As a survivor of disordered eating, I am hyper-conscious of diets disguised as anything else. My sister-in-law is vegetarian, and she explained to me that it's because "meat makes her feel fat." Putting aside the psychological analysis of "fat" as a feeling, this rationale makes vegetarianism a diet for diet's sake. It's difficult to deconstruct why someone is on a diet, but this book clearly sets forth the idea that veganism is for "skinny bitches." Ugh.

When I went vegan I gained ten pounds, and to be perfectly honest, I thought that cutting out animal products was a shortcut to thin. It wasn't.

There are plenty of good reasons to cut down on animal products or cut them out completely, but luring people in with promises of weight loss is pretty deceptive. I'm sure the book outlines how one can eat healthy and vegan at the same time, but it seems like it's designed to appeal to the type of people who are looking for an easy formula to magically lose weight. A lot of people who stick to the diet will probably lose weight, but that's a hella dumb reason to go vegan.

I'm going to write my own diet book called The Yellow Diet, and you can only eat things that are yellow. Watch the pounds melt away!

I was a vegetarian for 7 years because I'm an animal rights advocate. Weight didn't even factor in when I made the decision to cut out meat. When I brought meat back it was because I was on a band trip to China and the vegetarian options were lacking. I was basically trying to live off of white rice, which didn't really offer much nutrition and definitely didn't supply enough energy to be a tourist and perform in a 90-minute marching band show (in case there were any doubts about this, marching band is physically demanding and can be extraordinarily grueling, especially in unfavorable conditions).

I fully support anyone's decision to go vegetarian or vegan. But you've got to do it for the right reasons, and you've got to do your research so you can stay healthy while doing it.

I am exhausted by how often veganism is pegged as being "extreme" or impossible to negotiate without lots of research and effort. An omnivore is not guaranteed healthy eating, and plenty of meat eaters have eating habits that could be described as extreme (as in processed, fatty, restrictive, sugary, etc.) Please can we stop paying lip service to this idea that vegans somehow require extensive knowledge in order to maintain their diet? Everyone would benefit from knowing and understanding more about what they eat and what they should be eating to stay healthy.

Darn it, you made me dig up my old TypePad username and password for this. I can't read this without chiming in.

Automatically distrusting a woman's motives for eating a vegetarian or vegan diet is akin to thinking of women who get abortions as "victims." Women should be trusted to make their own decisions, and you know that. (Naturally, every person has nagging social pressures applied to her in potentially damaging ways, including the absurd expectation that all women need to be thin and stay home and pump out babies. But then we're talking about free will, which is a diversion more obtuse than this topic necessitates.)

As a fit vegan woman who who also reads up on fat acceptance literature, I detect an unfortunate "us vs. them" undercurrent in FA text; the assumption is that women who are thin are either hungry all the time, aren't getting enough nutrients, or choose a lifestyle conducive to fitness in order to achieve a socially-accepted definition of beauty. The thrust of FA is to judge women and men based on their personalities and actions, not on their appearances, but a small number of FA advocates twist this into judging small women based on their appearances. If real women have curves, does not being curvy mean I'm not a real woman? No one has the authority to define what a woman needs to do or look like in order to be "authentically" feminine.

I completely believe that veganism (or any restrictive diet) is abused by some for aesthetic side-effects. But your suspicions about vegan women are patronizing and insulting, and contribute to a culture in which woman have to look or act a certain way to pass muster. This distrust also undercuts the dedication to animal rights, environmental health, and personal health that most vegan women display.

P.S. I ate cake for breakfast yesterday. Even vegan woman know how to live it up.

And let me preemtively clarify that I do not confuse "thinness" for "fitness." They are very, very different.

I've been a vegetarian and on-again/off-again vegan for seven years, and I agree with faithlesswondergirl - the only difficult part of being vegan is giving up cheese (well, for me) and dealing with an unsympathetic and misunderstanding society. I eat the way I do for ethical and environmental reasons, and also because I feel healthier when I'm vegan. While I understand that some people use veganism to cover up eating disorders, I don't appreciate the stereotype that every vegan must be hiding something.

I agree that weight loss is a very bad reason to go vegan, but I have to disagree that veganism is a "very extreme diet". First of all, it's not a diet at all; it's an entire lifestyle and philosophy that includes not only what we eat, but what we wear, what we put on our faces, and even how we speak and relate to the world. Second, vegan eating is not particularly restrictive unless you want it to be. I own more than 12 cookbooks and make a different dinner almost every night; you'd be amazed at what variety is possible, even without animal products. I have been vegan for over a year and have not lost a pound, nor do I want to.

I have to agree with Rebecca B. that, while there certainly may be some women who use their "veganism" as an excuse to limit their eating, we should not automatically distrust the motivations of female vegans. I know a lot of vegans, both online and in real life, and we come in all shapes and sizes, but we are all to a person motivated by a desire for change and a respect for all sentient life.

As an abolitionist vegan I've had a problem with the Skinny Bitch book since it came out. I don't like the idea of trying to covert people to veganism by promising weight loss. First, veganism is much more than a diet, it's a lifestyle that extends to clothing, household products, personal hygene products, etc.

I've heard a few people talk about how many vegans this book has created, but I have to wonder first, how many are actually vegan v/s just being strict vegetarian, in other words have they actually taken it beyond diet. And secondly, how long is their veganism going to last? Do they cheat like so many do on diets? Will they stop when they've lost enough weight? This isn't real veganism.

I wish more people could feel comfortable talking about their true reasons for being vegan, compassion and the belief that sentient beings who can feel pain and fear deserve the right to freely live out their lives, be it human animals or non-human animals. But instead a lot of people seem like they're afraid to say that they care about animals out of fear of either pissing people off or being made fun of. So instead they try to take the health route which doesn't really educate anyone on the real problems.

One of my favorite quotes is by Alice Walker and is one of the first things I read that made me start thinking about why I viewed human animals as being more deserving of life than non-human animals.

The animals of the world exist for their own reasons. They were not made for humans any more than black people were made for whites or women for men.

BTW, I should probably also point out that I've been vegan for years now and still weigh close to 200lbs. Losing weight is about eating less calories than you burn and exercising. I wish people would realize that this is the only safe and effective way to do it and forget about starving themselves or going on dangerous and unhealthy fad/crash diets.

I have honestly never heard of being skinny as a reason for being vegan. And if women give that reason, it seems like more of a food problem than a problem with being vegan. Today a friend of mine said she thought she should cut out bagels! I was shocked. Sure they have a lot of carbs and calories but you need calories! I always look at the nutrition values of the bagels I eat and think wow, iron, protein, omega-3 etc etc. I wonder how women get this attitude.

I read through this book one day at the book store, I was very offended by the tone of "skinny bitch", I felt as if it aimed to shame me into being vegan and skinny. I am a vegetarian, and I know many people who are vegan and vegetarian, but none of them do it to lose weight; they do it to develop a more humane and healthy lifestyle. I do think being vegan is more of a challenge than being a vegetarian, and if I was to do it, I would want to consult a nutritionist. While I understand the poster's concern due to her own experience, I don't think that it is fair to relate this to any woman who chooses to be vegan.

