up the damn wall.
1. You had a surprise party. Happy birthday, cute cake. Oh, and your wife hired a band? The vegan food was catered? I hang out with professors a lot, no one else lives like you do. Do you get how few people live like this?
2. On Dank and Macdonald: as comes up every once in a while, you talk about your past as a lech. Look, when I was your student I would have gone with you anywhere. You claim that your students get crushes on you because they want to be like you but I am fairly confident that the girls who slept with you (or who wanted to) were thinking about sex, not your mind. You have an odd way of simulteneously being narcissistic and self-deprecating. It’s bizarre, but you should know that all you do by bringing the past is up is fan the flames of more student crushes.
3. Yeah, keep Brumberg and Atwood and dump the other books. DuBois is boring, Phillips is too hard to read.
4. I remember visiting you in your office, you had to take a phone call and you said to someone “Jesus H. Christ in a handbasket!” It was the funniest curse I ever heard. I thought about it as I read this post. Do you realize that all you’ve done is switch addictions? You used to sleep around with students, used to do drugs, divorces, all that. Now you’re a vegan who doesn’t masturbate, is faithful to his (fourth ) wife, and who works himself up into a frenzy of self-denial. You’re high on what you don’t do as much as on what you did.
So this comment will end up in your spam box and you probably won’t let it through but I dare you to post it. Really, Hugo, I still admire you so much. You are a good professor, even great at times, and underneath all the snobbery and the obtuseness and the vanity you have a very good, tender heart. (It shows, like your body does in the tight clothes you wear too often.) You’ve had a huge impact on my life, and someday I’ll tell you more, but for now, call me the earth goddess…
Very Interesting, a christian minister who cares more about the animals than the plight of unborn babies. What a disgrace.
Hugo:
“I am praying for a world where every child conceived will be healthy and wanted”
I see, so this is the litmis test (heathly and wanted), hmm. I think Adolf Hilter had this test as well.
a christian minister who cares more about the animals than the plight of unborn babies
Actually, I’m pretty sure Hugo doesn’t eat unborn babies either.
Which is fine: more for me! Yay!
Hugo, there are times when I wonder if we’re even the same species…
Tam, I feel like I have addressed this in posts over the years. You can hunt through my archives, but do know that my sexual ethic notes that both feminism and Christianity, at their best, are based on love.
Demeter, I’m leaving up your lengthy comment having excised a few things that needed to go. I may excise more later.
Jasper, I wish no one ever needed an abortion. I wish no one ever ate meat. I want to end abortion by changing hearts and minds and behavior, I want to end meat-eating in the same way.
Chris, wipe your chin, dude. I see a small toe just below your lip.
Gonz, perhaps we’re not. But since I am not limited by speciesism, I can still love ya.
You’re high on what you don’t do as much as on what you did.
Self-denial can be very pleasurable if you approach it right.
In my second year of college I would run a lot and not eat very much and I felt very virtuous because of this. Also withdrawing from coffee felt very tranquil and relaxing after the headaches subsided.
Actually, I’m pretty sure Hugo doesn’t eat unborn babies either.
Which is fine: more for me! Yay!
<fatbastard>
Well, listen up, sonny Jim: I ate a baby. Oh, aye, Baby: the other, other white meat. Baby: it’s what’s for dinner.
</fatbastard>
The entire universe is a cycle of life and death. The living feed off of each other as well as the dead and so on.
This cycle involves as a matter of course many things which seem cruel to us I am sure. Life is not as clean, nice and as pretty as we would like it to be. Modern technology has allowed us to deceive ourselves as to the real nature of life.
While it is laudable to want to eat foods that do not involve any cruelty (or not eat things that are dead, as one vegan guy I dated briefly said), it ultimately means not eating many things - as you experience. Sure, fight for more ethical treatment of animals, eat only organic, free range foods, OK. But beyond that you are taking yourself out of the natural order of things. Most (or at least many animals) kill and eat other animals. We aren’t much different. And while we may think of ourselves as unique beings at the top of the food chain, there are some who would say that the human body exists solely to be a host for bacteria, many of which would kill you if it weren’t for things like pennicillin. And the cycle would start all over again - you kill and eat the meat and plants and the bacteria (sometimes) kill you in the course of their living and then other living things come and eat your body when you are dead.
