Is Meat-Eating Merely a Lifestyle?

Is Meat-Eating Merely a Lifestyle?

I ask, because it seems that this is how people approach it, including, most painfully, people who consider themselves to be political activists and vegetarians or vegans for moral reasons. But before I begin, let me clarify a few points.

First, by “lifestyle” I mean a choice of how one lives one’s life such that not much morally is at stake—such that one’s choices affect mainly and directly oneself, not others. (For those who have a more expansive notion of the moral, one that includes how the choices affect the person him or herself, I say, “I hear you, but grant me the point for the sake of this blog.”) So the choice of which style of clothing one wears is a mere lifestyle, whereas the choice of working as an assassin for hire is not. Actually, examples of mere lifestyles are very hard to come by. Consider: all three of the following heavily involve moral aspects: my choice (as a man) to wear women’s attire, to wear clothes made in sweatshops, or to wear T-shirts carrying political slogans; the first and third make political statements (even if I, in a clueless manner, did not intend them to), and the second benefits from a form of labor exploitation. Indeed, for any lifestyle we can think of (except perhaps for those involving basic tastes in colors and shapes), it is easy to make a moral connection to it, especially in a time of environmental degradation and massive global inequalities.

Still, and going by the general way we often think, we do distinguish between ways of living that are primarily within the jurisdiction of the person who lives them, and ways of living that go beyond that (even if this, per the above paragraph, the distinction cannot withstand heavy scrutiny). The former is what I call a “mere lifestyle.”

Second, I assume that animals can feel pain and thus suffer when they experience the pain (this is a “duh” assumption for all but few people and those philosophers who have argued that there is a difference between feeling pain and suffering because of the pain); I assume that what goes on in factory farming—the source of most of the meat that we consume—involves much suffering for the animals and therefore gives us a strong (but possibly defeasible) reason to not partake in it (by, say, not enjoying the taste of meat produced in these “farms”); finally, I assume, not more controversially but certainly more surprisingly to many—that we also have a strong reason to not eat the meat of animals raised under good conditions and then “humanely” killed, because killing an animal causes its death and death is a harm to the animal, much like death is a harm to human beings (I mean to those who die, not just to those who lose them to death).

So why do I think that meat-eating is treated as merely a lifestyle?

There are a few reasons. The first is the sheer commonality of it. Most people seem to eat meat thoughtlessly, as if it is the most normal thing to do. It is a habit deeply ingrained in all societies. Even people who know of the wrongs involved in such practices as factory farming, eat meat and do so shamelessly. They post pictures of meat on their Facebook pages, as if no moral taint attaches to this practice. (I often say to people, “If you have to eat meat, do it with your head hung low.”) The worst are those who make it sound as if something is wrong with the vegetarian (“What??? You don’t eat meat??? What is WRONG with you?? I LOVE bacon!” and so forth).

The second is the socially imposed symmetry between the ways to view vegetarianism and meat-eating (the vegetarian options that restaurants, cafeterias, etc. are increasingly offering, attest to this social symmetry): “if vegetarianism is your thing, good for you, and that’s your choice; but mine is eating meat. So everyone is happy!”

The third reason is the little regard that people give to animals whose meat they consume. In addition to the above points, consider that in meetings for social justice activists, meat is often served. Rebellions against what is considered outdated religious practices often come at the expense of animals (e.g., protesting the taboo in Hinduism against eating beef by slaughtering cows to make the point). Many philosophers (who ought to know better) eat meat. The point is that even amidst what we would normally consider to be the height of political and moral awareness, eating meat is quite common. This indicates that animals are so far down on our moral ladder that eating them is considered to be a mere lifestyle.

This brings me to the fourth and most galling reason, which is the silence of people, including of course vegetarians and vegans themselves (myself included, so I plead guilty), who say nothing to people who order meat at restaurants or whose shopping carts are full of meat. Of course, we do not want to come across as lunatics by confronting strangers about their purchasing habits, but, really, under other circumstances we would say something. If you came across someone who has just bought a sofa made out of the skin of dead people, or worse, the skin of dead people killed in a genocide, we would protest by at least saying something. Some people might think it socially awkward to do so, but even they would bite this bullet for the sake of what is moral.

Even more interesting is the silence of friends: many vegetarian and vegan people say nothing to their meat-eating friends, passing over the latter’s choices to eat meat as if it were their choice of what color clothes to wear for work. (I pass over the interesting philosophical question about the possibility of close friendships between people whose moral values do not align with each other’s.) But this is surely not right. This is especially true if part of what friends do is to take moral care of their friends. I wouldn’t want my friends to be in the habit of robbing people blind, of pinching their asses on the streets, or of pimping out their younger siblings, so why would I remain silent when they order or buy meat? If their moral well-being is my concern, as it should be, I ought to say something about their meat-eating, though how and when to say it is a matter left to the specific context. The same applies to any relationship between people a crucial aspect of which is moral care-taking, be it mutual or one-directional.

Really, the practice of eating meat is morally indefensible; there is absolutely no (general) plausible moral reason for eating meat (and some of the defenses are downright ridiculous: “Animals kill and eat each other!” or “Animals are dumb”; or “But they taste so good!”; or “The animal is dead already!”; or “I have enough to worry about, so fuck off”; or, my favorite, “I was a vegetarian for ten years, so I feel like I’ve done my time, if you know what I mean”).

No. Meat-eating is not a mere lifestyle. It is a terrible moral practice that contributes to the misery of animals and corrodes our moral souls. We should speak up whenever we see others partaking in it. Those “obnoxious” vegetarians and vegans who reprimand us for eating meat, it turns out, are doing the right thing.

Or am I missing something?