As a vegetarian (though not a vegan), I think beatricious and Rebecca B. make some important points about veganism not being the "extreme diet" lots of people claim it is. And I also agree that lots of people make ridiculous assumptions about vegans, and vegetarians in general.

But on the other hand, I don't think Samhita's original post was designed to offend or dismiss vegans-- despite the unfortunate choice of the word "extreme." As others have pointed out, meat-eaters need to pay closer attention to what they eat if they want to be healthy too, just as Samhita says vegans should. But the larger point is about using a ridiculous and destructive beauty standard (skinny=attractive) to sell this particular way-of-life. The reasons for becoming a vegetarian or vegan are varied, of course, but in general relate to ethical concerns, environmental activisim, or the individual's health-- those are the issues that should be promoted, and not the implicit promise that veganism will make a woman look like one of those ultra-thin supermodels who are always on magazine covers. I think that's the larger point-- veganism, as Samhita says, "can work really well" (in a variety of ways-- both for the individual and the culture), but it's not a "cure" for having a normal, healthy-looking body.

I wholeheartedly agree with faithlesswondergirl and beatricious. I'm also kind of intrigued by the fact that this book is apparently so popular, yet of all the recommendations for vegan books and cookbooks I've gotten, that one has never come up, and I'd in fact never heard of it. The recommendations I do see are Vive Le Vegan!, How it all Vegan, Veganomicon, and--of course--Vegan Cupcakes Take Over the World. (Among other things!)

It is a very extreme diet that needs supplements to make sure you are not deficient in nutrients. It is frustrating, the lack of real nutritional information available
As a healthy vegan woman, I'm a little offended by those assumptions. There is only one nutrient that is commonly deficient in a well-balanced vegan diet. As well, there is plenty of real nutritional information available! Especially as vegetarianism and veganism grow more popular, there are many cookbooks, websites, forums, and other resources with all kinds of helpful information.

So, I can see why there's tension between feminism and the dieting industry, but I don't understand why that translates into tension between feminism and veganism. I have issues with the "skinny bitch" books as both a feminist and as a vegan foodie who's not into packaged meat substitutes. I don't feel veganism is extremely restrictive--especially with all of the amazing vegan cookbooks out these days! And the only supplement you really can't get from plants/bacteria/fungi is vitamin B12, and a lot of brands of soymilk are B12-fortified!

I have read the "skinny bitch" book and have several friends who follow the rules in the book. It does promote veganism but is NOT an extreme diet by any means for weight loss purposes. The authors write that they used the term "skinny bitch" as an eye catching and trendy title to sell books. They explain that weight loss is the result of living a healthy and active lifestyle, and that the American diet is filled with unhealthy tendencies. Both of the authors are vegans, but not strictly for weight loss purposes. They even go so far to say that being skinny is not nearly as important as being healthy and staying away from animal products. I am a little disappointed in this post today because I feel that it took a surface understanding of the book and made a general argument about women and weight loss. Otherwise, I love feministing.com and I will continue to read it everyday. I just wanted to give my perspective on this issue.

I have read the "skinny bitch" book and have several friends who follow the rules in the book. It does promote veganism but is NOT an extreme diet by any means for weight loss purposes. The authors write that they used the term "skinny bitch" as an eye catching and trendy title to sell books. They explain that weight loss is the result of living a healthy and active lifestyle, and that the American diet is filled with unhealthy tendencies. Both of the authors are vegans, but not strictly for weight loss purposes. They even go so far to say that being skinny is not nearly as important as being healthy and staying away from animal products. I am a little disappointed in this post today because I feel that it took a surface understanding of the book and made a general argument about women and weight loss. Otherwise, I love feministing.com and I will continue to read it everyday. I just wanted to give my perspective on this issue.

As a vegan, I have to admit I get a perverse pleasure from hearing someone encourage me to lose weight. Clearly, if only I had a healthy diet, I could be thin *just like they are.* Then, when I tell them I'm a vegan, I get to watch them try to process the fact that I'm an overweight vegan, since it's obviously true that fat people eat only ice cream and vegans eat only spinach. The end result, oddly, is usually a vaguely confused, "Well, you look pretty healthy." It is *so much fun* hearing that conclusion from someone who clearly started the conversation trying to convince me that I might keel over and die within the next hour.

As a vegan, I have to admit I get a perverse pleasure from hearing someone encourage me to lose weight. Clearly, if only I had a healthy diet, I could be thin *just like they are.* Then, when I tell them I'm a vegan, I get to watch them try to process the fact that I'm an overweight vegan, since it's obviously true that fat people eat only ice cream and vegans eat only spinach. The end result, oddly, is usually a vaguely confused, "Well, you look pretty healthy." It is *so much fun* hearing that conclusion from someone who clearly started the conversation trying to convince me that I might keel over and die within the next hour.

I am so over this trumped up problem between veganism, vegetarianism, and feminism- it is yet another example of "x makes you a good _____ (feminist, woman, activist, etc) and y makes you a bad ____ " I understand that feminism is not all things to all people, and that these types of conversations are important to the ongoing exploration and expression of feminism in our individual and collective lives.That said, the amount of hostility expressed towards vegetarians and vegans (by all kinds of people) never ceases to amaze me. A well rounded vegan diet is just as if not better for you than any other well rounded diet. I have know people who practice veganism and are all different shapes and sizes.

Rather than be on the defensive for my own choice to eat a vegetarian diet, I would like to take the question back to the critics:

What is it about veganism and vegetarianism that you find so threatening?

I've been a healthy vegan feminist woman for more than five years now (and a vegetarian for fifteen). My reasons for going vegan had absolutely nothing to do with weight. Also, as many others pointed above, I don't find a vegan diet very restrictive (the only thing I am careful to supplement is B12), and being vegan is definitely about more than just what one eats. So, yes, I was a bit offended by this post as well.

It's just funny how being vegan and feminist puts one on a double defensive. It is always I who am the "weird" one and have to explain my reasons for being vegan and/or feminist.

As Laura pointed out, the real tension here is between feminism and the dieting industry.
I take offense to the idea that one should be suspicious of vegan women's motives and that the diet is extreme--it's not.
As a vegan with a (distant) history of disordered eating, I've found that veganism has helped me overcome a lot of my fear of food. I'm making compassionate choices when I eat, which makes food a positive thing to me. Also, because a healthy vegan diet requires some cooking (any healthy diet requires cooking, but omnivores have many prepared options), I started learning to cook, learn about new vegetables and grains, nutrition...and getting creative with food!
Two years after going vegan, food has become a source of nourishment, fun and compassion--instead of terror.
Veganism is not about deprivation or thinness by any means. For me, it's been about positivity.