Ashes to ashes. Dust to dust. Worm to worm.
Then again, maybe I just sound like an overly verbose conservative who says that we eat meat because G-d ordained it, or something along those lines.
Well, ‘we do it because that’s what we’ve always done’ is now and has always been a cop out to avoid answering the real question. We are powerful beyond easy measure, the question is not ‘do we need to eat animals’ but ’should we kill animals that we might eat their flesh’. Some people feel a positive connection to Life, The Universe, And Everything by continuing to be a part of that cycle of birth, growth, death, repeat. Personally, I am neither vegetarian nor vegan, but I do take time to try to make sure that the money I spent goes to support agriculture that is sustainable, healthy, and, frankly, not horrifically cruel to the animals involved. My values place a heavy emphasis on economic responsibility and on long-term perspective.
Also, it’s amazingly annoying when anti-abortion people act as though it’s some sort of settled theological issue of Christian dogma that abortion is a horrible act of murder. It’s fine as a matter of conscience that you believe it to be so, and it’s fine that you try to convince us that we should feel that it is so, but your heavy, self-righteous implication that Hugo is engaged in some terrible heresy is dishonest. Do you really expect to get good spiritual results out of this kind of smug condescension? You and I, jasper, both know perfectly well that there is no shortage of Christian denominations that are quite theologically comfortable with abortion. You can try to convince us that it should not be so, but you cannot simply wish them out of existence.
Arg. I fed the troll. And I try so hard to stay on topic here. I am weak. Sorry, Hugo. >_
Chris Clarke:
Hugo:
I’m not sure I’ll ever manage vegetarianism, let alone veganism, though I keep reading about it — sure appreciated the alternate viewpoint by Stentor. But you guys gave me the best laugh I had in days, and I really needed that.
thanks.
Jasper’s comments seem rather ad hominem and out of context. However, I had to respond to NBarnes’ statement:
“Also, it’s amazingly annoying when anti-abortion people act as though it’s some sort of settled theological issue of Christian dogma that abortion is a horrible act of murder.”
It WAS a “settled theological issue” for about 1900 years. One thing that the Church Fathers, the Catholic and Orthodox divines, and the Radical Reformers all had in common (ironically) was their universal condemnation of abortion. You can consider a Christian pro-choice view to be more enlightened/educated/informed (and that’s certainly debatable), but you can’t deny that it is, historically, a theological novelty.
Treifalicious, you’re right that there’s s food chain in the animal kingdom. But as you’ve probably noticed on this blog, I’m rejecting the notion that humans are mere animals — while our animal brethren are, to some extent, captives to instinct, humans have free will which can trump our base nature. Veganism isn’t natural like monogamy isn’t natural — these are consequences of carefully considered choices to live as cruelty-free, as justly and as kindly and as responsibly as possible.
I’d like to expand upon a point in the comment by Demeter.
While I say ‘chacon son gout’ to your veganism etc. I do have an issue with the economics of much of what you are preaching. You often speak about ‘class’ in your blog, but more about the indicators such as pronunciation, schools, clothing, behaviour, but not much about the money. And yes, I know that money doesn’t guarantee entry into the upper middle class. I come from a similar background, where there was a ‘us & them’ ‘U and not-U’ attitude.
I work in a Canadian city for a social housing provider. Your dream of a vegan lifestyle is way out of my client’s reach. They do not have the time, the money or even the desire to live this way. They cannot drive or bike or take transit to some of these specialty stores, as they may have 2 jobs, or 4 children to look after, or an English as a 2nd Language class to attend. Some of the neighbourhoods don’t have the best grocery stores, because the clientele is from the lower economic strata, and it doesn’t make sense to open a store there. Often the poorer people are being ripped off by using variety stores to shop for groceries. School lunches provide very few vegan offerings for students…I could go on.
I personally have no problems with your economic choices; spend your money however and wherever you want. I’m curious as to how you would address this economic aspect of veganism. It often seems like a choice for the middle class. How can the poor, who have limited choices, not only for foodstuffs, but clothing/footwear, living arrangements etc make the jump?
Full disclosure, I’m not vegan.
Chris, that comment cracked me up.
