Thursday, June 6, 2013

The thinking of a new herbivore

740:

When I first started out, I could see that plant-based eating was a beautiful idea in theory but in practical terms I had my doubts. Was it possible? And if I could get over missing all those familiar foods could I also withstand the opprobrium of my friends, all of whom were dedicated omnivores or enthusiastic carnivores? I’d be living in a society and yet denigrating the eating habits of nearly everyone I mixed with; this change wouldn’t exactly win me too many friends. And, as it turned out, by exposing and explaining and talking about animal abuse in the food industry, I found myself socially dropped by family and friends. I was considered to be ‘on the nose’. 
            And yet I was only trying to be constructive and get to the truth. I only wanted to point out the human capacity for acting destructively and in this case hypocritically. Whether people were acting by commission or omission, or acting directly or by proxy, or being up front or clandestine - I wanted all of that to be energetically discussed. But it was not to be. And after a while, of people refusing to discuss the issues, I started to become rude, and then things descended into mutual abuse, and I knew that this wasn’t what I wanted at all. It was far from rational debate.
            In the early days, I often felt helpless to do much about the ‘animal thing’. I was fast becoming aware that human habits and social mores were so strongly established that nothing I could do personally would change things. Everyone thought of them-self as a sensitive person. And in this case that was the biggest problem. Everybody already knew that humans were trashing the environment and doing things against the ethical standard, but by looking at ‘other’ issues, it diverted them away from more controversial issues - by admitting culpability in one issue-area, another much more difficult issue-area could be effectively ignored.
             Animal use and abuse has become so much part of our lives that the last thing a person would want to hear was any condemnation of animal farms. So, as an animal advocate, you never get the chance to speak your mind; you’re never allowed to say that, whilst animal farms were providing us with much of our food, they were little more than death camps. Nor can you go further, to expand your case, to say that animal farming was a major cause of greenhouse gas emissions and general pollution. Nor that by eating so much of this animal-based food our bodies were going haywire and that we were losing control of our health.
Because we are stopped from even entering into this matter we never get to the point where we can explain the details, about animal foods being too ‘rich’ and comprising high carbohydrates and so much saturated fat, leading to obesity and all the other problems of over-indulgent lifestyles.
Everything that needed to be said couldn’t be said because it would sound like an insult, and that was considered by any hostile listener as reason enough for not having to listen to ANY of it.
There are obvious links between the main global issues, the one leading to the other and on to the next ... ending up with detrimental consequences for rich and poor; the rich are dying from overindulgence and lack of self discipline and sub-consciously suffer the shame of ignoring the plight of children in poor countries who are dying for want of food. 
            Most people can’t look squarely at any of this since they want to be consuming animals and all the ‘goodies’ made available by farming them. They don’t heed the warnings since they are transfixed, like a rabbit in the car’s headlights, on the comforts-of-life to which they’ve become accustomed.
            To the new herbivore all this is too obvious and clearly must be avoided, but at the same time none of it will make much sense to those who are determined not to change their lifestyle or diet.


No comments: