I am taking a course about feminism and food right now, and already I have some things to ponder. The course is taught by a woman who does not eat meat, and there are a lot of vegan arguments. She tries to keep it open-minded, but the connotation is still something to work on. While watching the introduction to this course, I felt somewhat conflicted as an omnivore who consumes mainly Canadian cuisine. Some of the topics in the intro included how meat production is the key driver of the climate crisis, causes domestic violence, is unhealthy, is for the poor, and is linked to expressing masculinity. After further thinking and watching the rest of the video, I came up with some things to write about that are part of bigger issues. 

First, I would like to touch on the idea that red meat consumption is supposedly linked to masculinity. Historically, in many cultures, men would go out to hunt for food and bring it home for the women to prepare. Then the entire family would consume it as part of a diet based on what animals were in the area and as a way to get food. This is the early way that they would work for their own food. Now, aside from some Indigenous people, we usually work for money and that money gets us food. We choose what to buy in the store, and if we are craving a particular meal we will buy the separate parts of that meal and prepare it at home. Many people still consume red meat because they enjoy the taste or they can afford the luxury of hearty meals. Men are statistically less likely to go vegan, so I understand this idea to an extent. But I think I can understand how the association between masculinity and meat consumption began. If veganism is somehow better scientifically than eating meat, and the only issue is that eating meat is seen as a symbol of masculinity, then we can probably understand how veganism is seen as a feminine practice. There was a lot of synergy among different social movements in the 20th century, including that of the women’s movement and the environmentalist movement. This causes subconscious associations to be drawn between the ideas and practices that both movements promoted. Likewise, the same kinds of associations can be made subconsciously between those groups that were not part of those social movements, which include men and meat-lovers. So, this may actually be where the linkage between meat and masculinity lies. Maybe this is the logic of my professor and other vegan feminists. If any are reading, please comment your thinking of whether meat is related to masculinity and if so, how. I am interested to try and understand where you are coming from. 

Next, I am going to examine the idea that meat is for the poor, and explain why this idea exists (because I have some experience being part of that group). In the early stages of veganism, people who wanted to quit consuming animal products did not have the option to buy many specially made vegan products. The lifestyle was not popular enough for it to be profitable for grocers. Vegans during this time had to make their own careful decisions about what they bought and how they prepared their food so it would align with their wishes. This often meant skipping the meat section and using trial and error to find adequate substitutes for baked goods or home cooking. This is a lot of work, and would usually be handled by the people of the house who cooked and prepared meals, which was probably the wife in most cases (remember the timing). However, there is also a factor of class to this issue of who could be early vegans. One may initially think that it would be cheaper to be vegan if people are skipping the meat and dairy sections like I said above, but we need to consider caloric requirements of the body. The average adult body with an intermediate level of exercise requires about 2000 calories per day to maintain the weight that their body is at. Of course, this varies depending on age, size, health conditions, and exercise level or energy requirements. Have you ever seen the image comparing a certain number of calories of meat versus veggies versus carbohydrates (such as pasta or potatoes)? The amount of meat one must eat to get to 500 calories takes up far less space than to fill that calorie amount with only vegetables. Since the price of products is based on weight or number of pre-packaged items, filling your energy requirement for the day is much more expensive when you only buy veggies than if you fill some of that space with meat. To further divide the ability of different classes to go vegan, most upper class consumers are able to go vegan because their jobs are not as physically demanding as working class people. When you are working as a lumberjack, trucker, or stock person, you are going to use more energy than someone working in an office typing on a computer or making phone calls (unless that upper class person has a really high metabolism and you don’t). This is why meat is seen widely as for poor people, because often that is the best decision for that family or person. If they cannot afford to pay rent and buy food, they should not be reprimanded by someone with a different opinion for buying the “wrong” types of food. People in the upper classes can afford to become vegan because their needs are able to be satisfied in different ways. 

