What do you think?
Rate this book
Eating Animals
Jonathan Safran Foer spent much of his life oscillating between enthusiastic carnivore and occasional vegetarian. Once he started a family, the moral dimensions of food became increasingly important.
Faced with the prospect of being unable to explain why we eat some animals and not others, Foer set out to explore the origins of many eating traditions and the fictions involved with creating them. Traveling to the darkest corners of our dining habits, Foer raises the unspoken question behind every fish we eat, every chicken we fry, and every burger we grill.
Part memoir and part investigative report, Eating Animals is a book that, in the words of the Los Angeles Times, places Jonathan Safran Foer "at the table with our greatest philosophers."
Faced with the prospect of being unable to explain why we eat some animals and not others, Foer set out to explore the origins of many eating traditions and the fictions involved with creating them. Traveling to the darkest corners of our dining habits, Foer raises the unspoken question behind every fish we eat, every chicken we fry, and every burger we grill.
Part memoir and part investigative report, Eating Animals is a book that, in the words of the Los Angeles Times, places Jonathan Safran Foer "at the table with our greatest philosophers."
341 pages, Hardcover
First published October 31, 2009
About the author
Jonathan Safran Foer
64 books14.2k followersJonathan Safran Foer is the author of two bestselling, award-winning novels, Everything Is Illuminated and Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, and a bestselling work of nonfiction, Eating Animals. He lives in Brooklyn, New York.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 7,829 reviews
January 15, 2014
This isn't as much of a review of Jonathan Safran Foer's latest book as it is a reaction to it--a reaction to the reactions of others, even. The title of this book garners a reaction from people who haven't read it and who may never read it. Just carry Eating Animals around for a few days and you'll understand. There's an assumption that a book about eating animals is going to tell you that it is in some way wrong to eat animals--whether for the welfare of animals or for your own welfare--and most people "don't want to hear it." We know something is wrong with meat today--with how completely estranged we are from the process that turns animal into product. We have that general feeling and we don't want the specifics. We don't want to face being held accountable for what we know. We don't want to think about eating animals. Why not? If there's no shame in it, then why is there such an aversion created by the title alone?
I say "we" because I'm guilty of the same, and it took this book to make me realize it. It took seeing how the people around me wanted nothing to do with a book that might challenge their eating habits. Allow me to explain with a little bit of backstory here, which is irrelevant to the book itself, but entirely relevant to my reading of the book:
I've been a vegetarian for close to five years. I've had a moral qualm about eating animals since I first made the connection between the meat on my plate and the animals in my backyard. (I grew up on a farm. There were cows and they had much happier lives than most do these days, though I never saw what end they met once my parents sold them.) Why then did I only become vegetarian at the age of eighteen? (I mean, obviously, I pieced together that burgers were made from cows long before then; I wasn't that slow of a child.) My various attempts to give up meat failed. I'm not sure why. The obvious answer would be that I had weak willpower, but I think that's a cop out. When vegetarianism did stick, I didn't feel any more self-empowered. In fact, the attempt that succeeded started as a fluke. I had no intention of seeing it through. I found out about PETA's 30-day challenge and I was curious. "I can abstain from eating animals for a month," I reasoned. When the month was over, I didn't want to eat animals anymore. No craving for meat was strong enough to compensate for the amount of suffering inflicted on animals. (What can I say? I'm a bleeding heart, a pussy, whatever.)
I surrounded myself with literature and images of slaughterhouses long enough to fend off the desire for flesh. The desire disappeared and I felt better. I felt better because I was eating better (fresh fruit and veggies was a vast improvement over my childhood diet of Hardees and Mountain Dew). I felt better once the nagging guilt the conflict between my beliefs and my actions caused was no longer. Or so I thought.
The truth is that over the years I became lax in my beliefs. Not eating animals became more habit and preference than moral conviction. People wore down my enthusiasm. Oh, the enthusiasm was there to begin with! There's nothing more exciting and refreshing than newfound vegetarianism! I felt better and I wanted other people to feel better, too. I thought I could help initiate that. I thought that I could lead by example--I wouldn't push my opinions down anyone's throat, of course, because I didn't want to be uppity about it. It doesn't work that way, or at least it didn't for me in rural North Carolina--in the county supporting the largest Smithfield slaughterhouse in the world, to be exact. People were interested, but only for the sake of arguing. Foer obviously experienced the same, writing:
"I can't count the times that upon telling someone I am vegetarian, he or she responded by pointing out an inconsistency in my lifestyle or trying to find a flaw in an argument I never made. (I have often felt that my vegetarianism matters more to such people than it does to me.)"
There's only so much antagonistic query I was equipped to handle at the age of eighteen. To be perfectly blunt, I stopped giving a fuck. I decided to be a vegetarian, not explain my reasons to others, and to stop giving a fuck what others thought about it. When someone asked me why I didn't eat meat, my responses ranged from "I don't like being overwhelmed by choices" to "I was raped by a butcher." When you stop giving a fuck, then people generally stop harassing you. These people aren't that clever to begin with, so they usually don't bother if they have to compete with another's nonchalance.
My initial reason for not considering becoming vegan was the difficulty. I felt it was a big enough change to quit cold turkey cold turkey. Yeah, I know, there's no excuse for my sense of humor. Over the years I should have made the necessary steps to eliminate eggs and dairy from my diet. I have no excuse for that either. I knew neither were essential to my nutrition or well being--that it was just a matter of putting forth more effort. In the back of my mind I knew, too, that my inaction was supporting animal cruelty towards laying hens, as well as indirectly promoting the veal industry. That nagging guilt was still there, but I pushed it aside.
I realized this past week that I can no longer do this. It is no longer acceptable. In fact, it never was. Nothing changed.
I was hardly beginning the book when I started to suspect that I was on the brink of a life-altering decision. Was Foer so persuasive that he alone managed to turn me vegan within the first few chapters? No. It wasn't even the news that Natalie Portman turned vegan after reading Eating Animals, either. ;)
It was my boyfriend telling me that he "didn't want to hear it" when I mentioned that piglets on factory farms have their testicles removed without anesthesia within the first ten days of their lives.*
It was the moment when my literature teacher asked me if Eating Animals contains information so disturbing and disgusting that she would probably never want to eat meat again; and then without pausing for a reply, she said, "I'd better not read it then."
It was this general reaction I received coinciding with what I read that made me re-examine my own unwillingness to live by what I know--something I've known without needing to be told, but something I needed to be reminded of: shame. I am ashamed to be part of a system that is inexcusable.
"Not responding is a response--we are equally responsible for what we don't do. In the case of animal slaughter, to throw your hands in the air is to wrap your fingers around a knife handle."
What does all of this say about the book? Not much. Just read it. Throw your assumptions away, quit looking for someone else to tell you what to expect, and just read with an open mind, and a willingness not only to accept what feels right, but to take the actions necessary so that you may be at peace with yourself.
* In defense of my boyfriend--although no defense is necessary--since the conversation mentioned took place, he has agreed to read Eating Animals. Ideally, he'll read it and never eat another bite of meat again; just as ideally, when I handed my copy of the book to my mother a few hours ago and asked her to please do me a favor and read it, she would have done so in earnest, in an attempt to understand her daughter's lifestyle, instead of putting it down after a few pages and resuming her crossword puzzle, which although not ideal, was what actually happened. I can't allow myself to expect much to come of it, because there's enough disappointment in life as it is, but I am grateful for this much: that he cares enough about me to read what he would otherwise rather turn away from.
Written 11/12/09.
Update (7/6/11): He never read it. We broke up, for reasons unrelated to diet. But if you know any cute, single, straight, literate, vegan boys, send 'em my way. If they do, in fact, exist.
Update again (5/2/13):
I'm a feminist now, so I apologize for the derogatory use of the word "pussy" within the original review. If there were any point to it, I'd also amend the previous update to exclude the word "straight" and change "boys" to "men" (not the band) because it's creepy when grown men want girls, so vice versa? There's no point though, because I'm not looking. I'm no longer single.
We're dating again. Everyone advises against dating an ex, but everyone can go fuck themselves. I'd like to think compassion is about second chances. For whatever more-complicated-than-that reasons, I've decided to give it a second go. He recently read the book. Kudos, right? Everything in its own time, or something. He's been vegetarian since, but I announce that tentatively, because obviously, things change: you can see that in just the span of updates to this not-a-review review. I'm happy right now. I'm hopeful. I finally realized I can't change the people I love. I can't shake them until they see what I see if they don't want to look, but I can tell my truth and maybe, just maybe, it will reach someone willing to take off the blinders.
11/15/13: Another update! But you'll have to scroll through my blog post if you want it bad enough: http://averagelookingvegan.wordpress....
I say "we" because I'm guilty of the same, and it took this book to make me realize it. It took seeing how the people around me wanted nothing to do with a book that might challenge their eating habits. Allow me to explain with a little bit of backstory here, which is irrelevant to the book itself, but entirely relevant to my reading of the book:
I've been a vegetarian for close to five years. I've had a moral qualm about eating animals since I first made the connection between the meat on my plate and the animals in my backyard. (I grew up on a farm. There were cows and they had much happier lives than most do these days, though I never saw what end they met once my parents sold them.) Why then did I only become vegetarian at the age of eighteen? (I mean, obviously, I pieced together that burgers were made from cows long before then; I wasn't that slow of a child.) My various attempts to give up meat failed. I'm not sure why. The obvious answer would be that I had weak willpower, but I think that's a cop out. When vegetarianism did stick, I didn't feel any more self-empowered. In fact, the attempt that succeeded started as a fluke. I had no intention of seeing it through. I found out about PETA's 30-day challenge and I was curious. "I can abstain from eating animals for a month," I reasoned. When the month was over, I didn't want to eat animals anymore. No craving for meat was strong enough to compensate for the amount of suffering inflicted on animals. (What can I say? I'm a bleeding heart, a pussy, whatever.)
I surrounded myself with literature and images of slaughterhouses long enough to fend off the desire for flesh. The desire disappeared and I felt better. I felt better because I was eating better (fresh fruit and veggies was a vast improvement over my childhood diet of Hardees and Mountain Dew). I felt better once the nagging guilt the conflict between my beliefs and my actions caused was no longer. Or so I thought.
The truth is that over the years I became lax in my beliefs. Not eating animals became more habit and preference than moral conviction. People wore down my enthusiasm. Oh, the enthusiasm was there to begin with! There's nothing more exciting and refreshing than newfound vegetarianism! I felt better and I wanted other people to feel better, too. I thought I could help initiate that. I thought that I could lead by example--I wouldn't push my opinions down anyone's throat, of course, because I didn't want to be uppity about it. It doesn't work that way, or at least it didn't for me in rural North Carolina--in the county supporting the largest Smithfield slaughterhouse in the world, to be exact. People were interested, but only for the sake of arguing. Foer obviously experienced the same, writing:
"I can't count the times that upon telling someone I am vegetarian, he or she responded by pointing out an inconsistency in my lifestyle or trying to find a flaw in an argument I never made. (I have often felt that my vegetarianism matters more to such people than it does to me.)"
There's only so much antagonistic query I was equipped to handle at the age of eighteen. To be perfectly blunt, I stopped giving a fuck. I decided to be a vegetarian, not explain my reasons to others, and to stop giving a fuck what others thought about it. When someone asked me why I didn't eat meat, my responses ranged from "I don't like being overwhelmed by choices" to "I was raped by a butcher." When you stop giving a fuck, then people generally stop harassing you. These people aren't that clever to begin with, so they usually don't bother if they have to compete with another's nonchalance.
My initial reason for not considering becoming vegan was the difficulty. I felt it was a big enough change to quit cold turkey cold turkey. Yeah, I know, there's no excuse for my sense of humor. Over the years I should have made the necessary steps to eliminate eggs and dairy from my diet. I have no excuse for that either. I knew neither were essential to my nutrition or well being--that it was just a matter of putting forth more effort. In the back of my mind I knew, too, that my inaction was supporting animal cruelty towards laying hens, as well as indirectly promoting the veal industry. That nagging guilt was still there, but I pushed it aside.
I realized this past week that I can no longer do this. It is no longer acceptable. In fact, it never was. Nothing changed.
I was hardly beginning the book when I started to suspect that I was on the brink of a life-altering decision. Was Foer so persuasive that he alone managed to turn me vegan within the first few chapters? No. It wasn't even the news that Natalie Portman turned vegan after reading Eating Animals, either. ;)
It was my boyfriend telling me that he "didn't want to hear it" when I mentioned that piglets on factory farms have their testicles removed without anesthesia within the first ten days of their lives.*
It was the moment when my literature teacher asked me if Eating Animals contains information so disturbing and disgusting that she would probably never want to eat meat again; and then without pausing for a reply, she said, "I'd better not read it then."
It was this general reaction I received coinciding with what I read that made me re-examine my own unwillingness to live by what I know--something I've known without needing to be told, but something I needed to be reminded of: shame. I am ashamed to be part of a system that is inexcusable.
"Not responding is a response--we are equally responsible for what we don't do. In the case of animal slaughter, to throw your hands in the air is to wrap your fingers around a knife handle."
What does all of this say about the book? Not much. Just read it. Throw your assumptions away, quit looking for someone else to tell you what to expect, and just read with an open mind, and a willingness not only to accept what feels right, but to take the actions necessary so that you may be at peace with yourself.
* In defense of my boyfriend--although no defense is necessary--since the conversation mentioned took place, he has agreed to read Eating Animals. Ideally, he'll read it and never eat another bite of meat again; just as ideally, when I handed my copy of the book to my mother a few hours ago and asked her to please do me a favor and read it, she would have done so in earnest, in an attempt to understand her daughter's lifestyle, instead of putting it down after a few pages and resuming her crossword puzzle, which although not ideal, was what actually happened. I can't allow myself to expect much to come of it, because there's enough disappointment in life as it is, but I am grateful for this much: that he cares enough about me to read what he would otherwise rather turn away from.
Written 11/12/09.
Update (7/6/11): He never read it. We broke up, for reasons unrelated to diet. But if you know any cute, single, straight, literate, vegan boys, send 'em my way. If they do, in fact, exist.
Update again (5/2/13):
I'm a feminist now, so I apologize for the derogatory use of the word "pussy" within the original review. If there were any point to it, I'd also amend the previous update to exclude the word "straight" and change "boys" to "men" (not the band) because it's creepy when grown men want girls, so vice versa? There's no point though, because I'm not looking. I'm no longer single.
We're dating again. Everyone advises against dating an ex, but everyone can go fuck themselves. I'd like to think compassion is about second chances. For whatever more-complicated-than-that reasons, I've decided to give it a second go. He recently read the book. Kudos, right? Everything in its own time, or something. He's been vegetarian since, but I announce that tentatively, because obviously, things change: you can see that in just the span of updates to this not-a-review review. I'm happy right now. I'm hopeful. I finally realized I can't change the people I love. I can't shake them until they see what I see if they don't want to look, but I can tell my truth and maybe, just maybe, it will reach someone willing to take off the blinders.
11/15/13: Another update! But you'll have to scroll through my blog post if you want it bad enough: http://averagelookingvegan.wordpress....
August 22, 2020
EVERYONE should read this book. I don't think I've ever read something so important.
Starting from a neutral standpoint on the matter, Safran Foer answers the question of whether he and his family should eat meat. Approaching the subject as a journalist, he includes interviews with family-run farms, activists and slaughterhouse workers. He includes different perspectives and arguments (which is great!) but ultimately exposes an underground network which is shocking.
I knew the situation was bad, but I didn't know how bad.
Education is always important -- and this book is education of the highest form. I would encourage you to read this so that you can make informed decisions.
Starting from a neutral standpoint on the matter, Safran Foer answers the question of whether he and his family should eat meat. Approaching the subject as a journalist, he includes interviews with family-run farms, activists and slaughterhouse workers. He includes different perspectives and arguments (which is great!) but ultimately exposes an underground network which is shocking.
I knew the situation was bad, but I didn't know how bad.
Education is always important -- and this book is education of the highest form. I would encourage you to read this so that you can make informed decisions.
November 14, 2021
Enjoying a good meal sounds so much better than livelong torturing and killing when fat enough.
Please note that parts of this review are unusually short, collected speech notes. Could be offending to some bigoted unknowing victims of cognitive bias too. Go look a pig, chicken, or cow in the eye while eating your freaking bacon, chicken nuggets, or steak.
The adverse effects are not limited to martyred animals and sick consumers, because before that is the exploitation and destruction of vast areas of land for animal feed and environmental damage. The contributions to global warming are manifold. The destroyed forests can no longer fulfill their task in the climate cycle. The methane emissions of livestock are considerable. Transport over the oceans causes immense CO2 emissions. The logistics, industrial processing, distribution, and operation of the meat departments in the retail chains cost tens of billions.
The agony of the animals. Be it the mercifully selected male chicks killed just after hatching, which are unsuitable for laying batteries. The castration of the piglets without anesthesia soon after birth. The narrowness. The cannibalism among the animals. Turkeys can no longer walk properly and permanently tilt forward because they are bred for maximum meat yield. The feces in multi-level laying batteries rain down. Calves are immobilized by being tied down to give the meat the desired consistency. Darning geese are forcibly fed with corn under high pressure. The beak tips of the chickens are cut off so that they do not pick each other in the narrowest space. One needs tons of medication and antibiotics, because the animals hurt each other and get wounds from the sharp and hard environment. Sweeteners, flavor enhancers, hormones, and all kinds of other chemicals are mixed into the feed to increase efficiency. One has to keep in mind that everything is subordinated to the increase in profits. If one cubic centimeter of stable space can be saved or the lining can be pimped with some chemicals, that will be done too.
Once the meat has been consumed for decades, the health costs for the community are added, just as with other, pathogenic habits such as sugar addiction, smoking, and various other substances. The ensuing incapacity to work, early retirement, disability, and long-suffering go at the expense of the general public and the relatives of the incorrigible carnivores.
It´s challenging to estimate whether antibiotic resistance or the plunge of zoonosis is more dangerous. The areas around industrial livestock farms are highly hazardous for health because contamination cannot be avoided. Either via the water or the contaminated dust, germs get into the environment. Moreover, as in hospitals, the messengers of the post-antibiotic age slumber here. If a pathogen manages to make the transition to humans in such large farms, it has resistance against most conventional defensive measures up its sleeves. As already demonstrated with swine flu and bird flu, not much is missing to compose the perfect disaster. It´s only a matter of time. And as long as the pharmaceutical companies shy away from the costly development of new antibiotics, as long as the old ones still work reasonably well, no savior can be expected.
It looks bigoted and mentally ill. In one country, the animals are eaten and in another used as a substitute for social contacts and treated as friends. While no expenses are spared for the pets, the purchaser of meat in the supermarket just looks at the price. Then it doesn´t matter how it came to this bargain. Expensive beef? An impudence! Cat food for a higher rate than human food? No problem. Which increases the pressure on the meat producers to still produce cheaper at the expense of the animals.
In one state or culture, pet owners sit with their favorite pets and eat different animals together. In other countries, the relationship is reversed. No, not that the animals eat humans.
Feeding the domestic pig with cat and dog in aspic with pasta in a tomato sauce seems bizarre. However, there is no difference and, strangely enough, such a comparison causes more protest than the fact that meat consumption is a deviancy of epic proportions. People feel personally attacked when confronted, as if the use of corpses is a defensive pillar of their existence. They can´t do anything with the idea of associating something profoundly wrong and contrary to their behavior.
Imagining that the euthanized dogs and cats are mixed into the feed for the vegetarian farm animals, which appears consistently bipolar, is unbelievable too. As if those responsible had learned nothing from the problem of feeding meat and bone meal around BSE and didn´t conclude. The pets are raised to the level of humans, the livestock is degraded to objects, and meat consumption is considered legitimate. However, eat a canary or puppy, or kitten? That is, of course, perverted or even criminal!
Alternatively, suppose one would buy headless torsos from dogs and cats in supermarkets. So once a year everyone buys a considerable dog, and everyone sits together and has a good time, partying and laughing, let´s call it Thanksslaughtering or something. Or one spears the carcass on a suckling pig grill and lets it spin automatically. Alternatively, make the children argue about who is allowed to turn the meat. Or a kitten grill in which dozens of kittens rotate in circles in different cooking stages. In the restaurant: "Saint Bernhard English, raw, medium, done or well done, sir?"
Not even a sausage will be eaten if one associates it with meow and wuff, let alone a whole animal. Why does the mere thought of such possibilities make one irritated, while the same cruelty to other animals is taken for granted, unavoidable, Flying Spaghetti Monster given, and systemic? Because it has always been that way, because one is so used to it because Grandpa still had one set up the battle shot apparatus and then you ate delicious pork together and went for a walk in the park?
It is "nice" together as a family, as a childhood memory, to eat a dead animal. Festivals all over the world revolve around it, are impossible without it. See the public and religious holidays practiced in every culture related to grazing animals. Sometimes the slaughter itself is integrated into the ceremonies and rituals. Everyone is looking forward to it for days, it´s sentimentally and nostalgically transfigured. As if people needed a corpse in their midst for the confirmation of their sense of family, which had previously been adequately tortured for a lifetime to affirm their sympathy. Everything is highly ritualized from shopping for food to cooking together with the children. The expectant time until the exceptional food is finally ready. Many adults probably have had one too many and play even more cheerful with the kids. There are gifts. It´s altogether very nice and one wants to do it with own kids later in life too.