I am disgusted, but not entirely surprised, by someone "selling" veganism as a route to weight-loss. I think that's pretty damn insulting to people actual vegans who choose to live this way actually.

People who are vegans, I wouldn't get too up in arms about the choice of the word "extreme" and comments about deficiencies. As someone said, most people who eat omnivorously have completely inadequate diets (I know I do!), taking away meat and meat by-products is huge.

As someone who was a vegatarian (not vegan but I didn't eat anything with gelatine or cheese with meat... crap, I can't remember what it's called, y'know) from 9 years old to 16 I know how hard it sometimes was just for me. Back then you practically couldn't go to dinner unless it was a Hare Krishna restaurant or something, and most snack foods contain some sort of meat or animal byproduct.

Oh, one more thing. While I respect veganism and vegetarianism and get extremely shitty at people's attitudes, and became a vegetarian as a child because of my disgust at intensive farming practices (I do try and get free range meat whereever possible now), being omnivorous has nothing to do with animals being "for" us. Despite removing ourselves from the "wild" in a pretty extreme way, we are still part of a food chain and we naturally kill and eat animals. The only unnatural thing is that we eat waaaaay too much meat, it's just ridiculous.

Anyway, sorry for the ramble

cassie,
that's fresh. love your story.

viceabbess,
i think sami finds veganism so threatening because the hottest man she's ever known was vegan for 13 years.

generally...
i hear most folks on here... i've done the vegan thing for a minute... now i'm on some other tip, where i figure certain agricultural practices are a lot more harmful and life-denying than, say, wild fishing.

all that said, i agree with the posters who say that a well-balanced vegan diet is no more difficult to achieve than a well-balanced omnivorous diet and is certainly easier than a well-balanced meat-n-potatoes diet (of which so many in my fam are adherents).

also, on the note that it's disingenuous to advertise a lifestyle change (veganism) by promoting it as a road to skinny bitchism, jess's first (of soon-to-be many) book's cover is something of a bait-and-switch. there are certain parallels there. that said, restrictive diets for the wrong reasons can be very harmful and the power of reinforcing body image pressures cannot be understated.

i think where danger enters is that, when anything's done for the wrong reasons, it can be harmful. even exercise, probably the most overwhelmingly good thing one could do for one's body, can be abused by folks doing it for unhealthy reasons, with dire consequences.

as far as supplements are concerned, and this is the end of my rant, i've found that a balanced diet of whole foods with ample leafy vegetables, a wide variety of colorful foods, and whole grains can easily make up for any sort of "deficiencies" in a vegan diet. this kind of approach to getting nutrients, while more work-intensive, is also more healthy than using supplements to fill the gaps, as there are many nutrients and interactions in natural foods for which gnc cannot make up (oh, and a lot of the veggie-based pills [ie, no dairy or meat components] smell disgusting).

heights and blessings,
puck

fenris,

two things... one, you just made me miss that free krishna temple food!

two, i think the comment about animals being "for us" is a reference to very common perceptions about why plants and animals exist. many people actually do hold the attitude that plants and other animals exist solely for the pleasure of people and even eronneously interpret the bible to support this claim.

it doesn't mean every person feels this way and it doesn't mean that our relationship to vegetation is any more healthy (look at the amount of pesticide cotton farming - not even a food - is responsible for driving into us soil, or the extreme salinization effects as a result of irresponsible soy farming)

The assumption that a healthy vegan diet is inherently complicated whereas a meat-inclusive diet is inherently easy really needs to end. I started studying nutrition long before I went vegan, and I knew I didn't need to worry much about nutrition as a vegan because if you're already watching your health it's easier to make sure you get all your healthy foods as a vegan than as a carnist. Just about everyone in the western world needs to eat more vegetables, fruits, and whole grains, and boy is that easy when those are the some of the stars of your diet instead of the chores you dread.

The average vegan is lacking in less than half as many nutrients than the average American, so let's face it, better knowledge on nutrition is important for EVERYONE, vegan or not.

Just speaking from personal experience, I have to say that I certainly have come across women who used veganism to thinly veil eating disorders. I had a roommate whose daily diet consisted of three cups of miso soup. She'd often mention her veganism if someone commented on how little food she ate, as if the point was to consume small amounts of food. For her the "I-can't-eat-that-I'm-vegan"
reason became her escape clause for not having to eat much of anything at all.

Interestingly, if offered something that actually *was* vegan, she'd say, "I'm stuffed, I ate miso today." As if BROTH were the only thing one needed to be healthy and satisfied. So I don't think the point of the post is all that far-fetched in SOME instances.

That said, I have of course also known vegans with big collections of cookbooks who ate varied, nutritious, tasty meals.

You know, for me, the issue at hand is more about SKINNY than vegan, vegetarian, bitch or otherwise...

Why not "healthy bitch in the kitch?" There is a reason that the word "skinny" was chosen, and it's because it attracts people. It reinforces the skinny=good ideology. If the word skinny had no bearing on the sales of the book, they wouldn't have included it... "bitch in the kitch."

Furthermore, linking "skinny bitch" with veganism only reinforces the idea that veganism is for weightloss or to hide an eating-disorder. Veganism and vegetarianism have their merits, and it is unfortunate that the author chose to title the book that way, and add those undertones...

Glad to see smart vegans weighing in here.

In the first 5 years of being vegan I put on 30lbs. It's definitely not a one-way ticket to skinnyville: olive oil and nuts and avocados and potatoes and olives and chocolate soy icecream and chips... there are so many delicious fatty vegan foods.

It's not difficult or 'extreme' to be vegan anymore, unless you're living in a remote area and have no access to fresh food or the internet. Like Antarctica, or a developing nation. I've been vegan for 7 years and in at least 7 different countries, and I've never once found it a burden - at the most, it's been an adventure and a great learning experience.

The assumption that a healthy vegan diet is inherently complicated whereas a meat-inclusive diet is inherently easy really needs to end.

I disagree. In US culture, eating as a vegan is more complicated than living as a meat-eater or vegetarian. That's because our culinary culture is very meat/animal-product centered; it's not a judgment on the value of veganism--it's an assessment of veganism's relationship to our culture. I live in big cities and always have, and finding more than one vegetarian option on a menu is never a problem (when I'm planning a meal out with friends--I myself eat meat), but finding a restaurant with even one vegan option is.

Anecdotally, I know plenty of vegetarians, but the few vegans I've known all had eating disorders that they were masking. That doesn't mean that all or even most vegans are, but I don't think that's what Samhita's claiming. She's noting that people with eating disorders can and do use veganism as a cover for their self-harm, and promoting veganism in a way that plays into that dynamic is immoral and irresponsible.

Criticizing this book without reading it is a little bit like the Catholic Church's criticism of The Golden Compass, or people who tried to say Harry Potter encourages kids to become witches or whatever. Don't knock it before you've read it, yo. The authors of Skinny Bitch explicitly state in the book that the end goal is not vegan = skinny. The title is supposed to get people's attention, sell books and present an argument to an audience that would not normally expose themselves to that argument. From what I gather, their goal is to end cruelty to animals - not to make people feel bad about themselves or start eating disorders disguised as social consciousness.

