In regards to eating meat

[yossarian]

As a vegetarian I bring my diet to the table

All people bring their diets to the table. It's pretty sad that you've internalized an inferior social position with fewer privileges than meat-eaters. Going to dinner involves extra responsibilities for you in "defusing situations" just because of some diet choice?

---

Vegetarians never got thrown out of carnivore only places. They have never been lynched for not eating meat. They have not been set on fire forced to do menial jobs for low pay, forced to sit in the back of the bus. They have never been enslaved. They could always marry whomever they wanted, yes even meat eaters! There simply are no dietary hate crimes.

Comparing being an ass about your dietary choice, and the struggles racial minorities have had to endure is in my book really really ignorant.

You're dodging. I'm not even a vegetarian I just think it's unhelpful to consider yourself a lower form of life with extra responsibilities just because of a diet.

The discrimination faced by vegetarians is not the same severity as that faced by blacks. DUH! This does not need to be stated, unless you're trying to win brownie points by stating really obvious stuff.

But you are dividing the world into two groups: vegetarians who accept themselves and respect themselves, and vegetarians who believe they are being an "ass" just for existing and must put in extra effort to defuse situations because other people bring up their vegetarianism and start fights about it.

I have a peg leg. I bring my peg leg to the table. Therefore, I take on extra responsibilities at dinner for defusing situations when someone is offended by my peg leg.

I am a midget. I bring my shortness to the table. Therefore, I take on extra responsibilities at dinner for defusing the situation when someone notices that I'm a little person and is offended by it and starts a fight.

I am a Muslim. I bring my hijab to the table. Therefore, I take on extra responsibilities at dinner for defusing the situation when someone notices that I look different and is offended by it and starts a fight.

You're a self-hating vegetarian who believes your own existence must be justified and defused.

---

It's funny that people think there are two teams in this thread. I see at least 8 different broad groups of people.

1. Vegetarians who tease the meat eaters and think it's funny to offend them.

2. Vegetarians who try really hard to be fair and respectful to meat-eaters without sacrificing their vegetarian convictions.

3. Vegetarians who downplay their beliefs and even existence so that they will be "a good vegetarian" and "get along."

4. Meat-eaters who think killing animals is unfortunate but necessary.

5. Meat-eaters who are emotionally offended and triggered by vegetarian ideology but don't know why because their ego defense mechanisms are trying to protect their self-image as a saintly person. So they are subconsciously motivated to find any reason for their emotional reaction OTHER than the vegetarian ideology itself. Like maybe the vegetarian looked at them funny. But the vegetarian ideology itself does and should naturally trigger guilt, doubt, and sadness in those involved in killing animals. The vegetarian ideology is inescapably a statement that meat-eaters are committing cruelty. Most meat-eaters would naturally find this ideology threatening. I think most humans are actually in this group. They haven't learned the simple statement, "Yeah it's too bad we have to kill animals, but it's just necessary." Instead they twist themselves into knots trying to convince people that God commanded them to kill animals or that animals enjoy being killed or whatever. ANYTHING to avoid taking responsibility for the effect of their own choices.

6. Meat-eaters who are inherently offended by the existence of a vegetarian and interpret even non-ideological statements by a vegetarian as an attack. This is likely due to preconditioning--they've seen the PETA ads and now associate those ads with every vegetarian who says ANYTHING at all. Even stuff that isn't food related! The vegetarian says, "I love swimming!" and the offended meat-eater can only think, "A vegetarian loves swimming. Vegetarians are such jerks."

7. People who loathe loud and proud activists in general, regardless of the cause, because it reminds them of their own fear of standing up for themselves and their beliefs.

8. People who just can't tolerate conflict of any sort and believe it is wrong to say anything controversial on any side of any debate anywhere. These people always go to debates and then try to get each side to give up their ideologies so that there will be peace and harmony. They don't realize that giving up your beliefs for the sake of harmony is far more self-destructive than a little harmless conflict. I actually saw a girl in the audience at a serious academic debate do this once. The audience had some mics where they could ask questions, and this girl didn't ask a question but instead pleaded with the various professors to abandon their life-defining convictions and to come together in spineless jelly-fish harmony. The reactions were pretty hilarious.