Given the minimal animal suffering associated with organic free-range farming and sustainable farming, the question of the absolute benefits of vegetarian nutrition and the vegetarian movement arises. An unrestricted yes in contrast to products from animal factories and with animal suffering. However, what is with exemplary farms that preserve cultural landscapes, practice biological pest control, can be visited by children and school classes, act as graces farms for animals and inspire people? Which are strictly checked for compliance with all production processes? In such cases, giving up on their dairy and eggs harms more than a purely vegan diet would help. Also, why should vegetarians be ashamed of consuming such products if they are extremely low on animal suffering?
Indeed the goal is to exploit no animal at all. Only as a society as a whole develops slowly, for example, from theocracy to dictatorship, monarchy, to militaristic theocracy to fascist dictatorship to social, democratic market economy to neoliberal nightmare, etc., so a change of diet can be made only in the long term. It´s too radical and for many also dissuasive and expensive (organic) to renounce all animal products. Vegetarianism is a useful intermediate on the way to a broad acceptance of veganism. Only until that happens aggressive advertising for new vegans can be counterproductive and could scare people off, arouse in them the fear of being stigmatized by their carnivore friends too.
The author goes through a transformation in the course of the book. Like any average citizen, he has never known the actual dimensions of the problem before, just as the reader who remains baffled after reading. One has eaten meat all her/his life. It tasted good. And now it has got a dark aura associated with environmental destruction, animal factories, industrial agriculture, and immeasurable suffering at every step of the production chain. It literally stinks, and it seems to be surrounded by dark streaks, the associations are no longer sufficiently positive. The symbols of advertisements have got cracks with blood floating from in between.
And sure, the easy way is always the pleasant, joyful one. Procrastination against diligence. Sitting instead of exercising. Passively consuming rather than actively shaping. Eat meat instead of consuming vegetarian food. Lazy evil is strong in us. It is extremely unpleasant, and it begins to tingle in the neck when dealing with such issues. One doesn´t want to have that feeling, preferably displaces it. The fact that we are physiologically composed of this suffering meat, that we are what we eat, is better ignored.
It is easier, as always, to point the finger at minorities. Oddly enough, discriminating against someone because of their gender, skin color, or sexual orientation is just illegitimate. To bask against vegetarians and vegans, on the other hand, is instead a trivial offense. The stigma of militant teachers, do-gooders, and spoilsports is anyway not too politically incorrect.
It´s much easier to slander them in this way rather than critically reflecting on their diet. This goes in part so far that they have to justify their children's nutrition and the child's welfare is doubted. While fast-food-consuming people don´t have the slightest need for explanation, supporters of a sustainable way of life must expect a visit from the social welfare office.
So many industries depend on it, so much advertising, so many powerful corporations. Almost everyone is involved. It´s a bit like with oil, media cartels, all monopolies past present, and future. If all people became allergic to meat overnight, the animals and the planet would be helped. The stock markets would collapse.
None of the profiteers would allow such a development. It seems more likely that widespread acceptance and, above all, a dominance of animal-free products will result in a PR advertising and marketing war. A triumphal procession of meatless nutrition would be their downfall, and therefore they have nothing to lose. However, probably the producers of artificial meat will destroy the previous top dogs, while they are still busy discrediting exemplary people.
The future sees many positive alternatives to meat consumption. For example, by cloning small amounts from animal donors who do not suffer for it. Alternatively, eat artificially produced meat that works without any animal components. It can also incorporate positive health effects, be individually adapted to the nutritional needs of different groups of people. Ultimately, the mass application and the ever-cheaper technology will make the difference. People will not stop eating flesh because of remorse, instead, the meat will be artificially produced. Also, because this is cheaper than conventional animal breeding, it will disappear. Perhaps at most as a deluxe segment for snobs, it will lead a shadowy existence.
Until that happens, the decisive factor will be the readiness of the population to change. If no renunciation, then at least a reduction. So that meat, as in earlier generations, again becomes an unusual and rare food and from that grows a more responsible consciousness. That, at least, like the indigenous people living in harmony with nature, they pay respect to the dead animal. For being able to continue living thanks to its death.
Moreover, if one's health, as well as ethics and morality, do not affect one, then perhaps the future of one's children and grandchildren do. With unreflective, excessive consumption one cannibalizes these too. The occupation of the meat mincer is not in vain defined as detrimental to enlightenment in Asian cultures. Because she/he works with death. Because interpreted metaphysically, one takes in parts of the souls of the martyred creatures. Whether they continue to scream, become part of one? And one day, after decades of consumption, large parts of one are made of such elements of torment, suffering, and misery?
A wiki walk can be as refreshing to the mind as a walk through nature in this completely overrated real life outside books:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intensi...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environ....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor...
Please note that parts of this review are unusually short, collected speech notes. Could be offending to some bigoted unknowing victims of cognitive bias too. Go look a pig, chicken, or cow in the eye while eating your freaking bacon, chicken nuggets, or steak.
The adverse effects are not limited to martyred animals and sick consumers, because before that is the exploitation and destruction of vast areas of land for animal feed and environmental damage. The contributions to global warming are manifold. The destroyed forests can no longer fulfill their task in the climate cycle. The methane emissions of livestock are considerable. Transport over the oceans causes immense CO2 emissions. The logistics, industrial processing, distribution, and operation of the meat departments in the retail chains cost tens of billions.
The agony of the animals. Be it the mercifully selected male chicks killed just after hatching, which are unsuitable for laying batteries. The castration of the piglets without anesthesia soon after birth. The narrowness. The cannibalism among the animals. Turkeys can no longer walk properly and permanently tilt forward because they are bred for maximum meat yield. The feces in multi-level laying batteries rain down. Calves are immobilized by being tied down to give the meat the desired consistency. Darning geese are forcibly fed with corn under high pressure. The beak tips of the chickens are cut off so that they do not pick each other in the narrowest space. One needs tons of medication and antibiotics, because the animals hurt each other and get wounds from the sharp and hard environment. Sweeteners, flavor enhancers, hormones, and all kinds of other chemicals are mixed into the feed to increase efficiency. One has to keep in mind that everything is subordinated to the increase in profits. If one cubic centimeter of stable space can be saved or the lining can be pimped with some chemicals, that will be done too.
Once the meat has been consumed for decades, the health costs for the community are added, just as with other, pathogenic habits such as sugar addiction, smoking, and various other substances. The ensuing incapacity to work, early retirement, disability, and long-suffering go at the expense of the general public and the relatives of the incorrigible carnivores.
It´s challenging to estimate whether antibiotic resistance or the plunge of zoonosis is more dangerous. The areas around industrial livestock farms are highly hazardous for health because contamination cannot be avoided. Either via the water or the contaminated dust, germs get into the environment. Moreover, as in hospitals, the messengers of the post-antibiotic age slumber here. If a pathogen manages to make the transition to humans in such large farms, it has resistance against most conventional defensive measures up its sleeves. As already demonstrated with swine flu and bird flu, not much is missing to compose the perfect disaster. It´s only a matter of time. And as long as the pharmaceutical companies shy away from the costly development of new antibiotics, as long as the old ones still work reasonably well, no savior can be expected.
It looks bigoted and mentally ill. In one country, the animals are eaten and in another used as a substitute for social contacts and treated as friends. While no expenses are spared for the pets, the purchaser of meat in the supermarket just looks at the price. Then it doesn´t matter how it came to this bargain. Expensive beef? An impudence! Cat food for a higher rate than human food? No problem. Which increases the pressure on the meat producers to still produce cheaper at the expense of the animals.
In one state or culture, pet owners sit with their favorite pets and eat different animals together. In other countries, the relationship is reversed. No, not that the animals eat humans.
Feeding the domestic pig with cat and dog in aspic with pasta in a tomato sauce seems bizarre. However, there is no difference and, strangely enough, such a comparison causes more protest than the fact that meat consumption is a deviancy of epic proportions. People feel personally attacked when confronted, as if the use of corpses is a defensive pillar of their existence. They can´t do anything with the idea of associating something profoundly wrong and contrary to their behavior.
Imagining that the euthanized dogs and cats are mixed into the feed for the vegetarian farm animals, which appears consistently bipolar, is unbelievable too. As if those responsible had learned nothing from the problem of feeding meat and bone meal around BSE and didn´t conclude. The pets are raised to the level of humans, the livestock is degraded to objects, and meat consumption is considered legitimate. However, eat a canary or puppy, or kitten? That is, of course, perverted or even criminal!
Alternatively, suppose one would buy headless torsos from dogs and cats in supermarkets. So once a year everyone buys a considerable dog, and everyone sits together and has a good time, partying and laughing, let´s call it Thanksslaughtering or something. Or one spears the carcass on a suckling pig grill and lets it spin automatically. Alternatively, make the children argue about who is allowed to turn the meat. Or a kitten grill in which dozens of kittens rotate in circles in different cooking stages. In the restaurant: "Saint Bernhard English, raw, medium, done or well done, sir?"
Not even a sausage will be eaten if one associates it with meow and wuff, let alone a whole animal. Why does the mere thought of such possibilities make one irritated, while the same cruelty to other animals is taken for granted, unavoidable, Flying Spaghetti Monster given, and systemic? Because it has always been that way, because one is so used to it because Grandpa still had one set up the battle shot apparatus and then you ate delicious pork together and went for a walk in the park?
It is "nice" together as a family, as a childhood memory, to eat a dead animal. Festivals all over the world revolve around it, are impossible without it. See the public and religious holidays practiced in every culture related to grazing animals. Sometimes the slaughter itself is integrated into the ceremonies and rituals. Everyone is looking forward to it for days, it´s sentimentally and nostalgically transfigured. As if people needed a corpse in their midst for the confirmation of their sense of family, which had previously been adequately tortured for a lifetime to affirm their sympathy. Everything is highly ritualized from shopping for food to cooking together with the children. The expectant time until the exceptional food is finally ready. Many adults probably have had one too many and play even more cheerful with the kids. There are gifts. It´s altogether very nice and one wants to do it with own kids later in life too.
Given the minimal animal suffering associated with organic free-range farming and sustainable farming, the question of the absolute benefits of vegetarian nutrition and the vegetarian movement arises. An unrestricted yes in contrast to products from animal factories and with animal suffering. However, what is with exemplary farms that preserve cultural landscapes, practice biological pest control, can be visited by children and school classes, act as graces farms for animals and inspire people? Which are strictly checked for compliance with all production processes? In such cases, giving up on their dairy and eggs harms more than a purely vegan diet would help. Also, why should vegetarians be ashamed of consuming such products if they are extremely low on animal suffering?
Indeed the goal is to exploit no animal at all. Only as a society as a whole develops slowly, for example, from theocracy to dictatorship, monarchy, to militaristic theocracy to fascist dictatorship to social, democratic market economy to neoliberal nightmare, etc., so a change of diet can be made only in the long term. It´s too radical and for many also dissuasive and expensive (organic) to renounce all animal products. Vegetarianism is a useful intermediate on the way to a broad acceptance of veganism. Only until that happens aggressive advertising for new vegans can be counterproductive and could scare people off, arouse in them the fear of being stigmatized by their carnivore friends too.
The author goes through a transformation in the course of the book. Like any average citizen, he has never known the actual dimensions of the problem before, just as the reader who remains baffled after reading. One has eaten meat all her/his life. It tasted good. And now it has got a dark aura associated with environmental destruction, animal factories, industrial agriculture, and immeasurable suffering at every step of the production chain. It literally stinks, and it seems to be surrounded by dark streaks, the associations are no longer sufficiently positive. The symbols of advertisements have got cracks with blood floating from in between.
And sure, the easy way is always the pleasant, joyful one. Procrastination against diligence. Sitting instead of exercising. Passively consuming rather than actively shaping. Eat meat instead of consuming vegetarian food. Lazy evil is strong in us. It is extremely unpleasant, and it begins to tingle in the neck when dealing with such issues. One doesn´t want to have that feeling, preferably displaces it. The fact that we are physiologically composed of this suffering meat, that we are what we eat, is better ignored.
It is easier, as always, to point the finger at minorities. Oddly enough, discriminating against someone because of their gender, skin color, or sexual orientation is just illegitimate. To bask against vegetarians and vegans, on the other hand, is instead a trivial offense. The stigma of militant teachers, do-gooders, and spoilsports is anyway not too politically incorrect.
It´s much easier to slander them in this way rather than critically reflecting on their diet. This goes in part so far that they have to justify their children's nutrition and the child's welfare is doubted. While fast-food-consuming people don´t have the slightest need for explanation, supporters of a sustainable way of life must expect a visit from the social welfare office.
So many industries depend on it, so much advertising, so many powerful corporations. Almost everyone is involved. It´s a bit like with oil, media cartels, all monopolies past present, and future. If all people became allergic to meat overnight, the animals and the planet would be helped. The stock markets would collapse.
None of the profiteers would allow such a development. It seems more likely that widespread acceptance and, above all, a dominance of animal-free products will result in a PR advertising and marketing war. A triumphal procession of meatless nutrition would be their downfall, and therefore they have nothing to lose. However, probably the producers of artificial meat will destroy the previous top dogs, while they are still busy discrediting exemplary people.
The future sees many positive alternatives to meat consumption. For example, by cloning small amounts from animal donors who do not suffer for it. Alternatively, eat artificially produced meat that works without any animal components. It can also incorporate positive health effects, be individually adapted to the nutritional needs of different groups of people. Ultimately, the mass application and the ever-cheaper technology will make the difference. People will not stop eating flesh because of remorse, instead, the meat will be artificially produced. Also, because this is cheaper than conventional animal breeding, it will disappear. Perhaps at most as a deluxe segment for snobs, it will lead a shadowy existence.
Until that happens, the decisive factor will be the readiness of the population to change. If no renunciation, then at least a reduction. So that meat, as in earlier generations, again becomes an unusual and rare food and from that grows a more responsible consciousness. That, at least, like the indigenous people living in harmony with nature, they pay respect to the dead animal. For being able to continue living thanks to its death.
Moreover, if one's health, as well as ethics and morality, do not affect one, then perhaps the future of one's children and grandchildren do. With unreflective, excessive consumption one cannibalizes these too. The occupation of the meat mincer is not in vain defined as detrimental to enlightenment in Asian cultures. Because she/he works with death. Because interpreted metaphysically, one takes in parts of the souls of the martyred creatures. Whether they continue to scream, become part of one? And one day, after decades of consumption, large parts of one are made of such elements of torment, suffering, and misery?
A wiki walk can be as refreshing to the mind as a walk through nature in this completely overrated real life outside books:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intensi...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environ....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor...
November 6, 2009
I am not a vegetarian. Honestly, I've never even tried to be a vegetarian at any point in my life. I love steak. I love bacon. I love sushi. I could go on, but you get the idea.
With my son not being able to have any sort of gluten or artificial coloring in the food he eats, I've always thought I was doing good by stopping by the actual farmer's stand to get fresh eggs and some fruit & veggies (one benefit of living in a small, hick town) and then picking up my nicely-packaged and already butchered meat from the store. Foer addresses this in the book about how people just don't want to think about how their meat ends up ready for them to purchase, and that's surely the case with me. I have no issues picking up the value-pack of chicken breasts, yet I can't go to Red Lobster anymore since I feel so bad for those damn lobsters on display. I've always assumed operations in a slaughterhouse wouldn't exactly be pleasant, but again, I willingly ignored to really think about what goes on there.
One of the main points Foer brings up in this is factory-farming. Corporations have taken over the aspect of farming, and of course done everything they can think of just to make it as profitable as possible. The majority of all meat in this country comes from this type of farming now, and there is only a very small percentage of actual farmers left. How these animals are treated throughout their short lives in these factory-farms is sickening. I don't think anyone who reads this book will be able to ignore these issues anymore. I know I'm not able to. This book really opened my eyes not only to the ethical standpoint of eating animals, but also to the health-related issues. The conditions at these factory-farms are vile. There is no way I can feed my kids this kind of meat knowing the shit (yes, actual shit) it's been through.
JSF's writing throughout this is never preachy or whiny; he just presents the facts and wants the reader to make his/her own choice on the matter. He talks with ranchers who are still trying as best they can to hold onto the old way of farming, members of PETA, and vegans who are trying to construct more humane slaughterhouses. The book never felt one-sided or that it was attacking people who eat meat. It did inspire me to make a drastic change though, and I think anyone who reads this would feel the same.
With my son not being able to have any sort of gluten or artificial coloring in the food he eats, I've always thought I was doing good by stopping by the actual farmer's stand to get fresh eggs and some fruit & veggies (one benefit of living in a small, hick town) and then picking up my nicely-packaged and already butchered meat from the store. Foer addresses this in the book about how people just don't want to think about how their meat ends up ready for them to purchase, and that's surely the case with me. I have no issues picking up the value-pack of chicken breasts, yet I can't go to Red Lobster anymore since I feel so bad for those damn lobsters on display. I've always assumed operations in a slaughterhouse wouldn't exactly be pleasant, but again, I willingly ignored to really think about what goes on there.
One of the main points Foer brings up in this is factory-farming. Corporations have taken over the aspect of farming, and of course done everything they can think of just to make it as profitable as possible. The majority of all meat in this country comes from this type of farming now, and there is only a very small percentage of actual farmers left. How these animals are treated throughout their short lives in these factory-farms is sickening. I don't think anyone who reads this book will be able to ignore these issues anymore. I know I'm not able to. This book really opened my eyes not only to the ethical standpoint of eating animals, but also to the health-related issues. The conditions at these factory-farms are vile. There is no way I can feed my kids this kind of meat knowing the shit (yes, actual shit) it's been through.
JSF's writing throughout this is never preachy or whiny; he just presents the facts and wants the reader to make his/her own choice on the matter. He talks with ranchers who are still trying as best they can to hold onto the old way of farming, members of PETA, and vegans who are trying to construct more humane slaughterhouses. The book never felt one-sided or that it was attacking people who eat meat. It did inspire me to make a drastic change though, and I think anyone who reads this would feel the same.
October 30, 2020
Should we stop eating animals?
To my mind the answer to this question is very plain and very straightforward; it does not require much thought or calculation: the answer is, of course, yes.
We should stop. We should have stopped a long time ago, but it is very difficult for an entire population to break a habit that is centuries in the making. A habit, though, is not justification enough for eating animals. There can be no justification.
Truth is, the animal agriculture industry is the single largest contributor towards climate change. Simply put, our diets are destroying the planet. The amazon rain-forest is being reaped to clear land to grow crops to feed to the animals we harvest for food. A much more sustainable practice would be to eat the crops ourselves; it would be a drastic reduction in the amount of land needed to feed us.
Veganism is the answer to climate change.
So many climate protesters and influencers lobby governments and local councils to take action on what is now being called the climate crisis, but the single biggest action we can take as individuals is to go plant based and to no longer partake in the industries that are ruining our planet. We need to take moral responsibility. We need to stop pointing fingers. We need to wake up. We need to change. And we need to do it right now.
Environmental reasoning is one case this book discusses at length. Ethics and compassion are another. Ethically speaking, killing is morally wrong. We live in a world where there are so many viable alternatives to animal products. If we can avoid causing suffering through our food choices, then we should at every opportunity. Then there is the entire health side of the debate. I am not going to discuss this at length here, but instead point you in the direction of a wonderful book that could change your life How Not to Die.
The most effective element of this book is its openness. It is non-threatening, and it provides succinct discussions on why we should stop eating animals. It wants you to think. It wants you to question. It wants you to consider the ramifications of your choices. And so do I.
___________________________________
You can connect with me on social media via My Linktree
__________________________________
To my mind the answer to this question is very plain and very straightforward; it does not require much thought or calculation: the answer is, of course, yes.
We should stop. We should have stopped a long time ago, but it is very difficult for an entire population to break a habit that is centuries in the making. A habit, though, is not justification enough for eating animals. There can be no justification.
Truth is, the animal agriculture industry is the single largest contributor towards climate change. Simply put, our diets are destroying the planet. The amazon rain-forest is being reaped to clear land to grow crops to feed to the animals we harvest for food. A much more sustainable practice would be to eat the crops ourselves; it would be a drastic reduction in the amount of land needed to feed us.
Veganism is the answer to climate change.
So many climate protesters and influencers lobby governments and local councils to take action on what is now being called the climate crisis, but the single biggest action we can take as individuals is to go plant based and to no longer partake in the industries that are ruining our planet. We need to take moral responsibility. We need to stop pointing fingers. We need to wake up. We need to change. And we need to do it right now.
Environmental reasoning is one case this book discusses at length. Ethics and compassion are another. Ethically speaking, killing is morally wrong. We live in a world where there are so many viable alternatives to animal products. If we can avoid causing suffering through our food choices, then we should at every opportunity. Then there is the entire health side of the debate. I am not going to discuss this at length here, but instead point you in the direction of a wonderful book that could change your life How Not to Die.
The most effective element of this book is its openness. It is non-threatening, and it provides succinct discussions on why we should stop eating animals. It wants you to think. It wants you to question. It wants you to consider the ramifications of your choices. And so do I.
___________________________________
You can connect with me on social media via My Linktree
__________________________________
February 9, 2017
I was torn how to rate this book. It isn’t perfect (I noted many flaws in its comprehensiveness) but it’s amazing enough, so 5 stars it is.