(Of course, I find it impossible to be vegan or even truly vegetarian - no cheese OR sushi??? - but its overall 'wake up and pay attention/think about what you're eating' message is helpful.)

Actually, these ladies aren't the only ones promoting veganism as a weight-loss strategy: Dr. McDougall does as well. http://www.drmcdougall.com/

Thanks for all the comments. Like I said in the post, with proper research it is a very healthy diet and when I was doing it well, it felt great!

There are a lot of issues coming up for me, because I agree that assuming a meat based diet is easy and a vegan one is difficult is problematic, but at the same time, I will insist that I think a vegan diet is extreme.

And I live in the Bay where vegan options are plentiful. It is extreme because when someone brings cake into the office you can't eat it or when you go to your grandma's house in India, you can't eat her fish stew.

Veganism occurs naturally in many cultures around the world, but it is not called a movement as it is in the US. And that movement in the US is usually consistent with being priviledged and white and having access to the information and support needed to eat a vegan diet. Sure I have seen this to be different in certain parts of rasta and Hindu culture, say in Brooklyn NY or in Oakland, but in general, you have to know what is up and have access to do it properly.

And I think it is awesome that so many of you have not become vegan to lose weight or to maintain it, but in my experience, it has been used to moderate weight and cravings and to punish yourself in new ways for eating.

Again, this is only my experience. This is a topic I have many mixed feelings on and like I said I was vegan for TWO YEARS and it wasn't just because I wanted to be thin.

t me address the question posed by viceabbess. I couldn't care less who eats what, as long as they aren't making me eat it. As an agricultural scientist, I range from amused to irritated by people who think veganism is a magical cure-all. That's not to say that reducing meat consumption is bad, I just don't believe it is feasible or desirable to eliminate meat production. The thing that pushes my buttons is the animal rights activism. Granted, it's more of a nuisance to scientists who work with vertebrates, since the idiots in the movement tend to care more about bunnies than beetles - although there are a select few who want to liberate the bees from slavery. Maybe that pisses a lot of people off...but you asked.

The point is absurd regarding eating disorders. There are also tons of women with eating disorders who do eat animal products, but we don't equate a diet including meat with eating disorders. All of this stems from misunderstanings and resentment towards the vegan movement. Clearly, Samhita never fully appreciated the reasoning behind veganism or she would not be an EX-vegan at this point. I'm sorry, but I have trouble taking anything seriously from someone who knows the suffering that animals go through and then chooses to consume animal products out of convenience. Would you do the same regarding clothing made by child labor? It boils down to lazyness trumping conviction.

Many fine points have been made so I'll keep my response brief.

Samhita, despite your response in the comments, I think you need to amend using the word "extreme" in the actual post. If a mainstream organization like the American Dietetic Association can say that a well-planned vegan diet is healthy for all, including pregnant women, your word choice is just unsound.

Also, the only nutritional supplement vegans need is vitamin B12, which can be taken in vitamin form or from eating fortified foods like cereals, grains, and nondairy milks. All other nutritional needs can be met eating a plant-based diet. That includes protein, iron, zinc, and other nutrients.

Additionally, while you and EG point out that veganism is extreme or difficult to adhere to because many cultures are meat-centered, do you then propose that feminists not be feminists because the society they live in is patriarchal and therefore being feminist can be, well, so darn inconvenient sometimes?

Samhita, I'm neither white nor privileged and that is why veganism and animal rights makes sense to me. It makes sense not to exploit animals just because I can. In fact, my involvement in feminism was a clear progression to the awakening I've had in terms of animal suffering. My working class boyfriend has been vegan for well over a decade. So that white and privileged arguement does not hold water with me. After all, beans are super cheap!

Have any of the Feministing posters read the Sexual Politics of Meat?

Finally, I gained 15 pounds after I stopped eating land animals. And I lost 46 pounds when I joined Weight Watchers a few years ago and ate a ton of meat. Those vegan cookies are off the hook at 400 calories each!

"[Veganism] is extreme because when someone brings cake into the office you can't eat it..."

LOLLLLZ! This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever read.

But seriously, I agree with Rebecca B. that your suspicions about vegan women are patronizing and insulting. And I'll go ahead and add disgusting to that list as well.

Yay! Someone said it's okay to be skinny! Seriously though, the term does need to be reclaimed, along with all the other labels slapped on women of every shape and size.

I switched to a vegetarian whole foods diet several years ago, for spiritual reasons, and also for various health reasons, none of which pertained to my weight. Part of the time I followed a vegan diet. I own several wonderful vegan/raw cookbooks, each of which is based on feeling good, having more energy, etc. Too bad they couldn't have marketed a vegan cookbook to women without adding in the negativity. And what's the point of marketing a cookbook to women specifically anyway? Oh right, because we are supposed to do all the cooking and be concerned with our respective weights.

Anyway, I generally kept to myself about my diet, and I met ridiculous amounts of slander a few times, because evryone assumed I was doing it to lose weight, even though I am a very petite person. The ironic thing is that I gained weight since I changed my diet. To me, it was always about the state of my health, not my size.

Actually, the real problem that I have with this book is that the authors throw in some wildly unsubstantiated ideas about nutrition in general. (A couple of these are noted in the review.)

I'd also like to add that I began eating vegan a few months ago and while I don't know if I agree with the characterization of it as an extreme diet, it does require effort. It has had a big impact on where my girlfriend and I can eat dinner -- we used to go out frequently for brunch and dinner, and we've stopped going to certain restaurants because there's nothing in them for me to eat. She's an omnivore and doesn't like vegan cooking, so we rarely eat at vegan restaurant.

In short; my experience has NOT been that eating a healthy omnivorous diet is equivalent to eating vegan. Eating vegan has restricted my options a great deal.

I'm happier and feel much better eating this way, but let's not pretend that it's super easy to eat out with an omnivore when you're vegan.

Ok Samhita,

I'm sorry but I'm really offended at this post.

First, i do not agree that its fair to joke around by calling your friends "skinny bitches" if in fact they are of a smaller size. Some women cannot help it and I'm one of those women and I hate it when my friends who are no bigger than I am (but perceptually believe they are bigger) feel like they can bludgeon me around with "anorexia" jokes or by pointing out non-stop that I have no ass. We also live in a culture where you not only have to be skinny but certian parts of ur body should have some weight to them, eg, ur butt. Well, sorry! Its pretty hurtful and it makes me really self conscious. Which means to say that, just because someone percieves themselves to be overweight they have no right whatsoever to bludgeon those they believe are not!

