1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

Death or This God-awful threak?

Discussion in 'Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel' started by itsstillmatt, Jul 8, 2010.

  1. gomestar

    gomestar Senior member

    Messages:
    19,385
    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    What is also indisputable is that gigantic tracts of non-arable land produce meat.

    oceans also strike me as an abundant food source, but a dearth of forestable vegetation
     
  2. samus

    samus Senior member

    Messages:
    376
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    - meat eaters are not arguing that meat eating is good for the environment (or vegetarianism is bad for that matter). they accept that all types of food consumption is bad for the environment and there is some suffering in the process.

    Right - and suffering should be minimized. Vegans would say that using animals to create food products is inherently harmful, whereas the suffering and environmental problems created by vegetable agriculture are not at all inherent, and can be mitigated or stopped using proper techniques. E.g., crop rotation, organics, etc.

    I'm not vegetarian and I think this is largely true. At least as it is currently practiced. If every farm was Polyface farm and not monstrous CAFOs we'd be having a different discussion.

    You're setting up the perfect as the enemy of the good. Are there problems with vegetable agriculture? Of course. Are they fixable? Yes. But if you're vegan, and you believe that using animals is wrong, there's no getting around that.

    I haven't seen anyone proposing that at all. If you notice, this thread was started calling out vegans and vegetarians, not the other way around.
     
  3. samus

    samus Senior member

    Messages:
    376
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    I am puzzled by all of the absolutism in this thread. Most of the vegans I know want to minimize their impact on the animal world. Hence they do not eat animal products, and they mostly try to avoid leather. It's pretty damned hard to achieve 100% success, and they know it. But what is so bad about trying to achieve an ethical vision? Many of us who eat meat also have some standards about humane treatment of animals, and we try to consume decently-produced meat. Do we succeed 100% of the time? Of course not, but that does not mean that the effort is utterly vain.

    I've said it before in this thread, and I'll say it again. When people are confronted with ethical choices that call their own into doubt (or call into question basic assumptions they take for granted), it's far easier to belittle, or accuse of hypocrisy, than to make one's own mind up and live and let live. The threat to the status quo must be extinguished.
     
  4. itsstillmatt

    itsstillmatt Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    14,384
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2006
    Location:
    The wild and the pure.
    I haven't seen anyone proposing that at all. If you notice, this thread was started calling out vegans and vegetarians, not the other way around.

    lol wut? No it wasn't. It was started to find out how much the various people here valued eating a highly varied diet. I really don't care what other people eat. Why would I?
     
  5. itsstillmatt

    itsstillmatt Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    14,384
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2006
    Location:
    The wild and the pure.
    I've said it before in this thread, and I'll say it again. When people are confronted with ethical choices that call their own into doubt (or call into question basic assumptions they take for granted), it's far easier to belittle, or accuse of hypocrisy, than to make one's own mind up and live and let live. The threat to the status quo must be extinguished.
    This is the height of silliness.
     
  6. Vintage Gent

    Vintage Gent Senior member

    Messages:
    2,748
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Location:
    The People's Republic of Galveston
    It's indisputable that the number of calories obtainable per acre of farmland is much, much higher for grain and vegetables than for meat, even leaving aside the animal suffering involved. Are there major ecological issues with the way all food is produced in the world today? Of course. But then I haven't seen anyone claiming otherwise. Have fun with your straw men.
    What is also indisputable is that gigantic tracts of non-arable land produce meat.
    OK, gents, I know it's inconvenient to let facts get in the way, but Slate examined this very question: http://www.slate.com/id/2176420
     
  7. samus

    samus Senior member

    Messages:
    376
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    What is also indisputable is that gigantic tracts of non-arable land produce meat.

    You're right. I'm not arguing that we should stop using non-arable land for those purposes. I just find it laughable when people argue that adding land for vegetable farming is wasteful or bad for the environment when how many millions of acres of pristine rainforest have been destroyed for cattle farming, and the insult to injury is how much more productive vegetable farming is, in terms of feeding the world.

    If we have to destroy forests to grow food (and I don't necessarily think we do), we might as well make the most of it. Using non-arable land to grow livestock (or the sea, gome) is in line with that principle.
     
  8. gomestar

    gomestar Senior member

    Messages:
    19,385
    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    IC
     
  9. kwilkinson

    kwilkinson Senior member

    Messages:
    33,650
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2007
    Location:
    Chicago
    This thread took a serious turn for the dull.
     