I’ve read so many books such as this but none for a while, and it’s because reading about how humans use animals is so devastating for me. It’s not just the books’ contents, it’s knowing that, at most, only 1% of Americans feel as I do, that my feelings and beliefs are shared by so few (The latest statistics I have are that 3% of Americans are truly vegetarian and 1% are vegan. vegetarian = never any meat, poultry, fish, vegan adds never any dairy, eggs, honey, leather, wool, silk, beeswax, or, as much as is feasible, any product of animal origin) Also disturbing for me is that I know that others will read this book and won’t absorb what it offers but will dissociate, that even more people won’t have the courage or the interest to read it at all. (Oh, I kind of told a lie: The information in here is incredibly disturbing, whether or not you’ve known it. I don’t want to discourage readers from reading this book though, so I’ll say it’s upsetting but hope that people will want to make an informed consent about what they do. I’m hoping that’s the case because I want many, many people to read this book.)
I highly respect Foer. He is thoughtful and philosophical and, maybe most importantly, non-judgmental and empathetic, and he’s very funny and that helps with taking in the disturbing facts. I appreciated how he incorporates his Jewish background into the book, and enjoyed the family stories that he tells. I’m truly puzzled why he doesn’t have better communication with his dog/why he can’t interpret better his dog’s communications, but given that he started off not even liking dogs I guess he’s made great progress in dog-human relationships.
He provides little snippets of information that are so interesting. For instance: Americans choose to eat less than .25% of the known edible food on the planet. I always know I’ll learn a little with every book I read and I learned a lot, especially about some individual animals/cases.
The letter on page 84 is hilarious, if the reader is already aware that the last thing any factory farmer wants is for the public to see their operations. I laughed and laughed at this letter and I’m so grateful it was there because so much of the book’s contents caused me much emotional pain. (When I needed cheering up while reading the book I kept going back and rereading that letter.)
I’m glad he touched on the connection between animal agriculture and the existence of influenza illnesses in humans. It’s one of my perennial rants, and with H1N1 in the news (and scaring me) it’s very topical.
This book – well, it will depend on what the reader brings to it and who the reader is. For me, it’s so obviously a cogent argument for veganism, but it’s like my last stint as a juror. At the end of the case, as the twelve of us were about to go into deliberations, I said to myself, it’s obvious how we should vote, but our first vote when we got into the jury deliberation room was 6 to 6, not so obvious in the same way to everybody, and the deliberations ended up being very stressful. People feel different ways and believe different things. Foer respects that and that’s one reason why I think this book can strike a chord in anyone who reads it.
This book is very well researched, and Foer spent three years in some hands on type research. The book proper including acknowledgements went through page 270, the notes went from pages 271-331 and the index is on pages 333-341, but it reads more like the memoir it partly is; it does not read like a textbook. The writing is engaging and not at all dry.
Well, it’s good to read a book that isn’t preaching to the choir (ethical vegans) because I think more readers will be open to what this author offers. I don’t see how anyone can read this book and not be changed, whether or not they make changes.
Foer has a “beef” with Michael Pollan, as do I, but I have a bit of a “beef” with Foer: it’s his book (and there are many other books out there and they’re all doing a lot of good in my opinion) but I wish he hadn’t provided so much time to give their points of view to the 4 more humane animal farmers and the vegan who was designing a slaughterhouse. It boggles my mind even more, that those who’ve really known these individual animals could kill them, especially when one is vegetarian and one other says he knows it isn’t necessary for humans to eat meat. I have such mixed feelings, but I’m afraid their rationalizations will give permission for readers to act with the status quo. However, only 1% vegan and 3% vegetarian of the American population, the actions these individuals take can make a difference. Never will 100% of Americans go 100% vegan so reducing suffering and having less of a negative impact on the environment - well how can I argue wholeheartedly?, but I felt very uncomfortable reading these parts, although certainly not as uncomfortable reading the factory farming and slaughter parts of the book.
I’ve heard some vegans complain that Foer doesn’t go far enough and the book doesn’t promote veganism, but this book is getting more mainstream attention than most books of its type, and some people say that they are eliminating or reducing the animal products they consume because of this book. So Foer, along with a bunch of others who are my heroes, are putting more and more information out there. It makes a difference. This book will make a difference. Hopefully, many will read this book and then continue and read some of the other many books and other resources out there as well. I’m very happy that this book is getting the attention and readership that it is.
I found it very interesting reading this book in early November because Foer talks about American Thanksgiving in the book.
So, now I feel incredibly sad and very angry (I know anger is a distancing emotion and I don’t want to others to withdraw from me, but I have a lot of compassion for myself right now and I have a reason to feel that way and that’s how I feel) and I definitely need some lighter reading materials, pronto.(Edit: Re the compassion for myself, blah blah: I'm not a new age type person at all and I don't remember ever saying anything like this with regard to myself, but I was very distraught after reading this book.)
Please go read other reviews of this book. Don’t let my distress dissuade you from reading this important book. I can guarantee that if you get even remotely as emotionally involved as I did while reading this book, you’re either already vegan or you’ll be grateful for the information.
I do have a fundamental disagreement with Foer, who seems to think it's okay at some level to use and kill animals if done humanely. I don't feel that way. Maybe because I'm already vegan and knew so much of the information in this book, my favorite parts were when Foer wrote about his (holocaust) survivor grandmother.
I’ve read so many books such as this but none for a while, and it’s because reading about how humans use animals is so devastating for me. It’s not just the books’ contents, it’s knowing that, at most, only 1% of Americans feel as I do, that my feelings and beliefs are shared by so few (The latest statistics I have are that 3% of Americans are truly vegetarian and 1% are vegan. vegetarian = never any meat, poultry, fish, vegan adds never any dairy, eggs, honey, leather, wool, silk, beeswax, or, as much as is feasible, any product of animal origin) Also disturbing for me is that I know that others will read this book and won’t absorb what it offers but will dissociate, that even more people won’t have the courage or the interest to read it at all. (Oh, I kind of told a lie: The information in here is incredibly disturbing, whether or not you’ve known it. I don’t want to discourage readers from reading this book though, so I’ll say it’s upsetting but hope that people will want to make an informed consent about what they do. I’m hoping that’s the case because I want many, many people to read this book.)
I highly respect Foer. He is thoughtful and philosophical and, maybe most importantly, non-judgmental and empathetic, and he’s very funny and that helps with taking in the disturbing facts. I appreciated how he incorporates his Jewish background into the book, and enjoyed the family stories that he tells. I’m truly puzzled why he doesn’t have better communication with his dog/why he can’t interpret better his dog’s communications, but given that he started off not even liking dogs I guess he’s made great progress in dog-human relationships.
He provides little snippets of information that are so interesting. For instance: Americans choose to eat less than .25% of the known edible food on the planet. I always know I’ll learn a little with every book I read and I learned a lot, especially about some individual animals/cases.
The letter on page 84 is hilarious, if the reader is already aware that the last thing any factory farmer wants is for the public to see their operations. I laughed and laughed at this letter and I’m so grateful it was there because so much of the book’s contents caused me much emotional pain. (When I needed cheering up while reading the book I kept going back and rereading that letter.)
I’m glad he touched on the connection between animal agriculture and the existence of influenza illnesses in humans. It’s one of my perennial rants, and with H1N1 in the news (and scaring me) it’s very topical.
This book – well, it will depend on what the reader brings to it and who the reader is. For me, it’s so obviously a cogent argument for veganism, but it’s like my last stint as a juror. At the end of the case, as the twelve of us were about to go into deliberations, I said to myself, it’s obvious how we should vote, but our first vote when we got into the jury deliberation room was 6 to 6, not so obvious in the same way to everybody, and the deliberations ended up being very stressful. People feel different ways and believe different things. Foer respects that and that’s one reason why I think this book can strike a chord in anyone who reads it.
This book is very well researched, and Foer spent three years in some hands on type research. The book proper including acknowledgements went through page 270, the notes went from pages 271-331 and the index is on pages 333-341, but it reads more like the memoir it partly is; it does not read like a textbook. The writing is engaging and not at all dry.
Well, it’s good to read a book that isn’t preaching to the choir (ethical vegans) because I think more readers will be open to what this author offers. I don’t see how anyone can read this book and not be changed, whether or not they make changes.
Foer has a “beef” with Michael Pollan, as do I, but I have a bit of a “beef” with Foer: it’s his book (and there are many other books out there and they’re all doing a lot of good in my opinion) but I wish he hadn’t provided so much time to give their points of view to the 4 more humane animal farmers and the vegan who was designing a slaughterhouse. It boggles my mind even more, that those who’ve really known these individual animals could kill them, especially when one is vegetarian and one other says he knows it isn’t necessary for humans to eat meat. I have such mixed feelings, but I’m afraid their rationalizations will give permission for readers to act with the status quo. However, only 1% vegan and 3% vegetarian of the American population, the actions these individuals take can make a difference. Never will 100% of Americans go 100% vegan so reducing suffering and having less of a negative impact on the environment - well how can I argue wholeheartedly?, but I felt very uncomfortable reading these parts, although certainly not as uncomfortable reading the factory farming and slaughter parts of the book.
I’ve heard some vegans complain that Foer doesn’t go far enough and the book doesn’t promote veganism, but this book is getting more mainstream attention than most books of its type, and some people say that they are eliminating or reducing the animal products they consume because of this book. So Foer, along with a bunch of others who are my heroes, are putting more and more information out there. It makes a difference. This book will make a difference. Hopefully, many will read this book and then continue and read some of the other many books and other resources out there as well. I’m very happy that this book is getting the attention and readership that it is.
I found it very interesting reading this book in early November because Foer talks about American Thanksgiving in the book.
So, now I feel incredibly sad and very angry (I know anger is a distancing emotion and I don’t want to others to withdraw from me, but I have a lot of compassion for myself right now and I have a reason to feel that way and that’s how I feel) and I definitely need some lighter reading materials, pronto.(Edit: Re the compassion for myself, blah blah: I'm not a new age type person at all and I don't remember ever saying anything like this with regard to myself, but I was very distraught after reading this book.)
Please go read other reviews of this book. Don’t let my distress dissuade you from reading this important book. I can guarantee that if you get even remotely as emotionally involved as I did while reading this book, you’re either already vegan or you’ll be grateful for the information.
I do have a fundamental disagreement with Foer, who seems to think it's okay at some level to use and kill animals if done humanely. I don't feel that way. Maybe because I'm already vegan and knew so much of the information in this book, my favorite parts were when Foer wrote about his (holocaust) survivor grandmother.
February 27, 2010
i've long flirted with vegetarianism. for a few months in the early '00s, i even dated her. but i'd never truly wanted to spend all of my time with her, send her flowers, or introduce her to my parents (and everyone i've ever cared about) until i read this book.
foer claims early on that he hasn't set out to write a book about why people should become vegetarians, an argument that holds zero ounces of water once you actually start reading his descriptions of factory farms. i found it impossible to learn about the government-sanctioned degradation of our environment and the systematic (mis)treatment of animals as mere protein, without questioning my own complicit support of the entire system.
i'll save the proselytizing for others. i'll just say that despite its lack of nuance, this book tipped the scale for me. i think i'm going to ask her to go steady.
foer claims early on that he hasn't set out to write a book about why people should become vegetarians, an argument that holds zero ounces of water once you actually start reading his descriptions of factory farms. i found it impossible to learn about the government-sanctioned degradation of our environment and the systematic (mis)treatment of animals as mere protein, without questioning my own complicit support of the entire system.
i'll save the proselytizing for others. i'll just say that despite its lack of nuance, this book tipped the scale for me. i think i'm going to ask her to go steady.
February 24, 2020
واکنش ما به پرورش صنعتی حیوانات، آزمون واکنش ما در برابر ضعفاست، در برابر موجوداتی که از ما دورند و صدایی برای اعتراض ندارند. آزمون واکنش ماست، وقتی کسی مجبورمان به واکنش نکرده است
سوم بهمن 1369 - سوم بهمن 1398
از دوران کودکی تا 29 سالگیام همواره میل شدیدی به خوردن انواع گوشتها داشتهام. ماهی، جوجهی بریان، جوجهی برشته، انواع کبابها، سوسیس و کالباس و در راس تمام اینها، کلهپاچه غذای محبوبم محسوب میشود. هیچگاه خوراک بدون گوشت را وعده غذایی درخور توجهی نمیبینم. میل من به خوردن گوشت از یکسو و احساس گرسنگی مداوم از سویی دیگر در من آنقدر زیاد است که در دوران زندگی دانشجویی توسط دوستان نزدیکم، به گوشتخوار ارم (نام خوابگاهمان) ملقب گشتهام. در طول این دوران، همزمان بخاطر خوردن گوشت و عشق به حیوانات، گهگاه دچار احساسات و افکار پارادوکسیکالی میشوم. در اعماق وجودم میدانم که با خوردن غذاهایی چنین لذیذ، در چه اعمالی شریک شدهام و از سوی دیگر، انسان را سرور و صاحب دیگر موجودات میدانم و با این گمان که پرورش صنعتی حیوانات امری ضروری برای ریشهکنی گرسنگی در جهان محسوب میشود، هرگونه فکر و خیال در باب حیوانخواری را از خود دور کرده و گیاهخواری را امری شخصی اما مهمل میدانم
چهارم بهمن 1398 تا شوم اسفند 1398
حالا بواسطه حضور دوست گیاهخوارم، بهانهای برایم پیدا میشود که به ندای قدیمی درونی گوش سپرده و به کتابهایی که تا پیش از این دربارهی حیوانخواری، رژیمهای غذایی و حقوق حیوانات احتکار کردهام سرک بکشم. بهطور خاص، حیوانخواری، معضل انسان همهچیز خوار، آب پنهان و جلد اول پژوهش چین کتابهایی هستند که تا پیش از این خریده و برای روزی که شاید از راه برسد نگاهداریشان کردهام. کتاب حیوانخواری اولین انتخابم جهت مطالعه متمرکز حول این موضوعست. هنوز تصمیم خاصی نگرفتهام. بخشی از حقایق و فکتها را از قبل میدانم، اما نویسنده حقایق بیشتری را پیش رویم میگذارد، حقایقی که اطلاع از آنها برایم بار اخلاقی دارد. زجری که حیوانات میکشند و تبعات زیستمحیطی دامپروری صنعتی دلایل کافیای هستند که تصمیم بگیرم پس از این، از خوردن هرگونه گوشت امتناع کنم. در زمان به پایان رساندن کتاب، یک ماهی میشود که بجز یک مورد استثناء، از خوردن محصولات گوشتی و دامی مرتبط با کشتار حیوانات پرهیز کردهام. آیا این تصمیمی احساسیست؟ عمل کسی که با بوییدن عطر جوجهکباب، هوس غذا میکند و سریعا میل خود را برآورده میکند بیشتر از روی احساس است یا کسی که با وجود میل به این غذا، به نفع وجدان پا روی هوس میگذارد؟
چهارم اسفند 1398 به بعد
حالا برنامهام این است که مطالعاتم در باب حیونخواری/گیاهخواری را ادامه بدهم. جلد اول و دوم کتاب آب پنهان، جلد اول و دوم کتاب پژوهش چین، آزادی حیوانات، بگذار آشغال بخورند، اقتصاد سیاسی حقوق حیوانات و معضل انسان همهچیزخوار کتابهایی هستند که قصد دارم در این حوزه مطالعه کنم (بدون حفظ ترتیب)
چرا اینها را نوشتهام؟
چرا اینها را اینجا نوشتهام؟ چرا تصمیم شخصی خود مبنی بر تغییر رژیم غذاییام را علنی کردهام؟ نخست به این دلیل که اعمال انسانها به یکدیگر وابسته است. مصرف بیرویه محصولات دامی در گوشهای از جهان، بعلت مصرف چند برابری غلاتی که صرف خوراکِ دامها میشود، به گرسنگی در نقاط دیگر دامن میزند. دوم اینکه دامپروری صنعتی نقض گسترده حقوق حیوانات، آسیبهای غیرقابل جبران زیستمحیطی، خشکسالی، بیابانزایی، قحطی، ایحاد مقاومت پاتوژنها در مقابل آنتیبیوتیکها، شیوع بیماریهای جدید (مثلا آنفولانزای ان 1 اچ 1) را در پی دارد. هدف این صنعت، نه ریشهکن کردن گرسنگی، بلکه به جیب زدن بیشترین سود است. من نه تنها نمیخواهم پولم - هرچند اندک - به سوی این صنعت سرازیر شود و در پیامدهای آن شریک باشم، بلکه میخواهم تا حد توان، با تبلیغات و پروپاگاندای صاحبان این صنایع، که گزارههای دلخواهِ خود را به عنوان فکتهایی علمی و تاریخی به خورد ما دادهاند مقابله کنم. ایجاد تغییر اساسی در این حوزه، تنها منوط به تغییر رژیم غذایی شخصی نیست. باید آگاهی داد، طرفداری کرد و سر و صدا به راه انداخت. ممکن است بسیار سادهلوحانه و احمقانه بنظر برسد که تصور کنیم تصمیم برای انتخاب غذا و خوردن یا نخوردن یک وعده گوشت عمل مهمی محسوب میشود، درست همانطور که احتمالا در دهه پنجاه میلادی، در آمریکا، اگر کسی به شمای سیاهپوست میگفت جایی که در رستوران یا اتوبوس برای نشستن انتخاب میکنید، میتواند در نهایت نژادپرستیِ آشکار دولتی را ریشهکن کند، احمقانه بنظر میرسید
آیا زجر کشیدن حیوانات و جانوارانی که میخوریم مهمترین مسئله جهان امروز است؟
قطعا نه. اما پرسش اصلا این نیست. مسئله این است که آیا زجرکش کردن حیوانات و نابودی محیط زیست از خورشت، کباب و همبرگری که میخوریم مهمتر است یا نه؟ مسئله اینجاست که ما به چه میزان از درد و رنج حیوانات برای آماده شدن غذایمان رضایت میدهیم؟
دربارهی کتاب
ماجرای نگارش این کتاب به زمانی باز میگردد که نویسنده صاحب فرزند شده و تصمیم میگیرد برای آنکه آگاهانه به فرزند خود خوراک دهد، سر از کار شیوه صنعتی تولید گوشت دربیاورد. یافتههای نویسنده با وجود ممانعت صاحبان صنت مذکور، تکاندهنده است. با وجود اینکه کتاب یک اثر پژوهشی/ژورنالیستی محسوب میشود، اما سیر روایی بسیار جذابی دارد. آنان که پیشتر کتاب بینهایت بلند، بهغایت نزدیک جاناتان سفران فوئر را خواندهاند و با مهارت و چیرهدستی نویسنده در داستاننویسی آشنا شدهاند منظورم را کاملا متوجه میشوند. هدف اصلی نویسنده از نگارش این کتاب، در وهله نخست آگاهی رسانی دربارهی تبعات و پیامدهای حیوانخواری است، نه در باب لزوم گیاهخواری و مسائلی از این قبیل
خواندن این کتاب را به چه کسانی پیشنهاد میکنم؟
به همه. بنظر من همه باید این کتاب، یا کتب مشابه را بخوانند، نه با این نیت از پیش تعیین شده که تغییری در رژیم غذایی خود ایجاد کنند، بلکه با این هدف که حداقل بدانند چه چیزی و به چه بهایی میخورند. خاطرم هست که یکی دو هفته پیش، در حالی که برای یکی از همکارانم در مورد شرایط نگهداری مرغهای گوشتی صحبت میکردم، با ناراحتی صحبتم را قطع کرد که"دیگر نمیخواهم چیزی بشنوم." اما چرا؟ مگر بیتوجهی خود نوعی پاسخ نیست؟ مگر انسان در مقابل ��کردههایش به اندازهی کردههایش مسئولیت ندارد؟ اگر مصرف گوشت صنعتی بجز لذتبخش بودن، امری صحیح است، چرا کسی تمایلی به دیدن و اطلاع از آنچه در صنایع غذایی بر سر حیوانات آورده میشود ندارد؟ ما یا به ارزشهایمان خیانت میکنیم یا با آنها زندگی میکنیم؛ متاسفانه مسیری میان این دو برای ما میسر نیست. همانطور که نویسنده هم در کتاب به این موضوع اشاره کرده، هدف از نگارش اینها، کوشش جهت متقاعد کردن دیگران به زندگی با استاندارد و برداشت من از کار صحیح نیست. فقط میخواهم با نمایاندن حقیقت، راضیشان کنم دست کم با باورها و استاندارهای خودشان زندگی کنند.