AMG, I volunteer with Food Not Bombs. We serve vegan meals on the street in Canadian City that’s propably not too unlike yours twice a week. I’ve met a fairly small number of homeless people who are vegan, and many who would like to be. I think if services that provide for the poor like food banks and shelters were more focused on providing vegan options, it would not cost much more. You don’t need specialty items like tofu and mock-meats to eat a healthy vegan diet.
I also know a lot of people who are extremely poor who manage to live vegan or freegan. One of the best ways to do this is dumpster-diving - making use of the food that our society wastes.
I don’t think people in serious poverty can always make the choice on their own to go vegan, but I also don’t think Hugo was arguing that it is neccesarily an individual effort that’s required. If services were more inclined to actually respect the priorities of the people they’re supposed to provide for, and if there was less stigma attached to alternative ways of obtaining food like dumpstering, I think it would be a lot easier to be vegan and poor.
You can read more about Food Not Bombs internationally at foodnotbombs.net, or the local chapter I work with (in Calgary) at foodnotbombs.tk
Full Disclosure: I’m not actually even vegetarian.
I don’t think people in serious poverty can always make the choice on their own to go vegan
Understatement of the week.
This is why veganism isn’t just a private choice. Veganism as a movement ought to be concerned with getting fresh choices into urban areas, encouraging community gardens, fighting the influence of fast food. I’m not simply asking folks from South Central to come and shop at Whole Foods. It’s gonna be a lot of work to change the way we eat and the way we make food available.
“Veganism isn’t natural like monogamy isn’t natural” - HS
Are you sure monogamy is not natural? I would argue that monogamy, albeit serial monogamy, is natural for human beings. It is my understanding that elephants and some primates also form long term pair bonds. They just break up after a few years but they do not carry on parallel relationships.
I think that arguing what is or is not “natural” is opening a very complicated can of worms (or perhaps tempeh-based worm substitute). Not to say that we shouldn’t do that, just that we should be aware of it.
I think there are a lot of vegan options that are actually some of the cheapest foods per calorie around - e.g. cans of beans or chick peas plus tomato sauce and seasonings makes vegan chili. Not to say that it’s the most interesting diet, but you can eat pretty well as a vegan. The challenge may be to get enough fresh foods and vitamin B12, especially on a tight budget that doesn’t allow for expensive/exotic ingredients or vitamin supplements.
Treifalicious, I think long-term monogamy works against our basic instincts much of the time. I’m conceding the point made by evolutionary biologists that many of us may be drawn to novelty and polygamy/promiscuity, but I’m also arguing that our will, our commitment to justice, and our cerebral cortex can trump any and all biological influences, time and again.
Of course, perhaps elephants make a conscious choice to be monogamous, resisting other imperatives. We make a huge mistake when we deny the possibility for consciousness and reflection among other mammals. I can’t prove that animals do exercise free will, mind you, but no one has proven that none of them ever do either.
i don’t know…i never like how people compare veganism and anorexia in the feminist debate as an argument against veganism. veganism is NOT about denying oneself (or at least, it shouldn’t be) even tho so many people see it that way.
as far as the poverty issue goes…LOTS of the folks who are vegan (that i know), in fact most, are poor. and i’m certainly not rich. veganism doesn’t really require “specialty” items. beans, rice, canned/frozen veggies. soymilk isn’t really anymore expensive than regular milk, and there is your B12.
It is my understanding that elephants and some primates also form long term pair bonds.
Also, gerbils and geese. I’m sure there are others.
Monogamy is every bit as much a part of nature as gang rapes. Nature unmediated gives us very little by way of moral guidance.
veganism is NOT about denying oneself (or at least, it shouldn’t be) even tho so many people see it that way.
Well, if you really, really like steak, then it really does require some denial. Those who don’t like animal products much have an easier time of it.
But for me — and for other vegan feminist voices — that delight in guilt-free eating is highly problematic when it involves the exploitation of the victims of factory farming
Replacing guilt about your body with guilt about the suffering of animals… yeah, that’s a hard sell.
labyrus,
I appreciate your comments about your experiences with poor vegans & the org. you volunteer with. And yes, I do agree that there are lots of cheap vegan options like beans for them to chose from. However, the people I work with are not homeless, but are the working poor, single mothers on social assistance, the physically & invisibly disabled, newcomers to Canada and seniors on limited pensions. They already have to travel on transit or foot to buy food, and for some the extensive reading of lables and scanning of ingrediants would be a poor use of time or beyond their English abilities. There are already so many barriers to preparing nutritious dishes for their families that I don’t have room for it here. And your suggestion of dumpster diving would be perceived by many in these situations as humiliating, condescending and crazy. I know that’s not how you meant it, and the people I work with may have indeed done this, but they would never admit it, and would have me up on human rights abuses for suggesting it!