  10. itsstillmatt

    itsstillmatt Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    14,384
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2006
    Location:
    The wild and the pure.
    This thread took a serious turn for the dull.
    +1.
     
  11. Valor

    Valor Senior member

    Messages:
    836
    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Location:
    NYC
    I have a question for you vegetarians out there, why won't you eat meat?

    Will you eat fish? Oysters?

    Is it because of animal suffering? Not all animals feel pain for instance.
    How did you draw an arbitrary line between the Animal and plant kingdoms and decide one was ok and another was not?

    What's the logical basis for being a vegetarian?
     
  12. Vintage Gent

    Vintage Gent Senior member

    Messages:
    2,748
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Location:
    The People's Republic of Galveston
    IC

    You must really be kidding. You pull a quote completely out of context, when the next paragraph partially refutes it:

     
  13. ratboycom

    ratboycom Senior member

    Messages:
    3,682
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2006
    Location:
    Nagoya, Japan
    One of my cousins turned into a raw vegan after college. He used to weigh around 250 lbs, now is down around 160 and is as tall as me. Though, he looks like death.

    I guess he was visiting his brothers a week ago and had a bite of pepperoni pizza and commented on how good it was, but it would destroy his bowels if he ate a whole piece.
     
  14. Vintage Gent

    Vintage Gent Senior member

    Messages:
    2,748
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Location:
    The People's Republic of Galveston
    What's the logical basis for being a vegetarian?

    A fair amount of empirical evidence suggests it offers considerable health benefits, including both an increase in the quality and quantity of life.
     
  15. itsstillmatt

    itsstillmatt Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    14,384
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2006
    Location:
    The wild and the pure.
    You must really be kidding. You pull a quote completely out of context, when the next paragraph partially refutes it:
    It isn't refuted, it is qualified. Big difference.
     
  16. samus

    samus Senior member

    Messages:
    376
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    This is the height of silliness.

    I call it like I see it. I don't attribute this to you, but there are many others in this thread to whom I do.

    lol wut? No it wasn't. It was started to find out how much the various people here valued eating a highly varied diet. I really don't care what other people eat. Why would I?

    Uh huh. "Death or Veganism?" = "Do you value a highly varied diet?" Come on now, you even said this was a response to people in the Veal thread. This hasn't for one second been a good-faith discussion of variety in cuisine.

    Besides, I bet the average vegan or vegetarian has a more varied diet than the average American omnivore.
     
  17. itsstillmatt

    itsstillmatt Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    14,384
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2006
    Location:
    The wild and the pure.
    A fair amount of empirical evidence suggests it offers considerable health benefits, including both an increase in the quality and quantity of life.
    What kind of empirical evidence is there for quality of life? How does one measure it? Utes?
     
  18. Valor

    Valor Senior member

    Messages:
    836
    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Location:
    NYC
    A fair amount of empirical evidence suggests it offers considerable health benefits, including both an increase in the quality and quantity of life.

    What if I weight eating meat strongly in terms of utils compared to health benefits? Then I shouldn't be vegetarian right? And did these studies even take into account other factors? I seriously doubt the validity of most studies into length of life due to the exogenous factors.
     
  19. Vintage Gent

    Vintage Gent Senior member

    Messages:
    2,748
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Location:
    The People's Republic of Galveston
    What kind of empirical evidence is there for quality of life? How does one measure it? Utes?

    Reduced incidence of illness and disease--e.g. cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer.
     
  20. itsstillmatt

    itsstillmatt Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    14,384
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2006
    Location:
    The wild and the pure.
    I call it like I see it. I don't attribute this to you, but there are many others in this thread to whom I do.



    Uh huh. "Death or Veganism?" = "Do you value a highly varied diet?" Come on now, you even said this was a response to people in the Veal thread. This hasn't for one second been a good-faith discussion of variety in cuisine.

    Besides, I bet the average vegan or vegetarian has a more varied diet than the average American omnivore.

    Tongue was planted firmly in cheek when I started the threak, and it has continued to be so throughout. So you are right, it wasn't good faith, but good fun, at least from my point of view. Anyway, I really don't care what somebody else does. It does bother me when somebody gets preachy to another person about what they should eat, whether it is that they should try liver, eat only vegetables, eat meat, whatever.
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by