سوم بهمن 1369 - سوم بهمن 1398
از دوران کودکی تا 29 سالگیام همواره میل شدیدی به خوردن انواع گوشتها داشتهام. ماهی، جوجهی بریان، جوجهی برشته، انواع کبابها، سوسیس و کالباس و در راس تمام اینها، کلهپاچه غذای محبوبم محسوب میشود. هیچگاه خوراک بدون گوشت را وعده غذایی درخور توجهی نمیبینم. میل من به خوردن گوشت از یکسو و احساس گرسنگی مداوم از سویی دیگر در من آنقدر زیاد است که در دوران زندگی دانشجویی توسط دوستان نزدیکم، به گوشتخوار ارم (نام خوابگاهمان) ملقب گشتهام. در طول این دوران، همزمان بخاطر خوردن گوشت و عشق به حیوانات، گهگاه دچار احساسات و افکار پارادوکسیکالی میشوم. در اعماق وجودم میدانم که با خوردن غذاهایی چنین لذیذ، در چه اعمالی شریک شدهام و از سوی دیگر، انسان را سرور و صاحب دیگر موجودات میدانم و با این گمان که پرورش صنعتی حیوانات امری ضروری برای ریشهکنی گرسنگی در جهان محسوب میشود، هرگونه فکر و خیال در باب حیوانخواری را از خود دور کرده و گیاهخواری را امری شخصی اما مهمل میدانم
چهارم بهمن 1398 تا شوم اسفند 1398
حالا بواسطه حضور دوست گیاهخوارم، بهانهای برایم پیدا میشود که به ندای قدیمی درونی گوش سپرده و به کتابهایی که تا پیش از این دربارهی حیوانخواری، رژیمهای غذایی و حقوق حیوانات احتکار کردهام سرک بکشم. بهطور خاص، حیوانخواری، معضل انسان همهچیز خوار، آب پنهان و جلد اول پژوهش چین کتابهایی هستند که تا پیش از این خریده و برای روزی که شاید از راه برسد نگاهداریشان کردهام. کتاب حیوانخواری اولین انتخابم جهت مطالعه متمرکز حول این موضوعست. هنوز تصمیم خاصی نگرفتهام. بخشی از حقایق و فکتها را از قبل میدانم، اما نویسنده حقایق بیشتری را پیش رویم میگذارد، حقایقی که اطلاع از آنها برایم بار اخلاقی دارد. زجری که حیوانات میکشند و تبعات زیستمحیطی دامپروری صنعتی دلایل کافیای هستند که تصمیم بگیرم پس از این، از خوردن هرگونه گوشت امتناع کنم. در زمان به پایان رساندن کتاب، یک ماهی میشود که بجز یک مورد استثناء، از خوردن محصولات گوشتی و دامی مرتبط با کشتار حیوانات پرهیز کردهام. آیا این تصمیمی احساسیست؟ عمل کسی که با بوییدن عطر جوجهکباب، هوس غذا میکند و سریعا میل خود را برآورده میکند بیشتر از روی احساس است یا کسی که با وجود میل به این غذا، به نفع وجدان پا روی هوس میگذارد؟
چهارم اسفند 1398 به بعد
حالا برنامهام این است که مطالعاتم در باب حیونخواری/گیاهخواری را ادامه بدهم. جلد اول و دوم کتاب آب پنهان، جلد اول و دوم کتاب پژوهش چین، آزادی حیوانات، بگذار آشغال بخورند، اقتصاد سیاسی حقوق حیوانات و معضل انسان همهچیزخوار کتابهایی هستند که قصد دارم در این حوزه مطالعه کنم (بدون حفظ ترتیب)
چرا اینها را نوشتهام؟
چرا اینها را اینجا نوشتهام؟ چرا تصمیم شخصی خود مبنی بر تغییر رژیم غذاییام را علنی کردهام؟ نخست به این دلیل که اعمال انسانها به یکدیگر وابسته است. مصرف بیرویه محصولات دامی در گوشهای از جهان، بعلت مصرف چند برابری غلاتی که صرف خوراکِ دامها میشود، به گرسنگی در نقاط دیگر دامن میزند. دوم اینکه دامپروری صنعتی نقض گسترده حقوق حیوانات، آسیبهای غیرقابل جبران زیستمحیطی، خشکسالی، بیابانزایی، قحطی، ایحاد مقاومت پاتوژنها در مقابل آنتیبیوتیکها، شیوع بیماریهای جدید (مثلا آنفولانزای ان 1 اچ 1) را در پی دارد. هدف این صنعت، نه ریشهکن کردن گرسنگی، بلکه به جیب زدن بیشترین سود است. من نه تنها نمیخواهم پولم - هرچند اندک - به سوی این صنعت سرازیر شود و در پیامدهای آن شریک باشم، بلکه میخواهم تا حد توان، با تبلیغات و پروپاگاندای صاحبان این صنایع، که گزارههای دلخواهِ خود را به عنوان فکتهایی علمی و تاریخی به خورد ما دادهاند مقابله کنم. ایجاد تغییر اساسی در این حوزه، تنها منوط به تغییر رژیم غذایی شخصی نیست. باید آگاهی داد، طرفداری کرد و سر و صدا به راه انداخت. ممکن است بسیار سادهلوحانه و احمقانه بنظر برسد که تصور کنیم تصمیم برای انتخاب غذا و خوردن یا نخوردن یک وعده گوشت عمل مهمی محسوب میشود، درست همانطور که احتمالا در دهه پنجاه میلادی، در آمریکا، اگر کسی به شمای سیاهپوست میگفت جایی که در رستوران یا اتوبوس برای نشستن انتخاب میکنید، میتواند در نهایت نژادپرستیِ آشکار دولتی را ریشهکن کند، احمقانه بنظر میرسید
آیا زجر کشیدن حیوانات و جانوارانی که میخوریم مهمترین مسئله جهان امروز است؟
قطعا نه. اما پرسش اصلا این نیست. مسئله این است که آیا زجرکش کردن حیوانات و نابودی محیط زیست از خورشت، کباب و همبرگری که میخوریم مهمتر است یا نه؟ مسئله اینجاست که ما به چه میزان از درد و رنج حیوانات برای آماده شدن غذایمان رضایت میدهیم؟
اگر ما حق انتخاب گزینه زندگی بدون خشونت را نداشته باشیم، این امکان به ما داده شده است که غذایمان را از میان برداشت محصول یا کشتار انتخاب کنیم، یعنی بین جنگ و کشاورزی. ما کشتار را انتخاب کردهایم. ما جنگ را برگزیدهایم. میتوان برای حیوانخواری انسان هر داستانی ساخت، اما این صادقانهترین نسخهی داستان حیوانخواری ماست.
دربارهی کتاب
ماجرای نگارش این کتاب به زمانی باز میگردد که نویسنده صاحب فرزند شده و تصمیم میگیرد برای آنکه آگاهانه به فرزند خود خوراک دهد، سر از کار شیوه صنعتی تولید گوشت دربیاورد. یافتههای نویسنده با وجود ممانعت صاحبان صنت مذکور، تکاندهنده است. با وجود اینکه کتاب یک اثر پژوهشی/ژورنالیستی محسوب میشود، اما سیر روایی بسیار جذابی دارد. آنان که پیشتر کتاب بینهایت بلند، بهغایت نزدیک جاناتان سفران فوئر را خواندهاند و با مهارت و چیرهدستی نویسنده در داستاننویسی آشنا شدهاند منظورم را کاملا متوجه میشوند. هدف اصلی نویسنده از نگارش این کتاب، در وهله نخست آگاهی رسانی دربارهی تبعات و پیامدهای حیوانخواری است، نه در باب لزوم گیاهخواری و مسائلی از این قبیل
خواندن این کتاب را به چه کسانی پیشنهاد میکنم؟
به همه. بنظر من همه باید این کتاب، یا کتب مشابه را بخوانند، نه با این نیت از پیش تعیین شده که تغییری در رژیم غذایی خود ایجاد کنند، بلکه با این هدف که حداقل بدانند چه چیزی و به چه بهایی میخورند. خاطرم هست که یکی دو هفته پیش، در حالی که برای یکی از همکارانم در مورد شرایط نگهداری مرغهای گوشتی صحبت میکردم، با ناراحتی صحبتم را قطع کرد که"دیگر نمیخواهم چیزی بشنوم." اما چرا؟ مگر بیتوجهی خود نوعی پاسخ نیست؟ مگر انسان در مقابل ��کردههایش به اندازهی کردههایش مسئولیت ندارد؟ اگر مصرف گوشت صنعتی بجز لذتبخش بودن، امری صحیح است، چرا کسی تمایلی به دیدن و اطلاع از آنچه در صنایع غذایی بر سر حیوانات آورده میشود ندارد؟ ما یا به ارزشهایمان خیانت میکنیم یا با آنها زندگی میکنیم؛ متاسفانه مسیری میان این دو برای ما میسر نیست. همانطور که نویسنده هم در کتاب به این موضوع اشاره کرده، هدف از نگارش اینها، کوشش جهت متقاعد کردن دیگران به زندگی با استاندارد و برداشت من از کار صحیح نیست. فقط میخواهم با نمایاندن حقیقت، راضیشان کنم دست کم با باورها و استاندارهای خودشان زندگی کنند.
February 26, 2010
In his book Heat, Bill Buford reflects (as he prepares to butcher a pig) that he has always respected vegetarians for being among the few who actually think about meat.
In Eating Animals, JSF doesn't seem to respect much of anybody, other than his grandmother and Kafka. For all the promising ethical paths he walks down, from traditional animal husbandry to Bill Niman's sustainable beef to animal rights activism, he's so determined to shit on everyone else's ideas about eating meat that I'm not sure what conclusions he actually comes to. Granted, just showing up seems to be getting him pretty far. As a weapon in the battle against factory farming, this book is a Big Deal. A big name author, a splashy cover, a few celebrities just waiting to be converted. Hey, by all means necessary, right?
But as cogent writing? As a satisfying philosophy? As a vision for the future? Fail. For all the navel gazing, armchair philosophy, Jewish guilt, and postmodern literary affectations, this book boils down to a litany of war crimes. A fantastically damning pamphlet it would be. Perhaps even a moral call to arms. Condensed. But unless you find that "Save the Children" infomercials improve on the umpteenth viewing, you're better off with the less-inuring testimony in The Omnivore's Dilemma or Fast Food Nation. I mean, hell, they had me at the slaughterhouse filmstrip from the Simpsons.
The question remains. Is eating meat part of being human?
Personally, I remain a vegetarian with respect for thoughtful butchers.
In Eating Animals, JSF doesn't seem to respect much of anybody, other than his grandmother and Kafka. For all the promising ethical paths he walks down, from traditional animal husbandry to Bill Niman's sustainable beef to animal rights activism, he's so determined to shit on everyone else's ideas about eating meat that I'm not sure what conclusions he actually comes to. Granted, just showing up seems to be getting him pretty far. As a weapon in the battle against factory farming, this book is a Big Deal. A big name author, a splashy cover, a few celebrities just waiting to be converted. Hey, by all means necessary, right?
But as cogent writing? As a satisfying philosophy? As a vision for the future? Fail. For all the navel gazing, armchair philosophy, Jewish guilt, and postmodern literary affectations, this book boils down to a litany of war crimes. A fantastically damning pamphlet it would be. Perhaps even a moral call to arms. Condensed. But unless you find that "Save the Children" infomercials improve on the umpteenth viewing, you're better off with the less-inuring testimony in The Omnivore's Dilemma or Fast Food Nation. I mean, hell, they had me at the slaughterhouse filmstrip from the Simpsons.
The question remains. Is eating meat part of being human?
Personally, I remain a vegetarian with respect for thoughtful butchers.
February 6, 2010
Hear are my thoughts in order as I was reading this book....
1. OMG.....OMFG!
2. Crap...now I'm a vegatarian!
3. I can never have my favorite Mongolian Chicken from Mings again (snif).
Yes in that order. I have not eaten meat since half way through this book. Will it stick? I hope so.
Not only the mind numbing crulety of the factory farms (which is plenty), and the enviormental damage they cause, but the shear crap they feed the animals did it for me. H1N1....factory farms. traced back to a hog farm in one of the Carolinas. They feed them antibiotics in every meal. That is how the resistant strains of bacteria are born......now they are using Cipro, which the medical community screamed out against. But the farm lobbies were stronger.
most chickens and turkeys can't naturally reproduce anymore.....What? They have been so geneticly altered that they can't reproduce....eeww! They can't even walk.
The author made the statement that if this was 60 years ago he would probably eat meat. But things have changed with factory farming for the worse. People want really cheap meat....well you get what you pay for.
1. OMG.....OMFG!
2. Crap...now I'm a vegatarian!
3. I can never have my favorite Mongolian Chicken from Mings again (snif).
Yes in that order. I have not eaten meat since half way through this book. Will it stick? I hope so.
Not only the mind numbing crulety of the factory farms (which is plenty), and the enviormental damage they cause, but the shear crap they feed the animals did it for me. H1N1....factory farms. traced back to a hog farm in one of the Carolinas. They feed them antibiotics in every meal. That is how the resistant strains of bacteria are born......now they are using Cipro, which the medical community screamed out against. But the farm lobbies were stronger.
most chickens and turkeys can't naturally reproduce anymore.....What? They have been so geneticly altered that they can't reproduce....eeww! They can't even walk.
The author made the statement that if this was 60 years ago he would probably eat meat. But things have changed with factory farming for the worse. People want really cheap meat....well you get what you pay for.
June 22, 2016
I realize I finished this book 10 days ago and have not rated it...and I also can't stop thinking about it.
There's a lot I could say about this book and how much it made me think-it's completely riddled with highlighter-but honestly, most people I know wouldn't bother picking this up no matter what I say. We eat animals because we're too selfish and stubborn to change. We eat animals because we're too lazy to make the "inconvenient" choices. We eat animals because we've been told over and over and over that it's the only healthy option. We don't want to hear about where our food comes from because from the little we do know, we know it's horrible, and if we were truly educated about it we'd have to admit the impact factory farming has on our health and our environment and the animals we continue to genetically mutilate and make those "inconvenient" choices.
It's plain and simple. It's irresponsible and dangerous to simply choose to not know where your food comes from. If you're going to choose to eat it, you should do so fully informed and own the responsibility of what you're doing.
If you've made it this far, I urge you to read this book regardless of your dietary choices. I really appreciate that this book presented fact. It's not going to try to guilt you into anything, though you very well may end up feeling guilty after reading it.
There's a lot I could say about this book and how much it made me think-it's completely riddled with highlighter-but honestly, most people I know wouldn't bother picking this up no matter what I say. We eat animals because we're too selfish and stubborn to change. We eat animals because we're too lazy to make the "inconvenient" choices. We eat animals because we've been told over and over and over that it's the only healthy option. We don't want to hear about where our food comes from because from the little we do know, we know it's horrible, and if we were truly educated about it we'd have to admit the impact factory farming has on our health and our environment and the animals we continue to genetically mutilate and make those "inconvenient" choices.
It's plain and simple. It's irresponsible and dangerous to simply choose to not know where your food comes from. If you're going to choose to eat it, you should do so fully informed and own the responsibility of what you're doing.
If you've made it this far, I urge you to read this book regardless of your dietary choices. I really appreciate that this book presented fact. It's not going to try to guilt you into anything, though you very well may end up feeling guilty after reading it.
May 21, 2010
I don’t mean this dismissively, but I feel like I finally get what Charlton Heston meant when he cried out, “Soylent Green is people!! It’s peeeeople!” Just . . . I don’t know. That movie’s pretty silly, but I keep walking around the house feeling like all those years that I ate meat, I was really eating human souls. And I even knew almost all of this information before reading the book. I know I’m being dramatic, as per usual, but there really is something about food that brings out both the best and the worst in humans. I think that’s part of the point of the title of this book. It’s about eating animals, but it’s also about us being eating animals. See what he did there? Anyway, I can’t give this book a full 5 stars because I have really high expectations for JSF, and, honestly, this book isn’t extremely well organized. I think the topic of what we eat is probably the most important one in American society today, though, and the dialogue Foer creates is very representative of the arguments that smart people make in legitimate disagreement over the topic of eating animals.
I saw Foer read from this book at Powell’s last October, and the day after that was the last time I ate meat. For a long time I knew about the health and environmental issues of factory farming, but I really love hamburgers, so I thought I would just be really careful about where I bought meat. I realized, though, that I really do care how we treat each other and how we treat animals, and I was not careful about where my meat came from. I became a vegetarian partly because it’s easier than having that mental dissonance, where I really care about all of the corruption and waste of the meat industry, but I set it aside because something tastes good. Other things taste good, too. It’s not worth the energy. I guess, the other part of why I became a vegetarian is that I forgot how to put up the mental walls between the human behavior that is so disgusting to me that is almost uniformly represented in the food industry and my condoning it by eating its products. The points that Foer read from this book in October just haunt me.
I don’t think that death is the worst thing, and so eating animals doesn’t horrify me because of the killing. I really get that other people do think that death is the worst thing, and I don’t necessarily think I’m right, but that’s the place I’m at in life. My friend pointed out how silly this is of me yesterday when he was asking why I love the movie True Romance so much. I was talking about how wonderful I think it is, and then I was qualifying it by saying that the part between Christopher Walkins and Dennis Hopper is so racist and makes me really uncomfortable. So, my friend started laughing at me and was like, “So, you don’t care about the total disregard for human life, but it really gets to you that they’re being racist?” What can I say? Maybe someday all of the things I’m offended at will line up really neatly. As it is, obviously it would offend me a lot more in real life to see someone killed than to see someone be really unpleasant, but in movies the opposite is true.
Even then, even in real life, I think that pointless suffering, not death, is the worst thing. And when pointless suffering is knowingly caused by humans, I think it’s bad just for the suffering itself, but also because of what it means for the people causing the suffering. What have we done to ourselves? What have we made each other? There is a letter toward the end of this book, written by a slaughterhouse worker, that describes this slaughterhouse atrocity that is burned into my brain now in a way that I can only think to describe as a Skye O’Malley. But this is a real, true incident, that I’m glad was written because it needs to never happen again. The incident itself was purely sadistic, but writing about it was somehow Important in the way that confessions and justice are important. But also important because although this man is responsible for his own actions and atrocities, people who work in slaughterhouses, like the animals going through them, are some of the most vulnerable elements our society. Both Gandhi and Aristotle are attributed with saying something like, nations should be judged by how they treat the most vulnerable among them. By that standard of judgment, the U.S. is not passing.
One of the major themes in this book is about traditions surrounding food and the way it brings people together in this really wonderful way. I think Foer speaks about family, even humanity, in such a beautiful, nostalgic, and hopeful way that there is something worthwhile about his unique exploration of this topic. It is not a cold, moral topic. It is about our mothers and fathers in the kitchen and our children playing in the yard while we barbeque. But that doesn’t remove us from complicity in what goes on to get the food to the table. It doesn’t excuse us.
There were two points he made about that particularly, which really influenced my decision to become a veggie. I’m going to spoiler them a little bit and probably mangle them a lot, so skip over if you wish. Also, my friend made this homebrew oatmeal stout in honor of his daughter’s birth, and it and its progeny are slowly changing this review into a drunk review, so there’s a chance none of this will make sense anyway.
If you want more details on what exactly all this is so appalling to me, I suggest you do read the book. Or, even watch Food, Inc., which is wonderful. And movies about the food industry are way more immediately powerful and entertaining than books. Sorry, JSF, but I honestly fell asleep a couple of times reading this book. Not in a way that means I didn’t like it, just in that way that I fall asleep to Blue Planet or The Vertical Ray of the Sun or the Documentary History of the United States. All wonderful works of art with magical sleep powers.
There’s one more point I want to make about this whole topic, and then I’ll leave you alone. It’s not my point, it’s the point of this girl who took JSF on his tour of factory farms. We make these justifications for the sense of taste that we make for no other sense. For example, if someone tortured a pig to death for a painting, we wouldn’t justify it in the way we justify torturing a pig to death for bacon. The girl says is, “Why doesn’t a horny person have as strong a claim to raping an animal as a hungry one does to killing and eating it?” If we would die of hunger otherwise, that might be a difference, but there is a lot of evidence that says a vegetarian or vegan diet can be healthier than an omnivorous one, and none to say they lead to starvation. What I’m trying to say is on a scale of bad, death is not worse than pointless suffering. But why live on that scale at all?
I am so sorry to be proselytizing here. It’s totally unacceptable. Blame it on the oatmeal stout and progeny if you wish. Plus, you know how new converts are. Rabid (wrote “rabit” first. Typing equivalent of slurring my words). All I’m saying is this: people eat more meat now than they ever have in history. And the diseaseS propagated by meat, not to mention the antibiotics made useless because of overuse on animals, make the meat industry possibly the most dangerous instance of institutionalized terrorism that exists in America. Hi, FBI, no offense intended! Even if you (FBI readers included) cut back a little bit on the meat you eat, it makes a huge statement to the meat industry. I came to being a veggie after many years of just cutting back on the animals, and I’m still not a vegan. It’s so doable.
Anyway, my plan is that my next review not be about something totally horrifying. For my first week free from school, this week has been strangely scarring in the reading. I always hope that there are some things that people will not do just because why would you? But I guess the excessive and sometimes ridiculous laws have a purpose. When I get back to school maybe some kind of class action against factory farms for H1N1, MRSA, salmonella, e. coli, and other crimes against humanity? We’ll talk.
I saw Foer read from this book at Powell’s last October, and the day after that was the last time I ate meat. For a long time I knew about the health and environmental issues of factory farming, but I really love hamburgers, so I thought I would just be really careful about where I bought meat. I realized, though, that I really do care how we treat each other and how we treat animals, and I was not careful about where my meat came from. I became a vegetarian partly because it’s easier than having that mental dissonance, where I really care about all of the corruption and waste of the meat industry, but I set it aside because something tastes good. Other things taste good, too. It’s not worth the energy. I guess, the other part of why I became a vegetarian is that I forgot how to put up the mental walls between the human behavior that is so disgusting to me that is almost uniformly represented in the food industry and my condoning it by eating its products. The points that Foer read from this book in October just haunt me.
