MORE THOUGHT FOR FOOD

Diet and our "isms"; beliefs and what we eat

We seldom use the terms, "omnivorism," or "carnivorism," yet we freely use "vegetarianism," as though it were a mere subset of some universally established human diet. The implied presumption here seems to suggest that not eating animals is in some way the product of an ideology or set of values or beliefs, while the other diets represent the normal human fare.

As most people prefer not to think much about the animals they eat, I would suggest that the abstraction of the hamburger from the cow is more based on ideas than is my non-meat diet. In this way, "carnivorism" may be the more ideological of the diets. When pressed, many meat-eaters will freely, if uncomfortably, admit they'd "rather not think about it." This means that some set of ideas, which they'd rather not think about, is involved in their decision to eat meat.

Our "isms" are tied up with our dietary choices, no doubt. Of course, one can assert that all dietary inclinations are enculturated, such that all are the result of beliefs. Maybe. But, my point is to address the unfortunate and unfounded bias toward assigning "ism" to one diet, while not to another. This bias does considerable and unnecessary damage, so we need to look at it.

The term "vegetarianism" is a misnomer, at least in my case. It is not at all because of any "beliefs" that I don't eat animals. It is solely because no part of my being registers any part of an animal as food. It has been since 1993 that I have neither eaten meat nor had any desire to do so. To be devoid of desire and therefore to not indulge in something is no matter of belief.

If there is any "belief" at play for me, it may be tied up with the following: I have long noticed that I have a much greater opportunity to learn from, serve, and enjoy a living animal than I possibly could by killing and eating it. I would much rather befriend a cow or a pig than find her on my plate. Over a lifetime friendship with an animal, surely there would manifest much more growth and value than whatever I might derive from one or two meals from that animal's dead body. I suspect the animal would feel that way, too, given the chance. I think my dog sees it this way, for example.

Generally, when we consider any "ism," we are referring to actions deriving from or supporting some set of ideas, principles or practices, rather than to any sort of incontrovertible understanding. If I say I believe in God, yet have had no experience of God, I am saying something different than one whose affirmation of God is based on some kind of direct experience; such experience is incontrovertible and enduring, while beliefs may change from day to day. The enlightened Buddhist rejects "Buddhism," because the understanding is not based on any ideology, even if some principles or values had led to such enlightenment. The ideological vegetarian may return to eating meat upon receipt of some new advice, while my motivation is not subject to such influences. Originally, I stopped eating meat both because I believed it was morally wrong, and because I increasingly could not avoid feelings of disgust when I did. Now, no "ism" applies any longer; for me, animals are simply not food.

I have lost touch with why so many eat meat, given that it is evidently unnecessary (millions live in prime health without it). I know that blind habit is a lot of it. Sure, it might be necessary if I were starving in the wilderness, or if that were all I had available to eat. The same is true in surviving a stranded airplane wreck: I might eat my wife or kid if I had to. But that is clearly not why most folks go out for a rib dinner.

Hindus hold the cow to be sacred. She represents, or is a manifestation of, Divine Mother. The idea of eating one is completely appalling, much like the idea of eating our own dog or cat is to us. One man's steak is another's Mother, one could say.

We're in the domain of beliefs again at this point. Or are we? Do you refrain from eating your cat because of some "belief?" Ask yourself that. More likely, your cat simply isn't a food item. Then, why is your neighbor's cow? What if they wanted to eat your dog? Eating a cow is much like eating your pet, depending on your perspective.

"Cannibalism" is a word that continues to evoke visceral response. I see this term including any creatures with vertebrae and eyes. All are my relatives, in a direct kind of way. My aversion to cannibalism is more based on direct identification than on any ideology or belief. I tend not to eat what I most identify with. I don't refrain from eating my neighbor because I believe it is wrong, so much as because my neighbor resembles me more than she does food. The revulsion I feel about eating another human is nearly identical to what I feel about eating a hamburger. I have no desire to eat either.

God help me I never have to eat my friends.