Second, I've been vegetarian for 6 years and recently partly vegan out of no choice, because I'm lactose intolerant. I constantly face criticism about the nutritional value of my diet, I constantly deal with people who believe that i'm unhealthy because i'm eating differently, or that I'm doing it for motives other than compassion for animals. Now, I have another criticism to face. According to you I should be susceptible to the new stereotype that vegans/ vegetarians are disguising an eating disorder and are to be submitted to questioning according to the stereotype. Isnt this another form of monitoring women's choices and lifestyles? I'd love to see how well you'd fare questioning a person of any other race as to whether they truly arent concealing a stereotype associated with that race! How is this any different?
And if you believe that vegan/vegetarian women are unhealthy how do you explain the fact that going on a vegetarian diet is enough to cut down by 50% your chances at any disease out there? Try telling that to my sister who just went under surgery for colon cancer, one of those diseases that is caused predominantly by a meat eating diet.

Dont get me wrong, i find the title of this book offensive- we shouldnt be using titles with the words "skinny" and "bitch" on them as being trendy- both words are offensive. But i feel like the rest of the rant was entirely unrelated to the book's title and catered only to your stereotypes of vegan women. Feministing is exhibiting some form of weight-watch policy recently where everyone and everything seems to be pulled appart to see whether its instructing some form of eating disorder- How about we stop being so anxious about eating disorders since just its mentioning makes more women believe that they are common and that its okay if they have an eating disorder too!? Even if you say its bad, if you increase its normalcy, more women are going to get eating disorders.

If you had eating disordered behavior while vegan, its because YOU have tendancies towards eating disorders. It has nothing to do with veganism. Veganism is not an easy way to keep one's weight down, and to imply that is ignorant and irresponsible. I had half a bag of chocolate covered pretzels for breakfast this morning, how is that going to help me lose weight? Just because YOUR mind is fixated on eating disordered behavior does not mean that all or even a majority of vegan women's minds work the same way. For you to say that veganism needs supplements to make sure one is not deficient in nutrients further shows how uneducated you are. If YOU had an eating disordered perspective, you might have "needed" supplements, because YOU were probably not eating right. A vegan diet is rich in CALORIES, vitamins, minerals, protein, carbohydrates and other nutrients. I'm 24 and have learned that veganism is a great way to eat properly and healthily. All it takes is a little common sense and a little knowledge about the foods we put into our body. Its unfortunate that at 30, you are still inept and far from figuring it out.

Please don't project YOUR issues with eating disordered behaviors on veganism. Please don't imply that because YOU could not get veganism right, that there is something nutritionally wrong with veganism. Again, its extremely irresponsible, and by alluding that those things are directly related to veganism and not the individual attempting a vegan lifestyle, you lose credibility.

Ooh, my second comment in one thread! Go, me!

As far as a vegan diet limiting your choices - three years ago I moved from New York, mecca of vegan goodness, to East Texas, mecca of Tex-Mex and deer hunting. And while the change in location caused me to go from vegan to vegetarian and back again, it wasn't because I couldn't resist all the lard filled beans and burger stands. It's because I'm lazy. Being vegan here is tough, but it's do-able. And it encourages me to cook more at home, and invite people over for delicious vegan meals, which is better for my health, my wallet, and my social life.

And as far as veganism being a movement based on privlege and being about to choose what you eat and buy - I won't deny that. But if I'm in a place where I can make that choice, then I feel I owe it to my health and the planet to do so. Plus I make a point not to judge people who have different diets and lifestyles than me, despite the fact that they rarely return the favor.

The title is supposed to get people's attention, sell books and present an argument to an audience that would not normally expose themselves to that argument.

Yeah - by exploiting women's insecurities about their weight. That's a morally shitty marketing tactic, no matter how noble their end goal is.

(And it's not just the title, here's how they market the book on their website):

If you can't take one more day of self-loathing, you're ready to hear the truth: You cannot keep shoveling the same crap into your mouth every day and expect to lose weight.

Authors Rory Freedman and Kim Barnouin are your new smart-mouthed girlfriends who won't mince words and will finally tell you the truth about what you're feeding yourself. And they'll guide you on making intelligent and educated decisions about food. They may be bitches, but they are skinny bitches. And you'll be one too-after you get with the program and start eating right.

and in reply to stanna, who said:

"Actually, these ladies aren't the only ones promoting veganism as a weight-loss strategy: Dr. McDougall does as well. http://www.drmcdougall.com/"

The McDougall diet is NOT synonymous with veganism. I'm vegan and I eat nothing NEAR to what McDougall suggests for weight loss. Is the Atkins diet is not the same thing as being an omnivore? Please educate yourself.

If A (veganism) is sometimes caused by B (disordered eating), that doesn't mean B (disordered eating) is always a precondition for A (veganism).

To believe that B=A is a logical fallacy.

I don't know your history with regards to veganism, but you've just put down an entire group of people.

Perhaps you should consider making an announcement that you don't mean "all vegans are disordered eaters" and apologize.

xherbivorex: The McDougall diet is a "vegan" diet...it involves no animal products. Just because it doesn't stand for "veganism" doesn't mean the diet itself isn't vegan, i.e., involved no animal products. It may be different from your type of being vegan, but its still vegan. And this thread has been really hilarious for confirming a lot of vegan stereotypes.

Clearly, Samhita never fully appreciated the reasoning behind veganism or she would not be an EX-vegan at this point. I'm sorry, but I have trouble taking anything seriously from someone who knows the suffering that animals go through and then chooses to consume animal products out of convenience. Would you do the same regarding clothing made by child labor? It boils down to lazyness trumping conviction.

And that's why meat-eaters are sometimes hostile to the idea of veganism. There you go. No acknowledgment that different people require different things in their diets, no acknowledgment of differing metabolisms, no acknowledgment of the importance of cultural traditions surrounding food. Just pure, obnoxious self-righteousness.

while you and EG point out that veganism is extreme or difficult to adhere to because many cultures are meat-centered, do you then propose that feminists not be feminists because the society they live in is patriarchal and therefore being feminist can be, well, so darn inconvenient sometimes?

Your point would be valid only if either Samhita or I were arguing that nobody should be vegan. Since we're not, I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

FemiDancer,

Which stereotypes would those be? The ones about how we stand up for animal rights? The ones about how we don't like being misrepresented? The ones about how tell you a vegan diet is healthy (and PS look in a medical journal you'll see that they agree)?

You seem to be missing the point here. The point is that the orginal post served to perpetuate negative stereotypes about vegans.