Tyler makes a good comment:
“The challenge may be to get enough fresh foods and vitamin B12, especially on a tight budget that doesn’t allow for expensive/exotic ingredients or vitamin supplements.”
My point is that the disadvantaged are just that, and they don’t have Hugo’s ability/time to read the lables, spend money on supplements and energy bars (these are expensive!), travel longer distances to get the items, or even be close to vegan alternatives if they need food in an emergency situation. I’m not saying the poor or disadvantaged can’t do this, but for most, there are already so many struggles that it is just not worth it.
it’s not about “liking” or “disliking” animal products. it’s just a different worldview (for me). i used to love eating fish and shellfish. one day i opened up a can of tuna and just couldn’t eat it anymore. it was the flesh of another creature, one who wasn’t there simply for me to consume. i’m not denying myself of eating fish because it is not an option for me to deny myself of.
as far as the poor thing goes, because this is something that bothers me a lot (when people talk about being veg as an elite option), i grew up poor too. my mom was a single mom, on welfare for much of my youth. we didn’t have a car and we didn’t even live in a large city so public transit was hard and slow. it took all day to go grocery shopping (for instance). and most of my diet was vegetarian. a can of kidney beans to throw in the pasta sauce was cheaper than hamburger, etc. a can of peas in a rice casserole instead of ham (or whatever most folks use). meat was the exception–exactly because it was expensive. a veg lifestyle is not an elite lifestyle. yes, there are folks who eat a lot of “convenience” foods (like protein bars, etc). but those things are not necessary.
anyone can, at least, reduce their meat consumption. the fact is most folks don’t want to.
it’s not about “liking” or “disliking” animal products. it’s just a different worldview (for me).
That is a fair point. At the same time, someone who numbers certain animal products among their favorite foods is going to have a harder time making the leap to veg(etari)anism, even if he believes he’s doing the right thing.
I was a vegetarian (near vegan) for a couple of 1-1.5 year stretches of time and it didn’t necessarily feel like denial after I reached a certain equilibrium point. If it had felt like I was giving up something that I really loved to eat, it would have been a lot harder to practice, so I do agree with your idea of changed worldview (for me, that worldview dissipated after a certain point, and it became a lot harder to handle the self-imposed inconvenience).
Chris: BEST LAUGH E*V*A*H !!!!!!!
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Hugo: This is a bit OT, but, I am interested in your response. I GET being a vegetarian, and I GET not wanting to torture animals in factory farming type situations et cetera. (I don’t want to be part of that either). But: IF (and I know you don’t) you had a big lot with your house, and a chicken house, where you had happy chickens you personally took care of (my mother did this, and I know a lot about it), what would be so wrong about eating their (sterile, un hatchable) eggs? If it is really about not causing suffering (and I think that is very noble and good, and I am an idealist myself, so I am not threatened by YOU trying to be GOOD (Some folks are! Threatened by people actively trying to be good I mean), what is the suffering in eating these sterile eggs made by your happy chicken pets?
I really don’t KNOW enough about milk and milking or apiary things; perhaps if you had your own cow or goat and milked it, that would be cruel. Like I said I don’t know whether milking is cruel (I think NOT milking makes cows suffer pain when they are USED to being milked, but that is entirely different, as it is depended on milking them in the first place). I guess my point is, is this about bodily PURITY, or not causing suffering? Because I am highly suspect of the whole Bodily purity thing, being as I am female and all. It’s been used against us, after all, for so long. Are you using it against yourself, perhaps?
AMG - Yeah, for sure, I think there are people for whom the system just plain needs to be more accomodating to. In a better society, the people you work with would not be poor in the first place, and I think if we lived in a more just society veganism would be a much easier sell. Which is why I was trying to distinguish veganism as a collective project and as a personal choice.