I don’t think that death is the worst thing, and so eating animals doesn’t horrify me because of the killing. I really get that other people do think that death is the worst thing, and I don’t necessarily think I’m right, but that’s the place I’m at in life. My friend pointed out how silly this is of me yesterday when he was asking why I love the movie True Romance so much. I was talking about how wonderful I think it is, and then I was qualifying it by saying that the part between Christopher Walkins and Dennis Hopper is so racist and makes me really uncomfortable. So, my friend started laughing at me and was like, “So, you don’t care about the total disregard for human life, but it really gets to you that they’re being racist?” What can I say? Maybe someday all of the things I’m offended at will line up really neatly. As it is, obviously it would offend me a lot more in real life to see someone killed than to see someone be really unpleasant, but in movies the opposite is true.
Even then, even in real life, I think that pointless suffering, not death, is the worst thing. And when pointless suffering is knowingly caused by humans, I think it’s bad just for the suffering itself, but also because of what it means for the people causing the suffering. What have we done to ourselves? What have we made each other? There is a letter toward the end of this book, written by a slaughterhouse worker, that describes this slaughterhouse atrocity that is burned into my brain now in a way that I can only think to describe as a Skye O’Malley. But this is a real, true incident, that I’m glad was written because it needs to never happen again. The incident itself was purely sadistic, but writing about it was somehow Important in the way that confessions and justice are important. But also important because although this man is responsible for his own actions and atrocities, people who work in slaughterhouses, like the animals going through them, are some of the most vulnerable elements our society. Both Gandhi and Aristotle are attributed with saying something like, nations should be judged by how they treat the most vulnerable among them. By that standard of judgment, the U.S. is not passing.
One of the major themes in this book is about traditions surrounding food and the way it brings people together in this really wonderful way. I think Foer speaks about family, even humanity, in such a beautiful, nostalgic, and hopeful way that there is something worthwhile about his unique exploration of this topic. It is not a cold, moral topic. It is about our mothers and fathers in the kitchen and our children playing in the yard while we barbeque. But that doesn’t remove us from complicity in what goes on to get the food to the table. It doesn’t excuse us.
There were two points he made about that particularly, which really influenced my decision to become a veggie. I’m going to spoiler them a little bit and probably mangle them a lot, so skip over if you wish. Also, my friend made this homebrew oatmeal stout in honor of his daughter’s birth, and it and its progeny are slowly changing this review into a drunk review, so there’s a chance none of this will make sense anyway.
If you want more details on what exactly all this is so appalling to me, I suggest you do read the book. Or, even watch Food, Inc., which is wonderful. And movies about the food industry are way more immediately powerful and entertaining than books. Sorry, JSF, but I honestly fell asleep a couple of times reading this book. Not in a way that means I didn’t like it, just in that way that I fall asleep to Blue Planet or The Vertical Ray of the Sun or the Documentary History of the United States. All wonderful works of art with magical sleep powers.
There’s one more point I want to make about this whole topic, and then I’ll leave you alone. It’s not my point, it’s the point of this girl who took JSF on his tour of factory farms. We make these justifications for the sense of taste that we make for no other sense. For example, if someone tortured a pig to death for a painting, we wouldn’t justify it in the way we justify torturing a pig to death for bacon. The girl says is, “Why doesn’t a horny person have as strong a claim to raping an animal as a hungry one does to killing and eating it?” If we would die of hunger otherwise, that might be a difference, but there is a lot of evidence that says a vegetarian or vegan diet can be healthier than an omnivorous one, and none to say they lead to starvation. What I’m trying to say is on a scale of bad, death is not worse than pointless suffering. But why live on that scale at all?
I am so sorry to be proselytizing here. It’s totally unacceptable. Blame it on the oatmeal stout and progeny if you wish. Plus, you know how new converts are. Rabid (wrote “rabit” first. Typing equivalent of slurring my words). All I’m saying is this: people eat more meat now than they ever have in history. And the diseaseS propagated by meat, not to mention the antibiotics made useless because of overuse on animals, make the meat industry possibly the most dangerous instance of institutionalized terrorism that exists in America. Hi, FBI, no offense intended! Even if you (FBI readers included) cut back a little bit on the meat you eat, it makes a huge statement to the meat industry. I came to being a veggie after many years of just cutting back on the animals, and I’m still not a vegan. It’s so doable.
Anyway, my plan is that my next review not be about something totally horrifying. For my first week free from school, this week has been strangely scarring in the reading. I always hope that there are some things that people will not do just because why would you? But I guess the excessive and sometimes ridiculous laws have a purpose. When I get back to school maybe some kind of class action against factory farms for H1N1, MRSA, salmonella, e. coli, and other crimes against humanity? We’ll talk.
December 1, 2017
Well, fresh fruits and vegetables are alive and responsive to light when you eat them, grain harvesters leave a wake of maimed and mutilated wildlife, and a songbird dies for every cup of coffee. I suspect that last is an imprecise ratio. So, Burroughs point that your food was alive is absolutely true. While North Americans aren’t the only people who overeat, it’s obvious that we do. Ninety dollars for a Thanksgiving turkey would certainly limit my household consumption.
November 23, 2009
Well done, Jonathan Safran Foer, well done.
(your book, not steak)
Look, I love meat. I really do. I hate myself for that, but I love meat. I also deplore seeing living creatures suffer. (I'm the jerk that lets spiders out of the house instead of squishing them.) I also know that if I had to kill the animal myself, I'd be a veggie for sure. I'm a total sucker for animals, but not enough of a sucker, I guess.
In junior high, I became a "crazy animal rights/environmentalist tree worshiping bunny hugger". This required me to not eat meat. I don't remember what started it, but it only lasted a few weeks.
A few years later I read, The Jungle and that put me back on the veggie wagon for a month or two.
In college, my anatomy and physiology lab completely cured me of eating beef roasts. (the human muscle in the lab was WAAAAAY to similar to the hunks of cow flesh wrapped under the cellophane.) That lasted a few months.
When driving, if the livestock truck passes me on the highway, I go veggie. (for a day if the truck is empty, maybe for a week if it's full)
This book may have changed me for good. Now, I'm not 100% vegetarian all of a sudden or attempting to go vegan, but I'm starting. When I go out for dinner, I will not choose meat. I will cook here at home with less meat. (This may drive my carnivore husband to divorce court. I'll send you the bill, Jonathan Safran Foer!)
Some veggies and vegans may say Foer was not "forceful" enough, but I am hopeful that at the very least, people like me will cut back on meat, which may lead to quitting meat altogether. Maybe enough people will see the horrid conditions of factory farms and demand fair treatment for animals.
Maybe I'm just living in a fantasy world... I mean, really, the most dedicated carnivore has to admit that factory farms are beyond awful. Exception to the rule: those who think the Lawd JEE-ZUS put the animals here for us to shoot -perhaps from helicopters- and eat. Those folks won't care that factory workers stick electric prods up animals' orifices (orifii?) and put cigarettes out on the animals' flesh. (Yep, sure makes ME believe we are higher, more civilized beings!)
Anyway... some people will NOT be moved by that at all. (NUTJOBS!)
Maybe the heartless population could be enticed to cut back on meat consumption with a little common sense? I am a sucker for common sense, and this book clearly points out that eating meat does not make a hell of a lot of sense.
Consider the impact of meat lust on the environment; the nasty pollution from factory farms, the decimation of wildlife (think overfishing). Think about how many calories of food go into making one little calorie of meat... No sir, makes no sense.
So, if the sad brown eyes of Bessie the cow are not enough to sway you off meat, and, like Rush Limbaugh, you could give a shit about the environment, maybe the fact that meat is not exactly the best thing for your health will get you to lay off the dead animal flesh. Increased meat consumption has been linked to colon and breast cancer. Anyone else noticed the increase of neurological and autoimmune diseases? You don't think that factory farms, which pump the animals full of antibiotics and hormones may play a part, do you?
Perhaps?
Maybe the surge of MRSA, H1N1 and H5N1 are revenge from the animals. Karma for all the suffering. Maybe when a pandemic of H1N1 wipes out a massive chunk of the population, the animals will go to slaughter with a little smile on their faces.
Okay. Maybe not.
I think this is one of the most thought provoking books I have read in ages. Should be required reading for those who put meat in their mouths.
(your book, not steak)
Look, I love meat. I really do. I hate myself for that, but I love meat. I also deplore seeing living creatures suffer. (I'm the jerk that lets spiders out of the house instead of squishing them.) I also know that if I had to kill the animal myself, I'd be a veggie for sure. I'm a total sucker for animals, but not enough of a sucker, I guess.
In junior high, I became a "crazy animal rights/environmentalist tree worshiping bunny hugger". This required me to not eat meat. I don't remember what started it, but it only lasted a few weeks.
A few years later I read, The Jungle and that put me back on the veggie wagon for a month or two.
In college, my anatomy and physiology lab completely cured me of eating beef roasts. (the human muscle in the lab was WAAAAAY to similar to the hunks of cow flesh wrapped under the cellophane.) That lasted a few months.
When driving, if the livestock truck passes me on the highway, I go veggie. (for a day if the truck is empty, maybe for a week if it's full)
This book may have changed me for good. Now, I'm not 100% vegetarian all of a sudden or attempting to go vegan, but I'm starting. When I go out for dinner, I will not choose meat. I will cook here at home with less meat. (This may drive my carnivore husband to divorce court. I'll send you the bill, Jonathan Safran Foer!)
Some veggies and vegans may say Foer was not "forceful" enough, but I am hopeful that at the very least, people like me will cut back on meat, which may lead to quitting meat altogether. Maybe enough people will see the horrid conditions of factory farms and demand fair treatment for animals.
Maybe I'm just living in a fantasy world... I mean, really, the most dedicated carnivore has to admit that factory farms are beyond awful. Exception to the rule: those who think the Lawd JEE-ZUS put the animals here for us to shoot -perhaps from helicopters- and eat. Those folks won't care that factory workers stick electric prods up animals' orifices (orifii?) and put cigarettes out on the animals' flesh. (Yep, sure makes ME believe we are higher, more civilized beings!)
Anyway... some people will NOT be moved by that at all. (NUTJOBS!)
Maybe the heartless population could be enticed to cut back on meat consumption with a little common sense? I am a sucker for common sense, and this book clearly points out that eating meat does not make a hell of a lot of sense.
Consider the impact of meat lust on the environment; the nasty pollution from factory farms, the decimation of wildlife (think overfishing). Think about how many calories of food go into making one little calorie of meat... No sir, makes no sense.
So, if the sad brown eyes of Bessie the cow are not enough to sway you off meat, and, like Rush Limbaugh, you could give a shit about the environment, maybe the fact that meat is not exactly the best thing for your health will get you to lay off the dead animal flesh. Increased meat consumption has been linked to colon and breast cancer. Anyone else noticed the increase of neurological and autoimmune diseases? You don't think that factory farms, which pump the animals full of antibiotics and hormones may play a part, do you?
Perhaps?
Maybe the surge of MRSA, H1N1 and H5N1 are revenge from the animals. Karma for all the suffering. Maybe when a pandemic of H1N1 wipes out a massive chunk of the population, the animals will go to slaughter with a little smile on their faces.
Okay. Maybe not.
I think this is one of the most thought provoking books I have read in ages. Should be required reading for those who put meat in their mouths.
May 11, 2024
The title alone may scare off those who’d rather not know how their meat got from farm to table, but Eating Animals is one of those books that’s too important not to read. As someone who’d never read a pro-vegetarian, animal-rights book before and who regarded vegans and vegetarians as sanctimonious and pushy, I found Eating Animals an ideal choice to ease into learning about this difficult reality. This is part memoir, part journalistic investigation, with a nice balance in tone—Foer isn’t judgmental or snobby, but he also doesn’t shy away from the facts. The book is strongest when going inside slaughterhouses and educating, exposing the truth of what’s undeniably horrific animal abuse, worker exploitation, and environmental destruction. I urge all omnivores to take the plunge like I did, to overcome that tendency to avoid inconvenient truths and just read this book.
When people think of farms, idyllic Charlotte’s Web–like images might spring to mind, but according to Eating Animals, the farm of today is a factory. As we well know, our clothing, toys, cars, boxed and canned foods, and numerous other products come out of factories. Farm animals are now no different, with a whopping 99% of meat, dairy, and eggs coming to the masses this way. When the world’s population is in the billions, there’s no way to provide without factories.
Lest passionate meat-eaters think Eating Animals is a stringent pro-vegetarian, “meat is murder!” book, Foer approaches the topic from another angle: factory farming’s effects on human beings. One of the most compelling and frightening sections concerns the connection between factory farming and the rise in aggressive zoonotic diseases, such as avian flu. Readers will look at Smithfield with new eyes after learning about the serious health ailments of residents living near factory hog farms. Slaughterhouse work has a nearly 100% turnover rate because in addition to poor working conditions, workers cannot handle the psychological toll of a job that’s based on daily abuse and slaughter.
For those unconvinced by these parts but who are worried about the climate crisis, Foer approaches from the environmental angle. Factory farming pollutes water and air significantly and is a top contributor to the climate crisis, producing more greenhouse gases than the entire transportation sector. There are many more harms to the environment than just these, and Foer touches on them all. The takeaway is clear: Factory farming is environmentally unsustainable and one of the planet’s greatest burdens. We’ll continue to struggle with a climate crisis as long as we consume animal products.
Is Eating Animals life-changing? Definitely. It’s arresting, thoughtfully researched, and fascinating, and Foer is never militant or holier-than-thou in his vegetarian views; in fact, the book is well balanced by italicized sections that are first-hand accounts from farmers, an animal activist, and even a vegan who builds slaughterhouses. These are interesting and offer a welcome reprieve from the shock and statistics of the rest.
At one point Foer says that sales of cruelty-free/cage-free (dishonest labels, as the book explains) eggs are rising in the United States. This proves that people want to do right by animals. He believes that if 100 meat-eaters were fully informed about factory farming, 95 would choose vegetarianism. With new authentic-tasting plant-based meats such as Beyond, Impossible, and Juicy Marbles available, I believe it would now be 99.
The whole book is thought-provoking, but nothing may hit home more than this: “Not responding is a response—we are equally responsible for what we don’t do. In the case of animal slaughter, to throw your hands in the air is to wrap your fingers around a knife handle.”
Update, 3/16/20: "What the "meat paradox" reveals about moral decision making" https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20...
Update, 10/28/20: "One Root Cause of Pandemics Few People Think About"
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/...
Update, 6/1/21: "A no-beef diet is great—but only if you don’t replace it with chicken" https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22...
When people think of farms, idyllic Charlotte’s Web–like images might spring to mind, but according to Eating Animals, the farm of today is a factory. As we well know, our clothing, toys, cars, boxed and canned foods, and numerous other products come out of factories. Farm animals are now no different, with a whopping 99% of meat, dairy, and eggs coming to the masses this way. When the world’s population is in the billions, there’s no way to provide without factories.
Lest passionate meat-eaters think Eating Animals is a stringent pro-vegetarian, “meat is murder!” book, Foer approaches the topic from another angle: factory farming’s effects on human beings. One of the most compelling and frightening sections concerns the connection between factory farming and the rise in aggressive zoonotic diseases, such as avian flu. Readers will look at Smithfield with new eyes after learning about the serious health ailments of residents living near factory hog farms. Slaughterhouse work has a nearly 100% turnover rate because in addition to poor working conditions, workers cannot handle the psychological toll of a job that’s based on daily abuse and slaughter.
For those unconvinced by these parts but who are worried about the climate crisis, Foer approaches from the environmental angle. Factory farming pollutes water and air significantly and is a top contributor to the climate crisis, producing more greenhouse gases than the entire transportation sector. There are many more harms to the environment than just these, and Foer touches on them all. The takeaway is clear: Factory farming is environmentally unsustainable and one of the planet’s greatest burdens. We’ll continue to struggle with a climate crisis as long as we consume animal products.
Is Eating Animals life-changing? Definitely. It’s arresting, thoughtfully researched, and fascinating, and Foer is never militant or holier-than-thou in his vegetarian views; in fact, the book is well balanced by italicized sections that are first-hand accounts from farmers, an animal activist, and even a vegan who builds slaughterhouses. These are interesting and offer a welcome reprieve from the shock and statistics of the rest.
At one point Foer says that sales of cruelty-free/cage-free (dishonest labels, as the book explains) eggs are rising in the United States. This proves that people want to do right by animals. He believes that if 100 meat-eaters were fully informed about factory farming, 95 would choose vegetarianism. With new authentic-tasting plant-based meats such as Beyond, Impossible, and Juicy Marbles available, I believe it would now be 99.
The whole book is thought-provoking, but nothing may hit home more than this: “Not responding is a response—we are equally responsible for what we don’t do. In the case of animal slaughter, to throw your hands in the air is to wrap your fingers around a knife handle.”
Update, 3/16/20: "What the "meat paradox" reveals about moral decision making" https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20...
Update, 10/28/20: "One Root Cause of Pandemics Few People Think About"
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/...
Update, 6/1/21: "A no-beef diet is great—but only if you don’t replace it with chicken" https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22...
November 10, 2009
“For us to maintain our way of living, we must tell lies to each other and especially to ourselves. The lies are necessary because, without them, many deplorable acts would become impossibilities.”
-Derrick Jensen
People cannot talk about their food choices without resorting to a narrative, and I’m no different. Food is so intensely personal; we relate to it on such an elemental level, that it’s easy to understand. The foods we eat are part of the mythos we use to delineate our identities. We eat kosher or halal because this is part of the cultural heritage that we are either born into or adopt as our own. We have our comfort foods and guilty pleasures and food phobias and all of these help inform who we are. My own narrative is none too exciting:
I stopped eating meat at fifteen as a bet with a very intense (self righteous?) vegan and animal rights activist friend of mine and just sort of never stopped. I have to admit that videos of slaughterhouses and feedlots disseminated by PETA (regardless of my current feelings about them) played a large part in my continued change of diet- I love the taste of animal flesh, but cannot agree with the way in which it is culled. If I’m going to be eating an animal then I am going to be the person who raises it, cares for it, kills it and prepares it and I want to honor its sacrifice as best as possible. Since my laziness precludes that active of a relationship with my food, I’ve stuck with my current diet. Along the way I’ve slipped up- sushi while living in Hawaii (who am I to say no to that?) and goulash while living in the Czech Republic (because there’s really only so much fried cheese a person can eat) - but I’ve always come back to the fold. To this day I still don’t call myself a vegetarian because I grow easily tired of people trying to find some hypocrisy in my actions, as though a failure to adhere to doctrine on my part would make the entire case of animal rights a moot point. Instead I just tell friends that “I don’t eat meat.” This is both a good way of circumventing any sort of new age stereotypes they may hold about vegetarianism as well as paving the way for a positive (read: non-adversarial) discussion as to my various reasons for it.
Suffice to say that when I heard that Jonathan Safran Foer, revered author of both Everything is Illuminated and Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, was penning a book about his lifelong debate about whether or not he should eat meat, I was sold. Fast-paced, impeccably researched, witty, heart-breaking and infuriating, this book did not disappoint. There’s relatively little that is ground-breaking or new here, the literature on animal rights has been dittoed for decades now. What makes this book so remarkable is Foer’s voice. Foer is an author able to evoke the most fragile of emotions from some of the most embittered hearts and to have the opportunity to look into the world of slaughterhouses and feedlots with one of the few authors to reduce me to a shuddering wreck was like looking at the world through less jaded eyes.
Rather than use the horrific realities (and they truly are horrific) of factory farming to attempt to shock the reader, a tactic that I would have taken much umbrage with, Foer presents the sad facts in a straightforward, almost clinical, tone: “At a KFC ‘Supplier of the Year,’ Pilgrim’s Pride, fully conscious chickens were kicked, stomped on, slammed into walls, had chewing tobacco spit in their eyes, literally had the shit squeezed out of them, and had their beaks ripped off” (Pg. 182). Rather than minimizing the impact these facts would have, this allows the reader’s imagination to fill in all the gory details, which cannot help but be far more persuasive. This book isn’t a rant, it’s a conversation. It is a conversation about our existence in relation to other beings and the level of respect that they should be afforded. It’s a conversation about the dehumanizing effect brought on by our near-complete divorce from the natural world. Foer just makes his points in as straightforward a manner as possible and lets the reader pose the question themselves: “Now that you are aware of what goes into making your food, what are you going to do?” When ignorance is stripped away what can be left but to change or be reduced to flimsy excuses and hardened hearts?
The solution, as solutions invariably are, is not a simple one. There is not one hard and fast answer to what we should do, though I’ve had many discussions with animal advocates who claim that making the mass slaughter of animals illegal would spur a massive increase in the number of vegetarians in the world. Ignoring the fact that such pie-in-the-sky utopianism is simply never going to happen (sorry, Obama, systemic change does not come from within), it also neglects the true cost of the farming of soy, the protein replacement choice of millions of vegetarians.