On the topic of meat being unhealthy, I have a couple things to be mindful of. First, does this person have deficiencies that can be solved cheaper and easier by eating meat than by taking a bunch of pill supplements? Second, might this person have financial issues? Third, are they eating meat in excessive amounts or with excessive seasoning? And fourth, is any of this actually my issue? If you have done your own thinking and your own research on the issue, and you have concluded that meat is not a good option for you, good job. I’m proud that you thought about an issue and are making a decision for your health. And, if you have done your own thinking and research and concluded that meat is a good option for you, good job. I’m proud that you thought about an issue and are making a decision for your health. However, what another person consumes, buys, or enjoys is none of your business. If you are trying to convert people to veganism for their health, and you persist even after they say they do not want to do that, you are harassing them. And, if you are trying to convert people to eating meat for their health, and you persist even after they say no, you are harassing them. People should have the right to decide freely what they eat in whatever amount they want to eat it in. If it causes them health issues down the road, that is not your problem. Everyone has unique needs and wants, and your clashing ideas are really not something to push. If someone asks you and is interested in learning more, then talk to your heart’s content. But don’t get upset if they end up deciding against it. 

On the topic of meat production causing domestic violence at the hands of butchers, that is not only a harmful generalization, but if taken the wrong way could cost a lot of people their jobs. The claim here is that because they do acts that are seen as violent on a regular basis, they become desensitized to violent acts and carry that into their home life. While desensitization to violence is an issue, it is not like that happens to every person who works in the meat industry. There are people who are not violent, and there are people who are violent, and people who are kind of gray in the area. But that is the same as every other group we analyze. You cannot make the generalization that all people in meat production are bad to promote a lifestyle that does not tolerate meat. I understand if you want to cut out animal products from your life, but since there are still many people who eat meat, you cannot rightfully get rid of its production to spare people violence. Also, for the people who are violent, what would happen to their families if they lost their job? If they then get so stressed from not having work that they take it out on them even more? If people are becoming violent because of their jobs as butchers or meat producers, eliminating their legal form of violence by firing them is not going to help their case. Instead, why don’t we do regular background and wellness checks on these employees? There are many other ways to handle this than to tell other consumers to stop eating meat. They are not responsible for the actions of people with meat production jobs, just as vegans are not responsible for the back injuries that people suffer from picking vegetables year-round around the world. 

As for meat being the supposed main driver of the climate crisis, you should think of the other main drivers of the climate crisis. When people think about livestock being the main driver of climate change, they think of the amounts of CO₂ that huge cattle farmers are producing. These farms are extremely large and are usually well-established brands that sell in big box stores. No one thinks of the small community farmers who have about 50 cattle that they take care of and show mercy to when it is their time to go. They don’t think about the small local butchers who make wonderfully seasoned meat for their loyal customers at a low price. They don’t think of the kids in kindergarten who love animals and would not be able to pet horses if it weren’t for ranchers. Better yet, no one thinks about the international corporations who make billions per year because they exploit their workers and use unethically sourced materials. When we think about numbers, we need to see them in context. When you see the tons of CO₂ being produced each year, you need to break it down by geography, time, and who is doing it. You also need to think about how much of that is being counteracted by the plants that farmers often grow in coexistence with their animals. Numbers don’t mean anything without an explanation. Make sure you are not being fooled by the big numbers that are never explained. 

I am not saying that everyone should be vegan, nor am I saying that everyone should eat animal products. I am saying that everyone should have the freedom to make that decision. By all means, promote what you believe and show people options, but let each other decide. The ability to go vegan is not always something one can do because of forces out of their control, and sometimes they have the means to do it but don’t want to. It is entirely up to the individual, and they can make their own decisions. One individual is not going to change the climate crisis or stop the suffering of animals. Instead of focusing on eliminating all options besides one, we should focus on making sure that those options are more ethically sourced. 

Until next time, keep thinking outside the box, and keep reading in between!