Your comment regarding the McDougal diet being vegan is pointless. Only eating blueberries would be vegan too, but that doesn't mean that most vegans would suggest it.

wow.

i mean, really... not all animal rights folks are wingnuts who prize "bunnies [over] beetles"...

joselle's point about beans is pretty keen. i mean, on one hand, i've heard vegetarianism and veganism shouted down as a diet of privilege. here, on the other hand, i've seen the same diets shouted down because they don't make it as convenient to go out to eat, which really hasn't been my first concern in my broker days (during which, i might add, dried beans and rice made up a sizeable amount of my diet).

and, btw, i have lived in the midwest, was vegan the entire time and really didn't have that hard a time beyond the sidelong glances and wait staff asking "but what are you eating?"

i suggest, midwest, that you pick up a couple of cookbooks yourself, it'll be really fun! check some of the titles on here (like the veganomicon, by the post punk kitchen, which i haven't checked out, but their cupcake book rawks).

also, there are a lot of chinese and italian restaurants where i lived in the midwest (northeast ohio) and they had vegan options for days.

nata,

while i think most of what you're saying is really keen and that we need to figure out ways to make people happy in their skin, no matter what shape that skin is in, it's still important to talk about problems.

ignoring eating disorders is not going to make them go away any more than ignoring the wage gap is going to make that go away.

oh, and on the B12 tip, sea vegetables, fermented soy foods and vegetables grown in organic soil (manure) are most likely to provide natural sources.

as far as sami's perspective "boil[ing] down to lazyness trumping conviction", that's insulting and best left out of any discussion. she doesn't have to answer for herself, but she is a very compassionate person and i challenge you, lucretia, to avoid using any products with a history of abuse - ie, not only nothing involving animal products, but nothing that makes use of synthetics produced from petroleum (uh oh, there go 90% of vegan shoe options!), nothing produced in unfair work environments, nothing produced from conventionally farmed cotton (primary pesticide burden in the us), etc., etc., etc.

come off it and lets have a discourse.

yo, and sami, i think that veganism is called a "movement" in the us because everything is called a "movement" in the us. people call musical styles movements... especially young people. one difference here is that vegetarianism is so contrary to meat-n-potatoes america that, whether intended or not, vegetarianism is considered counter-culture and is ascribed certain political characteristics regardless of the individual practicioner's intention.

what does that have to do with people's choices? a lot. what does it have to do with whether or not veganism is a valid diet choice? not much.

further, for clarity, i think it's important to recognize that all of us judge based on our experiences. sami was really honest and forthcoming about why she thinks the things she does and folks here jumped on her, calling that "disgusting." that's an extreme reaction. samhita's honest and open enough to say, "look, i didn't do this for all the right reasons, so i sometimes wonder if other people are doing it for the reasons i was." i think it's important to look at that without immediately jumping to horror.

oh, and eg,
"She's noting that people with eating disorders can and do use veganism as a cover for their self-harm, and promoting veganism in a way that plays into that dynamic is immoral and irresponsible."

word. i would love to see some numbers on this, when compared to other choices.

joselle, keep cooking those beans and rice (the dried beans and rice and homegrown tomato diet definitely carried me through a year or two of extreme irresponsibility)!

evil fizz, since it seems like you've read the book, i, for one, would like to hear more from ya.

heights and blessings

Purly: I never stated that the McDougall diet was not vegan. I stated that veganism is not equal to the McDougall diet, just as omnivorism is not equal to the Atkins diet. Perhaps you did not understand that comparison. Let me simplify it: Grass is green, but everything that is green is not grass. Does that make more sense to you?

And if the comments to this thread proved the stereotypes that vegans aren't eating disordered, then that's awesome. I don't really see anything other than positive, credible and factual information showing that veganism does not promote eating disorders. I see people perpetuating that veganism can be healthy and fat-positive and delicious and easy and fun. I'm totally down for those stereotypes, if that's what you're talking about!

wow.

i mean, really... not all animal rights folks are wingnuts who prize "bunnies [over] beetles"...

joselle's point about beans is pretty keen. i mean, on one hand, i've heard vegetarianism and veganism shouted down as a diet of privilege. here, on the other hand, i've seen the same diets shouted down because they don't make it as convenient to go out to eat, which really hasn't been my first concern in my broker days (during which, i might add, dried beans and rice made up a sizeable amount of my diet).

and, btw, i have lived in the midwest, was vegan the entire time and really didn't have that hard a time beyond the sidelong glances and wait staff asking "but what are you eating?"

i suggest, midwest, that you pick up a couple of cookbooks yourself, it'll be really fun! check some of the titles on here (like the veganomicon, by the post punk kitchen, which i haven't checked out, but their cupcake book rawks).

also, there are a lot of chinese and italian restaurants where i lived in the midwest (northeast ohio) and they had vegan options for days.

nata,

while i think most of what you're saying is really keen and that we need to figure out ways to make people happy in their skin, no matter what shape that skin is in, it's still important to talk about problems.

ignoring eating disorders is not going to make them go away any more than ignoring the wage gap is going to make that go away.

oh, and on the B12 tip, sea vegetables, fermented soy foods and vegetables grown in organic soil (manure) are most likely to provide natural sources.

as far as sami's perspective "boil[ing] down to lazyness trumping conviction", that's insulting and best left out of any discussion. she doesn't have to answer for herself, but she is a very compassionate person and i challenge you, lucretia, to avoid using any products with a history of abuse - ie, not only nothing involving animal products, but nothing that makes use of synthetics produced from petroleum (uh oh, there go 90% of vegan shoe options!), nothing produced in unfair work environments, nothing produced from conventionally farmed cotton (primary pesticide burden in the us), etc., etc., etc.

come off it and lets have a discourse.

yo, and sami, i think that veganism is called a "movement" in the us because everything is called a "movement" in the us. people call musical styles movements... especially young people. one difference here is that vegetarianism is so contrary to meat-n-potatoes america that, whether intended or not, vegetarianism is considered counter-culture and is ascribed certain political characteristics regardless of the individual practicioner's intention.

what does that have to do with people's choices? a lot. what does it have to do with whether or not veganism is a valid diet choice? not much.

further, for clarity, i think it's important to recognize that all of us judge based on our experiences. sami was really honest and forthcoming about why she thinks the things she does and folks here jumped on her, calling that "disgusting." that's an extreme reaction. samhita's honest and open enough to say, "look, i didn't do this for all the right reasons, so i sometimes wonder if other people are doing it for the reasons i was." i think it's important to look at that without immediately jumping to horror.

oh, and eg,
"She's noting that people with eating disorders can and do use veganism as a cover for their self-harm, and promoting veganism in a way that plays into that dynamic is immoral and irresponsible."

word. i would love to see some numbers on this, when compared to other choices.

joselle, keep cooking those beans and rice (the dried beans and rice and homegrown tomato diet definitely carried me through a year or two of extreme irresponsibility)!

evil fizz, since it seems like you've read the book, i, for one, would like to hear more from ya.

heights and blessings

EG,

One more comment for now because I sense this is quickly evolving pointless frustration. So if my culture says it ok to rape and then murder you, that's cool then? Because the meat and dairy industry represents rape and murder. End of story.

someone please erase the double post. sorry.

I'm going to preface this comment with the statement that I'm neither vegan nor vegetarian so the way I read Samhita's post was most likely affected by that.

My original reading on Sami's statement that Vegan is an extreme diet seemed real to me. Many of you have stated that it's not just eating, it's what you wear, what body products you use etc....sounds pretty extreme to me.