---

amen even the word negro bothers me. what the hell is a negro. that is a label given by white caucasian society to a people that has absolutely
NO NO validity in my book. i hope i never see that word again here . a good negro PLEASE dont ever use that term around me again i find it very
OFFENSIVE. the word makes me SICK

---

yeah a good negro was my cousin who graduated at the top of her class from hunter college and then couldnt get a job that white high school grads could get , she would have had to work for them she would have had to work for them , then she became a teacher and she got all the s*** classrooms with all the difficult kids because she was a good negro . right a good negro thats what white society wants thats what white society thinks trayvon martin is a good negro because he is a dead negro. now that we are not slaves anymore the only good negro is a dead negro in the eyes of much of white society . thats the reality of freaking hypocritical america running around the world fixing everything but cant fix their own house because they are so filled with hate. heres a toast to more good negroes .
aargh aaargh aaargh.

I agree it's offensive, and so is the term "a good vegetarian"

Dominant ideological groups always want to divide minority groups by defining some of those minorities as "good" especially when those minorities make concessions to them.

So white people--a dominant group--created these two racist definitions of "good black" and "bad black". Extremely racist. The bad ones would be people who talk in ebonics and the good ones are people who happen to fit into white cultural norms.

Then white people, being racist, define one of these as bad and the other as good. Both labels are completely racist.

Likewise, meat eaters (a dominant group) will divide a minority group (vegetarians) into two groups.

"Bad vegetarians" are the ones who are willing to stick up for their convictions when the topic is brought up--even if it's brought up by other people.

"Good vegetarians" are the ones who compromise their ideology and placate the meat-eaters with conciliatory but ideologically inappropriate statements. A good vegetarian might tell a meat-eater, "I don't believe you're hurting animals by eating meat" or "I'm sure you have a good reason to eat meat." These statements are not true; they contradict the ideology of most vegetarians. But the vegetarian says them to spinelessly placate a meat-eater and avoid victimization by the dominant group.

People in the dominant group will even start conversations with the vegetarian just to have an argument. They want to feel the power of their affiliation with a dominant group. They want to see a vegetarian squirm and give up his or her convictions for the feeling of power it gives them. So an ass at a dinner party might notice that a vegetarian isn't eating the meat and start prodding and provoking the vegetarian. The ass is the person who is starting a conflict at a party and trying to bully and single-out someone for their beliefs.

Ass: "Are you a vegetarian? You're not eating the chicken."

Bad Vegetarian: "Yep."

Ass: "Why are you a vegetarian?"

Bad Vegetarian: "Same reason as any other vegetarian. I just don't think it's nice."

Ass: "So you think we're all cruel people for eating animals?"

Bad Vegetarian: "Not necessarily cruel people, just being cruel to animals yes."

Ass: "Now I've got you. You're a minority group who has passed moral judgement on the actions of a majority group. Now I can use the numerical advantage to socially crush you! MUAHAHAHA! POWER!"

In comparison..

Ass: "Are you a vegetarian? You're not eating the chicken."

Good Vegetarian: "Yep."

Ass: "Why are you a vegetarian?"

Good Vegetarian: "Same reason as any other vegetarian. I just don't think it's nice."

Ass: "So you think we're all cruel people for eating animals?"

Good Vegetarian: "No, you're not cruel, you're just doing what you have to do. There's nothing immoral or cruel about eating animals."

The Ass thinks to himself: "Now I've got you. You're a minority group member who has abandoned his own convictions to placate the majority group. You were willing to lie just to avoid persecution, and now I can twist in the knife and make you dance around to avoid labeling all of us as the perpetrators of cruelty. MUAHAHAHA"

Ass: "But I thought you said you think it's not nice to eat animals... doesn't that mean you think we're not nice?"

Good Vegetarian: "Well that's not really what I meant... I just mean not killing animals is a personal choice that is not nice for me to do. But when you kill animals it is nice..."

<blah blah blah>

I've seen both of these conversations play out a million times.

The ass in this situation is the guy named "Ass", not the vegetarian who is being interrogated, not the vegetarian who is being singled-out, isolated, picked on because of his moral beliefs.