Personally, as someone who’s worked alongside a lot of institutionalized charities, social workers and government projects to address poverty, I think that there’s a lot that the system could do to provide vegetarian or vegan options for people in poverty, but don’t get me wrong, I don’t think it’s possible for an individual to affect that change by themselves.
I do think there’s a lot of problems in the current system of support for people in Canada, though, as evidenced by the fact that homelessness and poverty are growing.
If your clients really are interested in finding ways to make a veg diet more affordable, one practical short-term solution I could think of (which may or may not be realistic for them, I don’t know) would be a buying co-op. Actually, in general, a buying co-op is a good idea as it can save a lot on food costs for a lot of people (and if bulk orders get big enough the distribution company can deliver it to someplace more accessible than fancy organic grocery stores). It takes a bit of time and energy to organize, but if the work is shared around enough people it can be done. If the buying co-op is mixed-income rather than low-income, perhaps some of the really time-consuming work could be done by people who can afford to take the time - it would also be a good way to make connections in the community.
I’ve also heard of a restaurant in Montreal (I think it’s called the chic resto, I don’t know if it’s still around but there’s a documentary about it) that collects food that other places don’t want and cooks affordable meals for a low-income community, while also bringing in enough money to create some jobs in the same community. A project like that requires a fairly large amount of startup money, and some people involved who are well off enough that they have the time to put into getting it goin, but once it’s going it can sustain itself.
Community gardens can also be helpful but from the sounds of your post your clients might not realistically have the time to maintain a garden or the space to do it on.
If your clients aren’t interested in a veg diet than personally I don’t think it’s something worth worrying about. Let people worry about non-exploitive consumption after they’ve managed to climb out from under exploitation themselves. There’s already too many hurdles people in poverty have to jump through in our society.
(I also just kind of want to mention that I’ve had plenty of tasty, healthy, nutritious, and safe meals out of dumpsters, and I think it really is a shame that our society wastes so much nutritious food when so many people are in need. Dumpstering has helped keep me healthy through periods of unemployment and underemployment, and it is something I do encourage others to do, with some caution about checking food carefully. I think the stigma attached to it is ridiculous. At the same time, I of course understand that in your institutional role it’s illegal to encourage it.)
KMTBerry, I definitely think eating milk or eggs that came from a free-range chicken or cow, one that wasn’t slaughtered and was allowed comfort and socialization opportunities is better than eating the same thing that comes off a factory farm. Yet dairy products are not — despite the milk mustache ads — all that good for most American adults. Eggs are a little less bad, but they’re easy to live without too.
It’s not about purity as much as it is about kindness for me. But health does factor into it as well.
I’m not actually a vegan, though I’m a vegetarian who flirts with the idea. Anyway, I have this idea for a cookbook called “The decadent vegan”, which is to be full of recipes that, while vegan and possibly even healthy, are definitely NOT diet foods. Ideas include deep fried falafel, fruit or pecan pies, lemongrass tofu, 85% cacao chocolate*…when I get enough ideas together I’m turning vegan and publishing.
The point being that veganism doesn’t have to be about self-denial and control. I’ve found that since I stopped eating meat I’ve actually gotten to eat more tasty and interesting meals, because I’ve had to think about what I wanted to eat instead of just going for the slab o’flesh. I suspect that the same thing can be true of veganism, though I admit that giving up really good cheese would be hard.
*Fair trade. Let’s not substitute oppression of animals for oppression of people.
Eggs are a little less bad
Eggs are a LOT less bad. You don’t have to kill a chicken, breed it or take nutrition away from another animal - chickens lay eggs anyway.
Of course, we have no reason to keep chickens or cows living if we don’t use them for milk or eggs–why not let them die out naturally?
“I did judge folks who ate a lot ”
I would venture to say you are still quite judgmental on the food topics (as well as others). I’m surprised by how much of this post of yours was dedicated to the food choices of others, particularly women, and your evaluations of them. Why not just eat the way you have chosen and LISTEN to the women who do not follow your path, being open to learning from them instead of desiring to change them? They might have something to teach you, but you seem very stuck in “teacher” and “mentor” role trying to figure out how you can teach them and show them your greater wisdom. While you may be well-read in feminism, as a woman, I find some of the things you write quite condescending and patronizing.