My roommate of four years was a vegetarian and our senior year did attempt to be vegan. I do understand that a vegan diet does not automatically equal thin and that it's not just beans. However, my roommate had little money and we were at a college in northwest indiana with virtually no vegan restaurants. My roommate was on a tight budget and lost a drastic amount of weight because all she could eat were beans. she couldn't afford the range of food needed to keep her nutrients up. especailly considering in many areas of the country organic and vegan foods are still much more expensive.

Therefore I interpreted Sami's post as saying that true veganism is a very involved effort and one that is hard to follow without options and money to pay for it. I suppose my roommate could have sacrificed other things to aid in pursuing the lifestyle if it was that important to her but eventually she just went back to vegetarianism.

A note: Atkins is not synonomous with omnivorism because the Atkins diet does not allow eaters to be omnivores. Omnivores eat bread and other complex carbohydrates.

EG,

I'm sorry but if everytime you sat down to eat smth with your non-vegetarian/vegan friends and they noticed you had no meat in your plate they ask, "are you vegetarian?"
If you dare saying the truth, the answer usually is, "Why? I could never do it! How do you do it? Isnt it hard? Well I see you have some egg there on your plate, never thought about the fact that chickens feel pain when they are caged and made to produce eggs? You know its not really good for you! You need your protein, you should eat some meat!" All these things, are inevitably experienced by a vegetarian/vegan person *every single time* (no jokes, its predictable) they eat out with their friends and if you think you cant get any f-ing self righteous on their asses once in a while- you'd explode! If anything, the mere explanation of why you are a vegetarian even if you dont try to criticize the people you are eating with, is bound to make them feel bad. So, the predictable question "why are you vegetarian?" usually leads to a very predictable answer, "I think animals suffer and i dotn want to be part of it." Its the simple truth, but it makes people feel bad.

But not just that, even if you dont say WHY you are vegetarian, you still have to justify to everyone what you are doing to keep urself alive and why you think you are better than them- even though you never make such an assumption (it still happens to me even though i never tell people when they ask me why I am vegetarian), they clearly think that prancing over to the dinner table with meat-free plate means that you are calling them animal killers and fundamentally, evil people. Its just bullying and worse is, I've had times where i couldnt eat because if i had an egg on my plate the person (who was eating meat) made me feel like such a hypocrite for the suffering of chickens that i couldnt finish (or start) my meal and I had to literally get out of there crying (true story). Now you dont experience that because you are not a vegetarian but at this point I've just startd lying to people and telling them i dont want to discuss my lifestyle with them. Its been 6 freaking years of having to explain why and how and more...

I'm also a feminist and a proud supporter of feministing but if i cant even get some compassion here and some understanding- we have to get self righteous, because as you see we have been offended by a post by a feministing contributor has made (where she is self righteous about meat eating), where are we to go? Just asking for some respect. I believe what i believe in, let me to it and dont criticize it and least of all, dont assume I have a pathological disorder.

If my friends were such assholes to me about the way I lived my life, I'd find new friends.

Certainly you can be self-righteous and blow off steam if you want to. But don't expect me not to tell you that you're being obnoxious when you do so. If you want compassion and understanding, being a jerk is not the way to go about getting it.

By the way, Samhita wasn't self-righteous about meat-eating. What she said was that she wasn't a vegan. Do all the vegans here really think that women with eating disorders don't use veganism as a cover? Samhita didn't say that all vegans have eating disorders. She didn't say that vegans should start eating meat. She said that when she meats young women who identify as vegans, she wonders about their method of veganism.

Given the society we live in, is it really so beyond the pale to wonder about the intersection of many women and girls' self-destructive eating habits and restrictive political diets? (I will use the word "restrictive" because as an omnivore, I can eat everything vegans eat, and I can also eat more.)

Lucretia, your rhetoric about rape and murder depends on imbuing animals with the same rights as human beings. "Murder" doesn't mean killing a random life-form; otherwise I'd be commiting murder every time I took antibiotics to clear up strep throat. "Murder" refers to the killing of a human being. Since I reject your first principle, I don't see eating meat and dairy as supporting rape and murder.

One of the things that Alice Waters seems to overlook is that domesticated species are here for human beings, or at least because of human beings, on a basic historical level. Cows didn't evolve naturally; human beings domesticated cow ancestors specifically in order to eat them and drink their milk. Those species would not exist without our interference, and they are not adapted to live in any natural habitat. If we did not continue maintaining them, they'd die.

"One of the things that Alice Waters seems to overlook is that domesticated species are here for human beings, or at least because of human beings, on a basic historical level. Cows didn't evolve naturally; human beings domesticated cow ancestors specifically in order to eat them and drink their milk. Those species would not exist without our interference, and they are not adapted to live in any natural habitat. If we did not continue maintaining them, they'd die."

THIS

Perhaps I'm oversimplifying things but...

Someone puts out a book called Skinny Bitches which is actually a book about veganism.

People buy this book.

Some of the people here have a problem with the wording of this book.

But people chose to buy this book.

I'm not sure what's to be done here.... what's the most extreme view?

Should the authors pull the book off the shelf, apologize to women who may get an eating disorder because of their book? Perhaps we should make a list of words that should be banned?

Ok EG,

Again, people believe what they believe. I certainly dont come to feministing to justify to others why I think animals being killed as murder ( i know you are arguing this out with someone else on this thread but ill jump in, if its ok). Thats just what I feel like it is, thats just how it saddens and gets to me: its a very subjective emotional and visceral experience that I cannot translate to you. We could argue it out, and you could argue it out with any vegetarian out there, but personally, I equate eating animals with some sort of canibalism. Yes that makes no sense to a lot of people! Most people in fact... but thats because I have knowledge of the sensory and emotional (yes) systems of animal behaviour from studying human behaviour according to it (i'm a psych major) and just think that all the signs are loud and clear that they feel pain, that they react just like us. Otherwise, we wouldnt model the entirety of human sexual, behavioural, instinstictual nature on the central nervous systems of mice (since we cant modify people's brains and study them). But if you dont FEEL that way, then you just dont. Its like arguing why I like some form of music over another almost, its very personal.

Let me preface this with: I'm a pro-food-choice vegan. I really have no personal investment in convincing anyone of anything, but I do have a fondness for a good, meaty discussion. And if this is derailing the thread, I apologize. (Although, just putting the word 'vegan' in a title pretty much an invitation for this stuff.)

One of the things that Alice Waters seems to overlook is that domesticated species are here for human beings, or at least because of human beings, on a basic historical level. Cows didn't evolve naturally; human beings domesticated cow ancestors specifically in order to eat them and drink their milk. Those species would not exist without our interference, and they are not adapted to live in any natural habitat. If we did not continue maintaining them, they'd die.