Every day some 200 acres of Amazonian rainforest get bulldozed so that their mineral-scarce soils can be used as beds for another crop of soy. American farmers alternate growing vast fields of genetically modified corn with vast fields of genetically modified soy, never allowing a field to lay fallow for a season or two and recapture the necessary nutrients for growing, which leads to the addition of dozens of petrochemical fertilizer cocktails to spur it on. In short, the problem of farming animals is a symptom of a far larger problem, one which activist and author Derrick Jensen has been writing about for years: civilization in and of itself is a ravenous self-sustaining cancer bent on feeding desires that it hasn’t even thought of yet. It is the uncontrolled id to our Prius-driving, Trader Joe’s-shopping, plant-a-tree on Earth Day, National Geographic-subscribing ego. No story that we spin for ourselves will change the fact that our individual impact on slowing this destruction will be nil.
This is also why I don’t get down on myself for my cheese addiction (yes, addiction is the correct word. I will fight a strung-out tweaker in Thunder Dome for a block of cheddar and perform far more unsavory acts for just the promise of a good muenster). The problem of is huge, probably insurmountable, but to not even attempt to change is to tacitly approve of the system as it stands. An activist hoping to make a difference can be easily overwhelmed by the sheer scope and interconnectedness of the problems facing us. When confronted with just how much suffering goes into our comfortable First World living it’s easy to suffer an empathy overload and just be rendered numb to new atrocities. As the Buddhists like to say, all of life is suffering. It is up to us to determine just how much we can bear on our consciences. The trick is finding a level of compromise that you as an individual can live with. It could be as simple as beginning to cook vegetarian once or twice a week and making more conscious selections when in the grocer or it could be as extreme as eschewing all animal products, from steak to gelatin to leather- or any middle ground in between. Even the smallest step is still forward momentum.
-Derrick Jensen
People cannot talk about their food choices without resorting to a narrative, and I’m no different. Food is so intensely personal; we relate to it on such an elemental level, that it’s easy to understand. The foods we eat are part of the mythos we use to delineate our identities. We eat kosher or halal because this is part of the cultural heritage that we are either born into or adopt as our own. We have our comfort foods and guilty pleasures and food phobias and all of these help inform who we are. My own narrative is none too exciting:
I stopped eating meat at fifteen as a bet with a very intense (self righteous?) vegan and animal rights activist friend of mine and just sort of never stopped. I have to admit that videos of slaughterhouses and feedlots disseminated by PETA (regardless of my current feelings about them) played a large part in my continued change of diet- I love the taste of animal flesh, but cannot agree with the way in which it is culled. If I’m going to be eating an animal then I am going to be the person who raises it, cares for it, kills it and prepares it and I want to honor its sacrifice as best as possible. Since my laziness precludes that active of a relationship with my food, I’ve stuck with my current diet. Along the way I’ve slipped up- sushi while living in Hawaii (who am I to say no to that?) and goulash while living in the Czech Republic (because there’s really only so much fried cheese a person can eat) - but I’ve always come back to the fold. To this day I still don’t call myself a vegetarian because I grow easily tired of people trying to find some hypocrisy in my actions, as though a failure to adhere to doctrine on my part would make the entire case of animal rights a moot point. Instead I just tell friends that “I don’t eat meat.” This is both a good way of circumventing any sort of new age stereotypes they may hold about vegetarianism as well as paving the way for a positive (read: non-adversarial) discussion as to my various reasons for it.
Suffice to say that when I heard that Jonathan Safran Foer, revered author of both Everything is Illuminated and Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, was penning a book about his lifelong debate about whether or not he should eat meat, I was sold. Fast-paced, impeccably researched, witty, heart-breaking and infuriating, this book did not disappoint. There’s relatively little that is ground-breaking or new here, the literature on animal rights has been dittoed for decades now. What makes this book so remarkable is Foer’s voice. Foer is an author able to evoke the most fragile of emotions from some of the most embittered hearts and to have the opportunity to look into the world of slaughterhouses and feedlots with one of the few authors to reduce me to a shuddering wreck was like looking at the world through less jaded eyes.
Rather than use the horrific realities (and they truly are horrific) of factory farming to attempt to shock the reader, a tactic that I would have taken much umbrage with, Foer presents the sad facts in a straightforward, almost clinical, tone: “At a KFC ‘Supplier of the Year,’ Pilgrim’s Pride, fully conscious chickens were kicked, stomped on, slammed into walls, had chewing tobacco spit in their eyes, literally had the shit squeezed out of them, and had their beaks ripped off” (Pg. 182). Rather than minimizing the impact these facts would have, this allows the reader’s imagination to fill in all the gory details, which cannot help but be far more persuasive. This book isn’t a rant, it’s a conversation. It is a conversation about our existence in relation to other beings and the level of respect that they should be afforded. It’s a conversation about the dehumanizing effect brought on by our near-complete divorce from the natural world. Foer just makes his points in as straightforward a manner as possible and lets the reader pose the question themselves: “Now that you are aware of what goes into making your food, what are you going to do?” When ignorance is stripped away what can be left but to change or be reduced to flimsy excuses and hardened hearts?
The solution, as solutions invariably are, is not a simple one. There is not one hard and fast answer to what we should do, though I’ve had many discussions with animal advocates who claim that making the mass slaughter of animals illegal would spur a massive increase in the number of vegetarians in the world. Ignoring the fact that such pie-in-the-sky utopianism is simply never going to happen (sorry, Obama, systemic change does not come from within), it also neglects the true cost of the farming of soy, the protein replacement choice of millions of vegetarians.
Every day some 200 acres of Amazonian rainforest get bulldozed so that their mineral-scarce soils can be used as beds for another crop of soy. American farmers alternate growing vast fields of genetically modified corn with vast fields of genetically modified soy, never allowing a field to lay fallow for a season or two and recapture the necessary nutrients for growing, which leads to the addition of dozens of petrochemical fertilizer cocktails to spur it on. In short, the problem of farming animals is a symptom of a far larger problem, one which activist and author Derrick Jensen has been writing about for years: civilization in and of itself is a ravenous self-sustaining cancer bent on feeding desires that it hasn’t even thought of yet. It is the uncontrolled id to our Prius-driving, Trader Joe’s-shopping, plant-a-tree on Earth Day, National Geographic-subscribing ego. No story that we spin for ourselves will change the fact that our individual impact on slowing this destruction will be nil.
This is also why I don’t get down on myself for my cheese addiction (yes, addiction is the correct word. I will fight a strung-out tweaker in Thunder Dome for a block of cheddar and perform far more unsavory acts for just the promise of a good muenster). The problem of is huge, probably insurmountable, but to not even attempt to change is to tacitly approve of the system as it stands. An activist hoping to make a difference can be easily overwhelmed by the sheer scope and interconnectedness of the problems facing us. When confronted with just how much suffering goes into our comfortable First World living it’s easy to suffer an empathy overload and just be rendered numb to new atrocities. As the Buddhists like to say, all of life is suffering. It is up to us to determine just how much we can bear on our consciences. The trick is finding a level of compromise that you as an individual can live with. It could be as simple as beginning to cook vegetarian once or twice a week and making more conscious selections when in the grocer or it could be as extreme as eschewing all animal products, from steak to gelatin to leather- or any middle ground in between. Even the smallest step is still forward momentum.
October 8, 2020
This is a difficult review to write, my reading experience of this book has been painful.
The ethics of meat-eating is something I've struggled with for a long while and I personally chose vegetarianism over five years ago. However, I refrain from bringing it up in my conversations because, as the author points out in this book, food is a cultural icon. Our debates regarding food are discomfort inducing to say the least, and they often don't have any conclusions to offer.
While most of our indifference regarding eating animals stems from ignorance, a large faction of the western meat eating world today seems to be at least a little knowledgeable about the environmental and moral repercussions of factory farming, so Foer has attempted to probe deeper into the subject in this book.
The debate around vegetarianism/veganism is also very polar in nature, offering only the opposing positions of 'eating' meat or 'not eating' meat which complicates matters even further. There cannot be an in-between and ethically speaking, a compromise simply defeats the purpose.
While the author takes a definitive stand against factory farming and eating meat, he does offer a wide range of perspectives through interviews with cattle ranchers, PETA activists, factory farmers, slaughterhouse workers and other people working both for and against the meat industry.
I personally didn't like the writing style because it resembles youtube video transcripts more than that of an actual philosophical inquisition, but it's still worth a read.
3.5 stars.
The ethics of meat-eating is something I've struggled with for a long while and I personally chose vegetarianism over five years ago. However, I refrain from bringing it up in my conversations because, as the author points out in this book, food is a cultural icon. Our debates regarding food are discomfort inducing to say the least, and they often don't have any conclusions to offer.
While most of our indifference regarding eating animals stems from ignorance, a large faction of the western meat eating world today seems to be at least a little knowledgeable about the environmental and moral repercussions of factory farming, so Foer has attempted to probe deeper into the subject in this book.
The debate around vegetarianism/veganism is also very polar in nature, offering only the opposing positions of 'eating' meat or 'not eating' meat which complicates matters even further. There cannot be an in-between and ethically speaking, a compromise simply defeats the purpose.
While the author takes a definitive stand against factory farming and eating meat, he does offer a wide range of perspectives through interviews with cattle ranchers, PETA activists, factory farmers, slaughterhouse workers and other people working both for and against the meat industry.
I personally didn't like the writing style because it resembles youtube video transcripts more than that of an actual philosophical inquisition, but it's still worth a read.
3.5 stars.
October 1, 2018
Was kann ich als Vegetarier, der seit 35 Jahren aus Überzeugung auf Fleisch verzichtet, ein Sachbuch zu diesem Thema Neues bringen. Nicht viel. Die von Romancier Foer in eigenen Recherchen zusammengetragen Fakten sind für uns nicht neu, zumindest für einen Großteil der Deutschen. Immerhin leben über 8 Mio. Deutsche schon vegetarisch, also ungefähr jeder Zehnte. Das finde ich eine außergewöhnliche Entwicklung, von der wir in den 80er Jahren nur träumen konnten, als wir als Müslifresser verschrien wurden. Das Buch bringt uns viele Fakten über die Massentierhaltung in den USA, aber so weit entfernt sind wir in Deutschland nicht davon. Auch bei uns werden Schweine gequält und Küken wie Fließbandware aussortiert, geschreddert, gemästet und nach nur wenigen Wochen geschlachtet.
Bilder sind einprägsamer als Worte. Gerade zu diesem Thema würde ich eigentlich jeden Interessierten eine gut gemachte Reportage eher empfehlen anstelle eines Buchs, denn die Phantasie kann nicht so schrecklich sind wie die Realität in diesem Fall. Doch Foer schafft es, dass auch ich an einige Stellen das Buch mal weglegen musste (gerade bei der Schweinemast), weil die Quälereien einfach zu barbarisch beschrieben werden. Das Buch ist aber keine Ansammlung von Horrorgeschichten, sondern eine sehr weise und abwägende Herangehensweise an die Themen Tierhaltung und Vegetarismus. Das hat mich äußerst angenehm überrascht, denn ich ziehe mich sehr schnell aus Diskussionen zurück, die zu dogmatisch werden. Foer wählt verschiedene Stilmittel, wie Interviews, persönliche Berichte von Menschen aus der Branche, statistische Aufarbeitung, Glossar und eigene Meinung. Das macht das Lesen abwechslungsreich. Zudem erhebt er nie den Zeigefinger, belehrt nicht, sondern lässt den Leser anhand der Fakten selbst entscheiden, wie er sich ernähren möchte. Und jeder Schritt in die Richtung eines bewussten Fleischkonsums ist schon ein wichtiger Schritt und sollte nicht durch Radikale belächelt werden.
Ich selbst habe nie missioniert und in Gruppen auch nie das Interesse gezeigt, über meinen (früher ungewöhnlichen) Fleischverzicht zu diskutieren. Daher ist mir Foers Sichtweise sehr nahe. Es geht ihm auch in erster Linie nicht um die Ernährung wie in so vielen anderen Büchern, sondern um die Tiere. Diesen wichtigen Unterschied sieht man schon am Titel des Buchs, welches ja nicht Fleisch essen heißt. Die Verbindung eines Stück Fleisch zum Tier ist in unserer Gesellschaft verloren gegangen.
Fazit: Egal welche Ernährungsform man favorisiert, dieses Buch ist für alle Richtung geeignet. Auch in mir hat es gearbeitet während der Lektüre, denn zwangsläufig fragt man sich ja, ob man als Vegetarier wirklich nur den halben Weg gegangen ist. Ein Vorwurf den Veganer uns ja immer wieder machen. Ich habe mich aber mit der jetzigen Ernährungsweise mich bestätigt gefühlt, denn letztlich ist Sojamilch auch ein Kunstprodukt, welches eine miserable Ökobilanz hat. Es gibt keinen Königsweg, für alles gibt es Pros und Cons. Dies stellt der Autor gut dar und deswegen halt ich Tiere essen für ein sehr gutes Buch.
Bilder sind einprägsamer als Worte. Gerade zu diesem Thema würde ich eigentlich jeden Interessierten eine gut gemachte Reportage eher empfehlen anstelle eines Buchs, denn die Phantasie kann nicht so schrecklich sind wie die Realität in diesem Fall. Doch Foer schafft es, dass auch ich an einige Stellen das Buch mal weglegen musste (gerade bei der Schweinemast), weil die Quälereien einfach zu barbarisch beschrieben werden. Das Buch ist aber keine Ansammlung von Horrorgeschichten, sondern eine sehr weise und abwägende Herangehensweise an die Themen Tierhaltung und Vegetarismus. Das hat mich äußerst angenehm überrascht, denn ich ziehe mich sehr schnell aus Diskussionen zurück, die zu dogmatisch werden. Foer wählt verschiedene Stilmittel, wie Interviews, persönliche Berichte von Menschen aus der Branche, statistische Aufarbeitung, Glossar und eigene Meinung. Das macht das Lesen abwechslungsreich. Zudem erhebt er nie den Zeigefinger, belehrt nicht, sondern lässt den Leser anhand der Fakten selbst entscheiden, wie er sich ernähren möchte. Und jeder Schritt in die Richtung eines bewussten Fleischkonsums ist schon ein wichtiger Schritt und sollte nicht durch Radikale belächelt werden.
Ich selbst habe nie missioniert und in Gruppen auch nie das Interesse gezeigt, über meinen (früher ungewöhnlichen) Fleischverzicht zu diskutieren. Daher ist mir Foers Sichtweise sehr nahe. Es geht ihm auch in erster Linie nicht um die Ernährung wie in so vielen anderen Büchern, sondern um die Tiere. Diesen wichtigen Unterschied sieht man schon am Titel des Buchs, welches ja nicht Fleisch essen heißt. Die Verbindung eines Stück Fleisch zum Tier ist in unserer Gesellschaft verloren gegangen.
Fazit: Egal welche Ernährungsform man favorisiert, dieses Buch ist für alle Richtung geeignet. Auch in mir hat es gearbeitet während der Lektüre, denn zwangsläufig fragt man sich ja, ob man als Vegetarier wirklich nur den halben Weg gegangen ist. Ein Vorwurf den Veganer uns ja immer wieder machen. Ich habe mich aber mit der jetzigen Ernährungsweise mich bestätigt gefühlt, denn letztlich ist Sojamilch auch ein Kunstprodukt, welches eine miserable Ökobilanz hat. Es gibt keinen Königsweg, für alles gibt es Pros und Cons. Dies stellt der Autor gut dar und deswegen halt ich Tiere essen für ein sehr gutes Buch.
September 9, 2022
خیلی از جاهای کتاب که گفته بود دانشمندان اثبات کردهاند… ، فلان شخص گفته است… و جاهایی که آمار و ارقام ارائه شده بود و... دوست داشتم بدانم که اینها از کجا آمدهاند و چه رفرنسی دارند تا به آنها رجوع کنم و از طرفی هم میدانم که کتاب ژورنالیستی است؛ با این حال کاش رفرنس این موارد ذکر میشدند. به نظرم ترجمه کتاب هم میتوانست خیلی ��هتر از این باشد
********************************************************************
این فقط غذایی که در دهانمان میگذاریم نیست که بر همنشینی دور میز تاثیر دارد، بلکه آنچه در قالب واژهها از دهانمان بیرون میآید اثری درخشانتر دارد. این احتمال وجود دارد که گفتگو درباره باورهایمان همنشینی لذتبخش تری نسبت به غذا داشته باشد-حتی وقتی این باورها با یکدیگر متفاوت باشد. صفحه ۷۲ کتاب
همیشه میشود کسی که خوابیده را بیدار کرد. اما با هیچ سر و صدایی نمیشود کسی که خودش را به خواب زده بیدار کرد. صفحه ۱۲۸ کتاب
غذای ما امروز از درد و رنج تهیه میشود. میدانیم اگر کسی بخواهد فیلمی از نحوه تولید گوشت خوراکی نشان دهد، آن فیلم بسیار هولناک خواهد بود. شاید بیش از آنچه بخواهیم اعتراف کنیم میدانیم. شاید میخواهیم همه این دانستهها را در بخشهای تاریک و دور از دسترس حافظهمان پنهان کنیم. شاید میخواهیم همه چیز را انکار کنیم. وقتی گوشتی میخوریم که در فرآیندهای پرورش صنعتی تولیدشده، بهمعنای واقعی کلمه، گوشت شکنجه شده میخوریم. همین گوشت شکنجه شده، به گوشت بدن خودمان تبدیل میشود. صفحه ۱۷۳ کتاب
آیزاک بشویس سینگر… تبعیض میان گونههای جانوری را با «شدیدترین تئوریهای نژادپرستانه» مقایسه میکرد و معتقد بود حقوق حیوانات، خالصانهترین شکل دفاع از عدالت اجتماعی است. چون حیوانات، آسیبپذیرترین قشر ستمدیده ها هستند. صفحه ۲۵۵ کتاب
شفقت و ترحم، ماهیچهای است که با تمرین بیشتر قویتر میشود. و انتخاب مداوم مهربانی به جای خشونت ما را دگرگون خواهد کرد. صفحه ۳۰۷ کتاب
مارتین لوتر کینگ پسر، با شور و شوق فراوان از روزی نوشت که «آدمها تصمیمی بگیرند که نه بیخطر است، نه سیاسی، و نه حتی همهپسند.» بعضی وقتها ما مجبور میشویم تصمیمی بگیریم، چون «وجدانمان به ما میگوید درست است.» صفحه ۳۰۸ کتاب
********************************************************************
این فقط غذایی که در دهانمان میگذاریم نیست که بر همنشینی دور میز تاثیر دارد، بلکه آنچه در قالب واژهها از دهانمان بیرون میآید اثری درخشانتر دارد. این احتمال وجود دارد که گفتگو درباره باورهایمان همنشینی لذتبخش تری نسبت به غذا داشته باشد-حتی وقتی این باورها با یکدیگر متفاوت باشد. صفحه ۷۲ کتاب
همیشه میشود کسی که خوابیده را بیدار کرد. اما با هیچ سر و صدایی نمیشود کسی که خودش را به خواب زده بیدار کرد. صفحه ۱۲۸ کتاب
غذای ما امروز از درد و رنج تهیه میشود. میدانیم اگر کسی بخواهد فیلمی از نحوه تولید گوشت خوراکی نشان دهد، آن فیلم بسیار هولناک خواهد بود. شاید بیش از آنچه بخواهیم اعتراف کنیم میدانیم. شاید میخواهیم همه این دانستهها را در بخشهای تاریک و دور از دسترس حافظهمان پنهان کنیم. شاید میخواهیم همه چیز را انکار کنیم. وقتی گوشتی میخوریم که در فرآیندهای پرورش صنعتی تولیدشده، بهمعنای واقعی کلمه، گوشت شکنجه شده میخوریم. همین گوشت شکنجه شده، به گوشت بدن خودمان تبدیل میشود. صفحه ۱۷۳ کتاب
آیزاک بشویس سینگر… تبعیض میان گونههای جانوری را با «شدیدترین تئوریهای نژادپرستانه» مقایسه میکرد و معتقد بود حقوق حیوانات، خالصانهترین شکل دفاع از عدالت اجتماعی است. چون حیوانات، آسیبپذیرترین قشر ستمدیده ها هستند. صفحه ۲۵۵ کتاب
شفقت و ترحم، ماهیچهای است که با تمرین بیشتر قویتر میشود. و انتخاب مداوم مهربانی به جای خشونت ما را دگرگون خواهد کرد. صفحه ۳۰۷ کتاب
مارتین لوتر کینگ پسر، با شور و شوق فراوان از روزی نوشت که «آدمها تصمیمی بگیرند که نه بیخطر است، نه سیاسی، و نه حتی همهپسند.» بعضی وقتها ما مجبور میشویم تصمیمی بگیریم، چون «وجدانمان به ما میگوید درست است.» صفحه ۳۰۸ کتاب
February 20, 2024
4.5 stars
*essential reading*
short review for busy readers: a 3-year personal investigation by a new father into the US meat industry. Heavily footnoted. Allows all sides to comment in their own words. Excellent mix of the personal with the factual, the human interest with the hard data. Some of Foer’s guy humour leaks in at times which lowers the tone, but those lapses are short. While focused on the US, the information has relevance for other countries as well, esp Canada, the UK, EU & China.
in detail:
THIS REVIEW IS SUITABLE FOR BOTH CARNIVORES AND VEGETARIANS.
I’ve always found the topic of meat-eating vs non-meat eating fascinating.
I think it was when I heard the story of Cain & Abel in Sunday school and thought Cain got a pretty raw deal that struck the spark.
Despite my siding with history’s first murderer (you want blood? I’ll give you blood!) so many things come together in this essential question of meat. History, culture, gender, biology, social norms, traditions, nutrition, religious belief, economics, environmental science, philosophy, politics, law & justice, fads and personal lifestyle choices, just to name a few.
It’s a muddle, certainly, and it’s not only highly political, it’s also highly personal – as anyone who has been openly ridiculed or verbally attacked for their food choices by friend and stranger alike can more than attest to.
But the existential question of meat – to eat or not to eat?- has taken on another, more harrowing aspect in our days of environmental collapse and climate shifts. Can we call ourselves environmentally aware and yet still support and give our money to current farming practices?
In fact, is eating animals not even the issue on the table, is it really farming?
To start with, our societal view of farming is romantic and utterly out of date. The small family farm is virtually a thing of the past.
Farmers who know their livestock and aim to keep them healthy and happy make up only about 1% of all meat on the market today, according to Foer’s data. And even they cannot control how their animals are transported and slaughtered, nor other more minor aspects like tagging, nor the genetic make up of their livestock.
When we talk about meat today – the meat we buy from our local supermarket –we are automatically talking about factory farming and factory farming is just plain bad anyway you look at it.
It's more environmentally damaging than the global use of fossil fuels, devastating to human health due to the disregard for hygiene standards in slaughterhouses and the sale of sick and infected animals to consumers. It's also utterly unsustainable as a business model.
So why is circa 99% of meat in the US factory farmed?
Because it produces a cheap product, and makes good on that most wholesome of 1950s government promises: “a chicken in every pot”.
The smiling face of good government looking after the welfare of every citizen.
We have a choice, Foer says, either we keep our cheap chicken and pork and massively screw over the environment and ourselves…or we look for alternatives.
And if you think, like I did, alternatives mean organic or free-range farming, think again.
The real problem there is that most meat animals we consume today have been genetically bred into unnatural mutants. They have easily breakable bones, so they can’t stand or walk for long, they are highly stressed so that even the sound of a tractor nearby can cause them to keel over dead, and they can’t reproduce naturally due to their unnaturally rapid weight gain.
This is the stock both factory AND many (not all) organic farms have.
Why do that? Why specifically breed mutant chickens, pigs and turkeys and then pump them up with antibiotics and chemicals to keep them some semblance of natural?
Because it’s cheaper than traditional farming and turns a higher profit on a mass level.
And because we can.
Say what?
This is where the question of meat dovetails with the platforms of anti-racism/sexism/homophobia and other similar ethical equality movements. The logic is the same.
In essence, it’s not really about being specifically cruel to animals, as you’ll often hear proclaimed, it’s about dominance, oppression and assumed rights and privileges we humans believe we have through our naturally superior status.
When such arguments are applied to other humans, many of us can see the logic. What human should be treated as lesser and be oppressed due to their skin colour, sex, sexual orientation, religion etc?
What happens, though, when you apply the same logic to a chicken? To a pig? To a cow?
People stutter and backpedal there.
Meat animals are not equal to humans! You can’t call extreme oppression on how factory farms treat (helpless & caged) chickens so we (dominant & privileged) humans can have cheap and tasty chicken burgers! That's just not correct!
This is where the topic becomes even thornier more divisive than it already is. Can we apply the same ethical standards to farm animals that we do to humans…when we haven’t achieved ethical equality among different human groups yet? Is the same application to animals taking too big of a leap forward too fast?
Let’s check the global warming statics and human health risks like heart disease, as well as the likelihood of future pandemics based on brand new and terrifying pathogens created in polluted factory farms… I'll rephrase the question.
In conclusion, Foer points out that there is nothing wrong with eating animals, per se. Eating animals is not the acute problem, the current system of factory farming and genetic destruction of whole species of domesticated animals is.
And what to do about that? Good question, when so much money and different interests intersect at that exact point.
But as long as that is the dominant form of farming and the most convenient source of meat, Foer's not going to be feeding it to his family, nor supporting it with his money.
A wise, well-informed decision, I’d say.
*essential reading*
short review for busy readers: a 3-year personal investigation by a new father into the US meat industry. Heavily footnoted. Allows all sides to comment in their own words. Excellent mix of the personal with the factual, the human interest with the hard data. Some of Foer’s guy humour leaks in at times which lowers the tone, but those lapses are short. While focused on the US, the information has relevance for other countries as well, esp Canada, the UK, EU & China.
in detail:
THIS REVIEW IS SUITABLE FOR BOTH CARNIVORES AND VEGETARIANS.
I’ve always found the topic of meat-eating vs non-meat eating fascinating.
I think it was when I heard the story of Cain & Abel in Sunday school and thought Cain got a pretty raw deal that struck the spark.
Despite my siding with history’s first murderer (you want blood? I’ll give you blood!) so many things come together in this essential question of meat. History, culture, gender, biology, social norms, traditions, nutrition, religious belief, economics, environmental science, philosophy, politics, law & justice, fads and personal lifestyle choices, just to name a few.
It’s a muddle, certainly, and it’s not only highly political, it’s also highly personal – as anyone who has been openly ridiculed or verbally attacked for their food choices by friend and stranger alike can more than attest to.
But the existential question of meat – to eat or not to eat?- has taken on another, more harrowing aspect in our days of environmental collapse and climate shifts. Can we call ourselves environmentally aware and yet still support and give our money to current farming practices?
In fact, is eating animals not even the issue on the table, is it really farming?
To start with, our societal view of farming is romantic and utterly out of date. The small family farm is virtually a thing of the past.
Farmers who know their livestock and aim to keep them healthy and happy make up only about 1% of all meat on the market today, according to Foer’s data. And even they cannot control how their animals are transported and slaughtered, nor other more minor aspects like tagging, nor the genetic make up of their livestock.
When we talk about meat today – the meat we buy from our local supermarket –we are automatically talking about factory farming and factory farming is just plain bad anyway you look at it.
It's more environmentally damaging than the global use of fossil fuels, devastating to human health due to the disregard for hygiene standards in slaughterhouses and the sale of sick and infected animals to consumers. It's also utterly unsustainable as a business model.
So why is circa 99% of meat in the US factory farmed?
Because it produces a cheap product, and makes good on that most wholesome of 1950s government promises: “a chicken in every pot”.
The smiling face of good government looking after the welfare of every citizen.
We have a choice, Foer says, either we keep our cheap chicken and pork and massively screw over the environment and ourselves…or we look for alternatives.
And if you think, like I did, alternatives mean organic or free-range farming, think again.
The real problem there is that most meat animals we consume today have been genetically bred into unnatural mutants. They have easily breakable bones, so they can’t stand or walk for long, they are highly stressed so that even the sound of a tractor nearby can cause them to keel over dead, and they can’t reproduce naturally due to their unnaturally rapid weight gain.
This is the stock both factory AND many (not all) organic farms have.
Why do that? Why specifically breed mutant chickens, pigs and turkeys and then pump them up with antibiotics and chemicals to keep them some semblance of natural?
Because it’s cheaper than traditional farming and turns a higher profit on a mass level.
And because we can.
Say what?
This is where the question of meat dovetails with the platforms of anti-racism/sexism/homophobia and other similar ethical equality movements. The logic is the same.
In essence, it’s not really about being specifically cruel to animals, as you’ll often hear proclaimed, it’s about dominance, oppression and assumed rights and privileges we humans believe we have through our naturally superior status.
When such arguments are applied to other humans, many of us can see the logic. What human should be treated as lesser and be oppressed due to their skin colour, sex, sexual orientation, religion etc?
What happens, though, when you apply the same logic to a chicken? To a pig? To a cow?
People stutter and backpedal there.
Meat animals are not equal to humans! You can’t call extreme oppression on how factory farms treat (helpless & caged) chickens so we (dominant & privileged) humans can have cheap and tasty chicken burgers! That's just not correct!
This is where the topic becomes even thornier more divisive than it already is. Can we apply the same ethical standards to farm animals that we do to humans…when we haven’t achieved ethical equality among different human groups yet? Is the same application to animals taking too big of a leap forward too fast?
Let’s check the global warming statics and human health risks like heart disease, as well as the likelihood of future pandemics based on brand new and terrifying pathogens created in polluted factory farms… I'll rephrase the question.
In conclusion, Foer points out that there is nothing wrong with eating animals, per se. Eating animals is not the acute problem, the current system of factory farming and genetic destruction of whole species of domesticated animals is.
And what to do about that? Good question, when so much money and different interests intersect at that exact point.
But as long as that is the dominant form of farming and the most convenient source of meat, Foer's not going to be feeding it to his family, nor supporting it with his money.
A wise, well-informed decision, I’d say.
September 16, 2010
I’ve been a vegetarian for a few years now, and it was a long process that brought me here (literally too, I didn’t go cold turkey). I’m sometimes surprised by how little I thought about certain things throughout my life. And coming from someone who grew up with a face in a book, and his head in the clouds, I find this interesting. I over-thought and over-analyzed everything (or at least everything I thought about). I spent my days thinking about fantasy worlds and the future, about girls and relationships (of which I was not very adept at having), about what ifs and what could bes. I thought. I was philosophizing about the universe, and society, and the self long before I knew I was even doing it. And yet even with everything I thought about, there was so much that I never questioned, that I just took for granted.
The state of consumerism in our society makes it very easy for us to not question certain things (though I certainly can’t blame my choices on "the system"). We are so far removed from the process that brings things to our doorsteps and our dinner tables, that it usually takes an effort to even begin contemplating it. How many of us question where our tvs and laptops came from, how that cup of coffee got in our hands, who made the sneakers we’re wearing and how did this food got on our plates? I certainly didn’t. And yet when we start asking ourselves these questions they become hard to ignore. That last of those questions becomes most salient when we start asking, “what” was this food before it got to our plates?
I imagine many children one day suddenly realize they’re eating Babe for dinner and ask their parents why. Their parents probably tell them not to worry about it, and to finish their dinner, and most of them do, end of story…vegetarianism averted. I was recently shocked to learn that as a child I actually went vegetarian for a year or two (I vaguely recall this). Without any real explanation to my mom, I just refused to eat any meat. When I started again, it was sparingly (once a week), and never ventured out past a few staple meats. I never ate pork (jewish schooling gave me an aversion to it, even though my family didn't keep kosher), I refused to eat seafood (it was gross), and mainly stuck with chicken and turkey. Even when I started eating steak I had to eat it well done. Thinking about it now I like to tell myself that deep down I knew what I was doing was wrong. That I didn’t eat seafood because it still too closely resembled the animal it had been before, that I couldn’t eat rare meat because the blood reminded me of what I was eating, and that I felt too sorry for all the other animals to eat them. This probably isn’t that unlikely, but I wouldn’t steak my life on it (pun intended), my general pickiness as an eater is kind of damning for my “I was ethical but didn’t know it” theory.
As an adult, the more I thought about the life and suffering of the animals that were sacrificed for my meal, the harder it became to continue eating them. I never watched any of those horrible factory farming videos, I didn’t have to, though I had some idea of the content. Having seen these videos now, I only wish someone had shown them when I was 15 because I would have been a vegetarian for 15 years now, rather than three. I’m sometimes baffled by individuals that are aware of the practices involved in the meat industry, but continue to support it (with their dollars and their dinners). I imagine there are two types. One intellectually believes they shouldn’t be eating meat anymore, but is held back from making the choice. I understand this state of being. I lived it. I struggled most of my life with acting on, and making a reality, my inner beliefs. How often do we say we’re going to start working out, or stop wasting time on this or that, and we never do it. I fully empathize with this predicament.
Then there are those who understand the system, but who don’t care, or don’t agree it’s wrong in any way. This second case is more baffling, though it shouldn’t be. The human ability to engage in cognitive dissonance (is that something you engage in?) is truly amazing. I’m sure there were plenty of good and kind people who owned slaves, men who value loyalty above all else but cheat on their wives, and though I doubt anyone reading this would rob a bank, how many of us have cheated on our taxes or stolen something from work? I imagine this second case consists of people who understand what’s involved in the meat industry, but don’t think that animals feel pain like us, or that their suffering is like that of a machine or a bug. Or who maybe buy into the fallacy that we need to eat all that meat to fulfill our protein requirements (I should note I’m not a vegan yet). Whatever it is, they feel the positives of eating that food outweighs any negatives involved in bringing it to their plate.
As if this wasn’t enough, the more I thought about the chemicals we pump into these animals, and the damage done to our environment and the resources we consume in feeding, housing, raising, processing, and transporting our food, I just couldn’t justify taking part in it anymore. The only thing left is the “but it tastes good” philosophy, and I really do struggle sometimes to find sympathy for it. It’s worth noting I’m not the kind of vegetarian who is against the idea of eating meat in theory (it’s just dead flesh), but given the realities of our system I don’t find I have another choice for myself.
I’ve always been an animal lover and the happenstance of our willingness to eat Porky but not Skippy strikes me as odd. This has been another tough part of society for me to come to grips with. As someone who wants to work in cognitive science, and who owns and loves two ferrets, I have to wrestle with the fact that much neuroscientific research is done on ferrets. We live in a world of contradictions and hypocrisies and this is not on the verge of changing any time soon. And I guess we each have to ask ourselves, how far are we willing to go to break out of the system and act on our beliefs?
I didn’t intend for this book review to turn into a story about me, but I think it’s a fitting way to write about a Jonathon Safran Foer book. Foer can weave a sad, funny, and heartbreaking story in beautiful prose like it's spilling out of his mouth. His stories are fantasy, but they are also personal journeys. In a way this book was about his personal journey to becoming a vegetarian, and the case he makes for it. I can’t think of a better way to recommend this book than to tell you about the personal journey I took, and direct you to Eating Animals if you want to read a thorough case for it, written by someone with more talent than yours truly, and an amazing ability to be frank, and yet empathetic and non-judgmental at the same time.. I should warn readers though, I only vaguely mention the fact that there are many problems with the meat industry, Foer goes into much more specific detail about these practices. If you're a squeamish person, you may have serious problems getting through this book. One half of me wants to tell you to not read this book to protect you, and the other half wants you to go through that if it makes you take stock afterwards...
The state of consumerism in our society makes it very easy for us to not question certain things (though I certainly can’t blame my choices on "the system"). We are so far removed from the process that brings things to our doorsteps and our dinner tables, that it usually takes an effort to even begin contemplating it. How many of us question where our tvs and laptops came from, how that cup of coffee got in our hands, who made the sneakers we’re wearing and how did this food got on our plates? I certainly didn’t. And yet when we start asking ourselves these questions they become hard to ignore. That last of those questions becomes most salient when we start asking, “what” was this food before it got to our plates?
I imagine many children one day suddenly realize they’re eating Babe for dinner and ask their parents why. Their parents probably tell them not to worry about it, and to finish their dinner, and most of them do, end of story…vegetarianism averted. I was recently shocked to learn that as a child I actually went vegetarian for a year or two (I vaguely recall this). Without any real explanation to my mom, I just refused to eat any meat. When I started again, it was sparingly (once a week), and never ventured out past a few staple meats. I never ate pork (jewish schooling gave me an aversion to it, even though my family didn't keep kosher), I refused to eat seafood (it was gross), and mainly stuck with chicken and turkey. Even when I started eating steak I had to eat it well done. Thinking about it now I like to tell myself that deep down I knew what I was doing was wrong. That I didn’t eat seafood because it still too closely resembled the animal it had been before, that I couldn’t eat rare meat because the blood reminded me of what I was eating, and that I felt too sorry for all the other animals to eat them. This probably isn’t that unlikely, but I wouldn’t steak my life on it (pun intended), my general pickiness as an eater is kind of damning for my “I was ethical but didn’t know it” theory.
As an adult, the more I thought about the life and suffering of the animals that were sacrificed for my meal, the harder it became to continue eating them. I never watched any of those horrible factory farming videos, I didn’t have to, though I had some idea of the content. Having seen these videos now, I only wish someone had shown them when I was 15 because I would have been a vegetarian for 15 years now, rather than three. I’m sometimes baffled by individuals that are aware of the practices involved in the meat industry, but continue to support it (with their dollars and their dinners). I imagine there are two types. One intellectually believes they shouldn’t be eating meat anymore, but is held back from making the choice. I understand this state of being. I lived it. I struggled most of my life with acting on, and making a reality, my inner beliefs. How often do we say we’re going to start working out, or stop wasting time on this or that, and we never do it. I fully empathize with this predicament.
Then there are those who understand the system, but who don’t care, or don’t agree it’s wrong in any way. This second case is more baffling, though it shouldn’t be. The human ability to engage in cognitive dissonance (is that something you engage in?) is truly amazing. I’m sure there were plenty of good and kind people who owned slaves, men who value loyalty above all else but cheat on their wives, and though I doubt anyone reading this would rob a bank, how many of us have cheated on our taxes or stolen something from work? I imagine this second case consists of people who understand what’s involved in the meat industry, but don’t think that animals feel pain like us, or that their suffering is like that of a machine or a bug. Or who maybe buy into the fallacy that we need to eat all that meat to fulfill our protein requirements (I should note I’m not a vegan yet). Whatever it is, they feel the positives of eating that food outweighs any negatives involved in bringing it to their plate.
As if this wasn’t enough, the more I thought about the chemicals we pump into these animals, and the damage done to our environment and the resources we consume in feeding, housing, raising, processing, and transporting our food, I just couldn’t justify taking part in it anymore. The only thing left is the “but it tastes good” philosophy, and I really do struggle sometimes to find sympathy for it. It’s worth noting I’m not the kind of vegetarian who is against the idea of eating meat in theory (it’s just dead flesh), but given the realities of our system I don’t find I have another choice for myself.
I’ve always been an animal lover and the happenstance of our willingness to eat Porky but not Skippy strikes me as odd. This has been another tough part of society for me to come to grips with. As someone who wants to work in cognitive science, and who owns and loves two ferrets, I have to wrestle with the fact that much neuroscientific research is done on ferrets. We live in a world of contradictions and hypocrisies and this is not on the verge of changing any time soon. And I guess we each have to ask ourselves, how far are we willing to go to break out of the system and act on our beliefs?
I didn’t intend for this book review to turn into a story about me, but I think it’s a fitting way to write about a Jonathon Safran Foer book. Foer can weave a sad, funny, and heartbreaking story in beautiful prose like it's spilling out of his mouth. His stories are fantasy, but they are also personal journeys. In a way this book was about his personal journey to becoming a vegetarian, and the case he makes for it. I can’t think of a better way to recommend this book than to tell you about the personal journey I took, and direct you to Eating Animals if you want to read a thorough case for it, written by someone with more talent than yours truly, and an amazing ability to be frank, and yet empathetic and non-judgmental at the same time.. I should warn readers though, I only vaguely mention the fact that there are many problems with the meat industry, Foer goes into much more specific detail about these practices. If you're a squeamish person, you may have serious problems getting through this book. One half of me wants to tell you to not read this book to protect you, and the other half wants you to go through that if it makes you take stock afterwards...
June 28, 2016
“If Nothing Matters, There's Nothing to Save”
- Jonathan Safran Foer, Eating Animals
I'm going to have to chew on this book for a bit. I'm not sure a review the day after reading will fully vest what I plan on doing after reading this. I might be about ready to go veg, but there is something just annoying enough about JSF that almost wants to keep me eating meat just to piss him off. Nah, that really isn't true, but I wish it was.
The book isn't as well-written as I would have liked. It gave me what was important, but just not in the portions or the way I would have preferred. The book's narrative shifts were a little confusing. At times, I didn't know if JSF was trying to produce an academic screed or a philosophical screed. In total, I guess it worked, but barely. I think 'Eating Meat' was held together more by the power of the message than the way that JSF cooked the message.
To be fair, I did really like Foer's ideas/themes of creating new stories of food and his idea that animals are often recepticals of our forgetting. I thought that was the strongest piece of his whole book.
Anyway, off to bed. I'll dream of factory slaughtered turkeys and hogs and wake tomorrow ready to think more about this book, the Animals I eat, the resources I waste, and what I plan on doing for the rest of my life in relation to the meat I eat. We will see what tomorrow brings.
- Jonathan Safran Foer, Eating Animals
I'm going to have to chew on this book for a bit. I'm not sure a review the day after reading will fully vest what I plan on doing after reading this. I might be about ready to go veg, but there is something just annoying enough about JSF that almost wants to keep me eating meat just to piss him off. Nah, that really isn't true, but I wish it was.
The book isn't as well-written as I would have liked. It gave me what was important, but just not in the portions or the way I would have preferred. The book's narrative shifts were a little confusing. At times, I didn't know if JSF was trying to produce an academic screed or a philosophical screed. In total, I guess it worked, but barely. I think 'Eating Meat' was held together more by the power of the message than the way that JSF cooked the message.
To be fair, I did really like Foer's ideas/themes of creating new stories of food and his idea that animals are often recepticals of our forgetting. I thought that was the strongest piece of his whole book.
Anyway, off to bed. I'll dream of factory slaughtered turkeys and hogs and wake tomorrow ready to think more about this book, the Animals I eat, the resources I waste, and what I plan on doing for the rest of my life in relation to the meat I eat. We will see what tomorrow brings.
January 2, 2023
M-a zdruncinat teribil cartea lui Jonathan Safran Foer. Am mai avut o tentativă să o citesc în urmă cu 3 ani, însă am renunțat de la primele 30 de pagini – mă speriase, nu eram pregătită să duc ce era acolo.
Apoi, am început să lucrez cu un medic nutriționist în Viena, în paralel cu un medic nutriționist în România și așa am simțit cum se traduce ce mănânc în analize, în starea mea de zi cu zi. Întregul proces m-a făcut să vreau să înțeleg mai multe despre mâncarea căreia îi dădeam atât de puțină importanță.
Am început anul 2023 cu dorința de a fi în stare să citesc “De ce mâncăm animalele”. Și cum nu-mi place să trăiesc cu deadline-uri deasupra capului, am pus mâna pe ea și am terminat-o în doar două zile. Mi s-a făcut fizic rău, mi-a venit să urlu de nervi, m-am supărat pe mine că m-am ferit vehement de această realitate. Dar, știi cum e: uneori ne ia niște ani sau chiar niște vieți să înfruntăm niște realități.
Cartea nu este o lungă înșiruire de argumente pentru a ne convinge să devenim vegetarieni (așa cum credeam eu), ci este o luptă împotriva maltratării animalelor, o luptă împotriva fermelor industriale americane, o luptă împotriva suferinței.
A schimbat ceva în mine? Poate mai mult decât mare parte dintre lecturile avute de-a lungul vieții. Simt o revoltă incomensurabilă pe care aștept cu multă răbdare ca timpul să o transforme în ceva constructiv – și am toată încrederea în mine că așa se va întâmpla.
Oricât de greu este să recomand cuiva cartea asta, mi se pare că este mai mult decât o simplă recomandare. Ar trebui să fie o lectură obligatorie. Este obligația noastră să ne informăm despre ce mâncăm, despre ce consecințe au alegerile noastre alimentare. Să citim lucruri (oricât de dure ar fi ele), ca abia apoi să luăm decizii. Schimbările nu se fac mai niciodată fără disconfort, asta e sigur.
Mulțumesc, Jonathan, că mi-ai dat acest disconfort, de care aveam atât de mare nevoie!
Apoi, am început să lucrez cu un medic nutriționist în Viena, în paralel cu un medic nutriționist în România și așa am simțit cum se traduce ce mănânc în analize, în starea mea de zi cu zi. Întregul proces m-a făcut să vreau să înțeleg mai multe despre mâncarea căreia îi dădeam atât de puțină importanță.
Am început anul 2023 cu dorința de a fi în stare să citesc “De ce mâncăm animalele”. Și cum nu-mi place să trăiesc cu deadline-uri deasupra capului, am pus mâna pe ea și am terminat-o în doar două zile. Mi s-a făcut fizic rău, mi-a venit să urlu de nervi, m-am supărat pe mine că m-am ferit vehement de această realitate. Dar, știi cum e: uneori ne ia niște ani sau chiar niște vieți să înfruntăm niște realități.
Cartea nu este o lungă înșiruire de argumente pentru a ne convinge să devenim vegetarieni (așa cum credeam eu), ci este o luptă împotriva maltratării animalelor, o luptă împotriva fermelor industriale americane, o luptă împotriva suferinței.
A schimbat ceva în mine? Poate mai mult decât mare parte dintre lecturile avute de-a lungul vieții. Simt o revoltă incomensurabilă pe care aștept cu multă răbdare ca timpul să o transforme în ceva constructiv – și am toată încrederea în mine că așa se va întâmpla.
Oricât de greu este să recomand cuiva cartea asta, mi se pare că este mai mult decât o simplă recomandare. Ar trebui să fie o lectură obligatorie. Este obligația noastră să ne informăm despre ce mâncăm, despre ce consecințe au alegerile noastre alimentare. Să citim lucruri (oricât de dure ar fi ele), ca abia apoi să luăm decizii. Schimbările nu se fac mai niciodată fără disconfort, asta e sigur.
Mulțumesc, Jonathan, că mi-ai dat acest disconfort, de care aveam atât de mare nevoie!
Read
September 27, 2019A non-intrusive and at times touching case for reconsidering our relationship with food. One of the fairest analyses of animal farming available to purchase -- it isn't unequivocally opposed to the use of animals for food, but that is not the point of the book.
If you already don't consume animals, this won't do much for you besides providing arguments to strengthen your enthusiasm for veganism, and humanising those who haven't made the same life choice. If you still do eat animals, this will be a challenging volume.
If you already don't consume animals, this won't do much for you besides providing arguments to strengthen your enthusiasm for veganism, and humanising those who haven't made the same life choice. If you still do eat animals, this will be a challenging volume.
April 15, 2019
به خودت بستگی داره که اجازه بدی هر آشغالی به نام خوراک وارد بدنت بشه یا نه؛ فقط خودت. حتمن سخت هم هست خیلی وقت ها ولی از یه لحظه ای باید تصمیم بگیری که راه درست رو بری یا بگی من هم مثل بقیه مگه چه اتفاقی قراره بیفته؟! هر روز و هر نوبت خوراک رو می تونی ازش لذت ببری اما نه حتمن با حیوان خواری محض، چرا که یه روزی نه چندان دور باید تاوانش رو پس بدی! باید سبک خوراک خوردنت رو تغییر بدی و از دروغ هایی که تا الان شنیدی فاصله بگیری. یادت باشه زندگی هر قدر هم کوتاه باشه دلیلی نیست که کیفیت نداشته باشه و به وجود و درون خودت تو��ه نکنی. داستان حیوان خواری همینه. اینکه اجازه بدی یا نه. اجازه بدی که بدنت بشه یه زباله دونی یا نه-اینها گفتگوهای درونی من است از ابتدای خواندن تا پایان ماجرای کتاب که تازه پس از بستن آغاز می شود
و از کتاب بیاورم
وقتی گوشتی می خوریم که در فرآیندهای پرورش صنعتی تولید شده، به معنای واقعی کلمه، گوشت شکنجه شده می خوریم. همین گوشت شکنجه شده به گوشت بدن خودمان تبدیل می شود / ص 173
اگر ما حق انتخاب گزینه ی زندگی بدون خشونت را نداشته باشیم، این امکان به ما داده شده که غذایمان را از میان برداشت محصول یا کشتار انتخاب کنیم. یعنی بین کشاورزی و جنگ. ما کشتار را انتخا�� کرده ایم. ما جنگ را برگزیده ایم. این صادقانه ترین نسخه ی داستان حیوان خواری ماست./ ص 291
نکته: چاپ کتاب بسیار خوبه. کاغذ تیره رنگ ارگونومیک و سبک. ترجمه ی خوب و پذیرفته از ثمین نبی پور- سپاس از او هم
1397/05/04
و از کتاب بیاورم
وقتی گوشتی می خوریم که در فرآیندهای پرورش صنعتی تولید شده، به معنای واقعی کلمه، گوشت شکنجه شده می خوریم. همین گوشت شکنجه شده به گوشت بدن خودمان تبدیل می شود / ص 173
اگر ما حق انتخاب گزینه ی زندگی بدون خشونت را نداشته باشیم، این امکان به ما داده شده که غذایمان را از میان برداشت محصول یا کشتار انتخاب کنیم. یعنی بین کشاورزی و جنگ. ما کشتار را انتخا�� کرده ایم. ما جنگ را برگزیده ایم. این صادقانه ترین نسخه ی داستان حیوان خواری ماست./ ص 291
نکته: چاپ کتاب بسیار خوبه. کاغذ تیره رنگ ارگونومیک و سبک. ترجمه ی خوب و پذیرفته از ثمین نبی پور- سپاس از او هم
1397/05/04
March 21, 2020
Αν δεν ήμουν ήδη χορτοφάγος, θα το σκεφτόμουν πολύ σοβαρά να γίνω μετά την ανάγνωση του βιβλίου αυτού. Νομίζω πως αποτελεί μια από τις αρτιότερες μελέτες σχετικά με την βιομηχανοποιημένη κτηνοτροφία και τα αποτελέσματα της ολοένα και μεγαλύτερης κατανάλωσης κρέατος. Ξεκινώντας από μια ανάγκη για περισσότερη πληροφόρηση σχετικά με τις διαδικασίες παραγωγής και επεξεργασίας όσων φτάνουν στο πιάτο μας, ο Φοερ επιτυγχάνει τελικά κάτι ακόμα μεγαλύτερο - την περιγραφή της βαναυσότητας μέσω της οποία φτάνει το κρέας στο πιάτο μας. Προσωπικά δε μπορώ να πω ότι θα μεμφθώ οποιονδήποτε θέλει να συνεχίσει να τρώει κρέας, είναι προσωπική επιλογή και απολύτως σεβαστή όπως πρέπει να είναι και η δική μου επιλογή για αποχή εξίσου σεβαστή από εκείνον. Η ουσία είναι όμως ότι η ολοένα και μεγαλύτερη κατανάλωση κρέατος επιφέρει τρομακτικές επιπτώσεις στο οικοσύστημα που ζούμε και ανεξάρτητα από το εάν κάποιος τρώει ή όχι κρέας, θα ήταν καλό να διαβάσει αυτό το βιβλίο. Η ωμότητα την σκηνών που περιγράφει προφανώς δεν είναι ευχάριστη αλλά μπροστά στα αποτελέσματα που έχει ήδη φέρει η αλόγιστη κατανάλωση, νομίζω πως είναι κάτι που αντέχεται.
June 16, 2011
I am floating this again (last time! Swear!), this time for the Facebook 30 Day Book Challenge. Day whatever I am on asks for a book that changed your life. I... don't know that I have ever read a book that really changed my life. But this one comes the closest.
That sounds a little dippy, but really. For years, I had skittered around the margins of vegetarianism. I'd forgo meat the majority of the time, perhaps even the vast majority, but I didn't have really concrete reasons as to why. Health? Environmentalism? Animal rights? That time I found a hunk of cartilage in a Subway chicken breast?
This book gave me reasons. Reasons I knew about already, sure -- we've all heard horror stories, seen a PETA protest, read Fast Food Nation. But Jonathan Safran Foer, in addition to laying out all the terrible truths about where our food comes from nowadays, managed to make me realize that my choices do matter, even if I'm not really "making a difference."
After having a child, JSF realizes that what he eats and how he goes about it is part of the story of his life, a story that he is telling to his children every day, just by living it. He decided his story can't be about eating animals anymore, not while he carries the knowledge of how harmful modern farming techniques are, in so many ways, and how much of a liberal pipe dream phrases like "free range," "cage free" and "humane" almost always are.
Have I eaten meat since I read this? Yes, a few times, see below. But it has also, in the last six months, been a big, big contribution to the drastic, near complete reduction in my egg and dairy consumption. Because those foods, as much as I love them, are part of the story too.
Food choices are deeply personal. It is also easy to slip into stridency and defensiveness when talking about them, no matter which side you are on. If you are curious, or questioning, read this book. It might change your life too, sort of.
---
This isn't really a review; it's just a comment I left on another review that I decided to lazily re-post. And now I am lazily bumping it, because I have accidentally eaten meat a whole bunch of times in the last few weeks after going like 6 months without (though in my defense I was on vacation in a country where as far as I know they raise their animals using more humane, old-style techniques). So anyway I wanted to re-read my review again and re-commit. Then I found a typo.
---
What I appreciated about Eating Animals is the way it argues that even if you totally ignore the question of whether it is "right" to eat meat or not, the way meat is "farmed" in our country is intrinsically wrong, in my mind, unarguably so.
Whether you think animals have any right to exist or even to die with a minimal amount of suffering (which I think is also pretty obviously the case, because we all know pain is horrible and try to avoid it, and feel empathy when we hear about people or cute animals suffering, unless we are sociopaths or something), modern factory farming produces food that is frequently unsafe for consumption, and in any case loaded with bacteria (seriously, did you know every piece of chicken you buy is bloated with feces-contaminated water, a lot of it, which is there because of the way the animals are slaughtered and processed?) and antibiotics.
Far from only hurting animals and occasionally making people sick, these practices do great harm to the environment, poisoning the land and the air. Yes, they produce cheap food, but only because the huge corporations that own the farms don't pay for all that environmental damage, and for some reason our government has a totally incomprehensible farm subsidies system in place that somehow makes all this possible and profitable.
I don't eat meat anymore, even though I love it and constantly crave it (well, not so much chicken anymore). If it was still farmed the way it was 100 years ago, on small farms that treated animals well, but also did far less harm to the environment, I probably would still do it. You can get that kind of meat today, but it is expensive, because it costs what it should cost. Cheeseburgers at McDonald's should not cost $1.
I do realize that the foods I do eat are also part of a huge corporate system that is still really screwed up (I eat bananas and drink coffee, for one thing). The way I see it, cutting out meat, which is by far the most harmful eating practice I engaged in, is the least I can do.
Facebook 30 Day Book Challenge Day 10: Book that changed your life.
That sounds a little dippy, but really. For years, I had skittered around the margins of vegetarianism. I'd forgo meat the majority of the time, perhaps even the vast majority, but I didn't have really concrete reasons as to why. Health? Environmentalism? Animal rights? That time I found a hunk of cartilage in a Subway chicken breast?
This book gave me reasons. Reasons I knew about already, sure -- we've all heard horror stories, seen a PETA protest, read Fast Food Nation. But Jonathan Safran Foer, in addition to laying out all the terrible truths about where our food comes from nowadays, managed to make me realize that my choices do matter, even if I'm not really "making a difference."
After having a child, JSF realizes that what he eats and how he goes about it is part of the story of his life, a story that he is telling to his children every day, just by living it. He decided his story can't be about eating animals anymore, not while he carries the knowledge of how harmful modern farming techniques are, in so many ways, and how much of a liberal pipe dream phrases like "free range," "cage free" and "humane" almost always are.
Have I eaten meat since I read this? Yes, a few times, see below. But it has also, in the last six months, been a big, big contribution to the drastic, near complete reduction in my egg and dairy consumption. Because those foods, as much as I love them, are part of the story too.
Food choices are deeply personal. It is also easy to slip into stridency and defensiveness when talking about them, no matter which side you are on. If you are curious, or questioning, read this book. It might change your life too, sort of.
---
This isn't really a review; it's just a comment I left on another review that I decided to lazily re-post. And now I am lazily bumping it, because I have accidentally eaten meat a whole bunch of times in the last few weeks after going like 6 months without (though in my defense I was on vacation in a country where as far as I know they raise their animals using more humane, old-style techniques). So anyway I wanted to re-read my review again and re-commit. Then I found a typo.
---
What I appreciated about Eating Animals is the way it argues that even if you totally ignore the question of whether it is "right" to eat meat or not, the way meat is "farmed" in our country is intrinsically wrong, in my mind, unarguably so.
Whether you think animals have any right to exist or even to die with a minimal amount of suffering (which I think is also pretty obviously the case, because we all know pain is horrible and try to avoid it, and feel empathy when we hear about people or cute animals suffering, unless we are sociopaths or something), modern factory farming produces food that is frequently unsafe for consumption, and in any case loaded with bacteria (seriously, did you know every piece of chicken you buy is bloated with feces-contaminated water, a lot of it, which is there because of the way the animals are slaughtered and processed?) and antibiotics.
Far from only hurting animals and occasionally making people sick, these practices do great harm to the environment, poisoning the land and the air. Yes, they produce cheap food, but only because the huge corporations that own the farms don't pay for all that environmental damage, and for some reason our government has a totally incomprehensible farm subsidies system in place that somehow makes all this possible and profitable.
I don't eat meat anymore, even though I love it and constantly crave it (well, not so much chicken anymore). If it was still farmed the way it was 100 years ago, on small farms that treated animals well, but also did far less harm to the environment, I probably would still do it. You can get that kind of meat today, but it is expensive, because it costs what it should cost. Cheeseburgers at McDonald's should not cost $1.
I do realize that the foods I do eat are also part of a huge corporate system that is still really screwed up (I eat bananas and drink coffee, for one thing). The way I see it, cutting out meat, which is by far the most harmful eating practice I engaged in, is the least I can do.
Facebook 30 Day Book Challenge Day 10: Book that changed your life.
August 9, 2016
Eating animals ...is about eating animals..and much much more. I've always felt wrong for eating meat yet continued to do so. For some reason, I thought it would be so hard to give up. Over time my conscience spoke louder than my fears (denials) and the ball has been rolling ever since. I wanted some extra encouragement, so I ordered this book.
I knew about slaughter houses and what goes on: to an extent. Little did I know, I really knew nothing. I've ingested this food all my life! HOLYYYYYY SHIIIIIIT! How can I keep this to myself?! All I keep thinking is ,"Everyone needs to know about this!"
Yet, I don't want to be "that person" but then I do, I really really do. I wish I could convince more people to read this book but some just don't want to hear it. Once you "know" there is no going back.
This is not only about the terror millions of animals experience(turkey,chickens,pigs,cows,fish), it's also about the incredible impact it has on our environment and health.
Farming as we knew it, is no more. Our meat comes from industrial factory farms that claim they want to feed the people, but in reality, it's all about money, and there is no limit to the extreme measures they take to make it. (Regardless of the consequences) I can't even begin to describe the horror.
A video that was mentioned in the book, Meet Your Meat, (Google it) was eye opening and heartbreaking. Watch it. I dare you.
"If we are at all serious about ending factory farming, ... To those for whom it sounds like a hard decision ... The ultimate question is whether it's worth the inconvenience. We know, at least, that this decision will help prevent deforestation, curb global warning, reduce pollution, save oil reserves, lesson the burden on rural America, decrease human rights abuse, improve public health, and help eliminate the most systematic animal abuse in world history. What we don't know, though, may be just as important. How would making such a decision change us?" -Pg. 257
I knew about slaughter houses and what goes on: to an extent. Little did I know, I really knew nothing. I've ingested this food all my life! HOLYYYYYY SHIIIIIIT! How can I keep this to myself?! All I keep thinking is ,"Everyone needs to know about this!"
Yet, I don't want to be "that person" but then I do, I really really do. I wish I could convince more people to read this book but some just don't want to hear it. Once you "know" there is no going back.
This is not only about the terror millions of animals experience(turkey,chickens,pigs,cows,fish), it's also about the incredible impact it has on our environment and health.
Farming as we knew it, is no more. Our meat comes from industrial factory farms that claim they want to feed the people, but in reality, it's all about money, and there is no limit to the extreme measures they take to make it. (Regardless of the consequences) I can't even begin to describe the horror.
A video that was mentioned in the book, Meet Your Meat, (Google it) was eye opening and heartbreaking. Watch it. I dare you.
"If we are at all serious about ending factory farming, ... To those for whom it sounds like a hard decision ... The ultimate question is whether it's worth the inconvenience. We know, at least, that this decision will help prevent deforestation, curb global warning, reduce pollution, save oil reserves, lesson the burden on rural America, decrease human rights abuse, improve public health, and help eliminate the most systematic animal abuse in world history. What we don't know, though, may be just as important. How would making such a decision change us?" -Pg. 257
June 13, 2017
I think that this book has changed my life, albeit in a really f*cking inconvenient way. I've read Omnivore's Dilemma and Fast Food Nation and all the types of books that people who are trying to be socially conscious are supposed to read, and I know about the horrors of factory farming and how brutally animals are treated in the course of getting to my plate. But somehow it's been easier to live with it and ignore it in the past; Pollan even gives you a convenient out at the end of his book, where he "pities" the "dreams of innocence" of the vegetarian. I've never quite had it put to me the way that Safran Foer does, and it is this way that I cannot escape. This book asks just what the hell are you going to do about it? Knowing what you've just told about how chickens are raised & slaughtered, how the hell can you ever go to the store & buy chicken breasts again? After reading about what's done to pigs in the course of their lives, how can you go buy bacon? And even if you don't want to admit that turkeys and chickens and cows can feel pain, how can you support of an industry that Human Rights Watch says is guilty of "systemic human rights violations"? I'm not trying to get on a high horse or anything here: I love meat. I love bacon & sausage & desebrada & chicken fingers and pork roasts. I love these things and I don't want to go without them. And I never asked for the farming industry to use genetic manipulation to breed animals that are weaker & sicker. I never asked for them to jam-pack animals with antibiotics & end their lives in horrifically violent ways. But I don't think I can eat meat anymore because whether I asked for it or not, buying their products is supporting their ways.
This review's getting too long. I suppose to sum up, this book has changed my life & I really wish I hadn't read it. I really wish I could just go on pretending that none of this ever happens. I wish I didn't tear up when I think about the chicken in my freezer (keep in mind that I am pregnant & emotional, please).
This review's getting too long. I suppose to sum up, this book has changed my life & I really wish I hadn't read it. I really wish I could just go on pretending that none of this ever happens. I wish I didn't tear up when I think about the chicken in my freezer (keep in mind that I am pregnant & emotional, please).
November 1, 2022
A thorough, well researched and hard book about an important subject.
Jonathan Safran Foer uses a personal narrative which also takes time to reflect on the social context of food and what makes it hard to take the leap from a “knowing” that animals die for your daily meals to action. The visual statistics used to drive across the message are very effective and he also takes time to interview and narrate the views both sides of the discussion. This book made me stop eating meat, so Eating Animals in my view is a book with impact, quite an achievement for any book!
Jonathan Safran Foer uses a personal narrative which also takes time to reflect on the social context of food and what makes it hard to take the leap from a “knowing” that animals die for your daily meals to action. The visual statistics used to drive across the message are very effective and he also takes time to interview and narrate the views both sides of the discussion. This book made me stop eating meat, so Eating Animals in my view is a book with impact, quite an achievement for any book!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 7,829 reviews