Yes, and with us, they die. I'm pretty sure you're not trying to fool yourself with this, so you realize that even when the meat you eat isn't specifically a young animal, it's an animal that was killed long before it's life would naturally have ended. But, either way, I'm not sure what your point is. We used artificial selection to alter their species. Is that technically true? Yes. Is that pertinent to whether they have rights? Not really. The descent of any individual animal is unrelated to whether or not they have rights, because rights exist outside of the bias of the people providing them. If an animal has rights, it has rights, even if it's evolved along with humans; this is why we given very basic rights (such as the right to food, water, and shelter) to dogs. If an animal doesn't have rights, it doesn't have rights, no matter how much humans were involved. So for vegans the question isn't, "How much have humans altered the gene frequency of this species of animal?" it's, "Given that this animal currently exists, and will until it dies, does it deserve rights?"

Cassie: The point is that if everyone stopped eating meat and dairy product...everyone would stop breeding these animals. The animals that you want to provide rights with would cease to exist if you actually succeed. Isn't it a little ironic that by working for rights for domestic animals (like cows, chicken, and pigs), you are working for their destruction?

"If my friends were such assholes to me about the way I lived my life, I'd find new friends.

Certainly you can be self-righteous and blow off steam if you want to. But don't expect me not to tell you that you're being obnoxious when you do so. If you want compassion and understanding, being a jerk is not the way to go about getting it."

It's easy to say, EG, that if my friends don't agree with me I'll just find new ones, but don't you think that's a little unfair. Perhaps I value my friends and would like them to take the time to understand and respect me, not necessarily agree. Furthermore, where am I supposed to find such friends? I have been vegetarian for 16 years now and is not easy and my boyfriend has been vegan for 8. I am a doctoral student in a very "liberal" department yet I am consistently made to defend my ethics, whether I bring it up or not. And while you certainly have the right to tell other's when you feel that they are being obnoxious, you should probably think about how it makes you feel when anti-feminists say the same to you. People are entitled to their own opinions and I do not try to push mine on others. That said, however, when I live in a world that constantly puts me on the defensive, sometimes I have to make myself heard.

furthermore, just saying that animals are here for people doesn't make it true. That is one way to think about it. Sure, we domesticated animals, but does that mean that they exist for us? Perhaps they would die without our intervention now, but does that mean that it's ok and we should merely accept things as they are? Perhaps righting the wrongs of the past, rather than accepting an unpleasant present would be more useful. And just because an animal is domesticated and requires human intervention does not mean that we do (or should) eat them. We certainly don't eat house cats, dogs, hamsters, etc. I think that it is important to acknowledge that this is an opinion. You believe that animals were put here for people, I believe that living things don't naturally exist in a hierarchy.

Lastly, I will simply repeat a sentiment that has already been expressed. Why are vegetarianism and veganism so threatening?

afishnamedpig: I can't speak for EG, but I know I'm certainly feeling more than a bit defensive after being likened to rapists and murderers for eating meat.

FemiDancer: Yes, I do understand this. One point that I'd make is that producing fewer cows for human consumption doesn't actually hurt cows that are currently alive, because they're going to be killed anyway. You might be arguing that each unborn cow would be better off being raised to be killed, or that there is an inherent good in have a large number of things, but I don't think that you are, so I'm not sure why you're concerned about keeping up the numbers of cows. Yes, if we reduced the number of people who eat meat, there will physically be fewer cows. But if the reduction in number is accompanied with better living conditions (which, in this hypothetical animal-rights-concerned world, would happen), I'm not sure why anyone would say that that's a loss for the cows.

That's not even really taking into account the point of your argument, which seems to be that I should not support something's rights if I can see a negative result for that support. Which, frankly, rubs me the wrong way. Every change, no matter how necessary and right, has a negative backlash of some kind. Those backlashes deserve attention to minimize the harm, but the possible negatives should *never* be used to withold rights if the we've come to the conclusion that those rights are deserved. There's too much history of people thinking that they know best how to help someone, when what they really want is to minimize the problems for themselves, for me to be sympathetic to that sort of argument.

xherbivorex, I was replying to the OP, not to you.

I don't think cows deserve equal rights with humans. I think cows are delicious. I just think its funny that on your end, what you are working toward is completely impossible, because as soon as the cows and chickens are seen as having equal rights, there will be no need to produce them anymore, and they will have equal rights, but cease to exist. Of course, you will never get all humans to stop eating meat or using dairy and egg products, so, the likelihood of that possibility is pretty low until humans blow themselves up. The reason why we have such large brains is because of our high protein diet, and I have no problem being omnivorous, because, well, as a human I'm supposed to eat animals. Maybe not in the large quantity suggested by manufactures, but humans certainly didn't evolve by being fruitarians. They killed animals to live, and now we've just outsourced the killing.

What makes you say people are threatened by vegetarianism and veganism? I have never noticed that. Though I have heard people express contempt at the notion that its immoral to eat animals.

Animals don't have a right to life. Animals kill each other all the time. Other animals kill humans. Animals don't believe that humans have a right to life. (Most) humans don't believe that animals have a right to life.

Humans have a right to life because we give that right to each other. We are bound by our human laws. Because of our laws we generally don't have to worry about the people around us killing each other. Animals aren't bound by our laws, if you approach a bear it wouldn't recognize your right to life, because that is a human law. You are likely to be attacked. What protections that animals do have, they are not entitled to. We are not obligated to give them rights. When an animal becomes intelligent enough to understand our laws and obey them, then by all means, lets give them rights.

I realize that my opinion may sound a bit heartless to some, but there you have it.

And I'm inclined to agree that a diet that completely cuts out entire food groups is a bit extreme. I also have done my research on nutrition, when I select my foods I always have nutrition in mind. I eat healthier than I used to and have lost weight from it, which I'm glad for because its a physical reminder to me that I've become healthier, and I still eat meat. And as people have pointed out, its possible to be an unhealthy vegan. Now if I could just bring myself to work out a bit.

"I'm sorry but if everytime you sat down to eat smth with your non-vegetarian/vegan friends and they noticed you had no meat in your plate they ask, "are you vegetarian?"
If you dare saying the truth, the answer usually is, "Why? I could never do it! How do you do it? Isnt it hard? Well I see you have some egg there on your plate, never thought about the fact that chickens feel pain when they are caged and made to produce eggs? You know its not really good for you! You need your protein, you should eat some meat!" All these things, are inevitably experienced by a vegetarian/vegan person *every single time* (no jokes, its predictable) they eat out with their friends and if you think you cant get any f-ing self righteous on their asses once in a while- you'd explode" -- nata_was

I've been a vegetarian for over 10 years, and this has happened to me a handful of times -- literally, less than five times, and all of them at the beginning of my vegetarianism (I was 15 when I stopped eating meat).

Here's the deal: I don't give a damn what you eat. I don't think vegetarianism is for everyone (particularly really picky eaters), but I do think that most people who eat the "standard American diet" could do with eating less meat. I gave up meat because I flat-out did not like it -- never did, even when I was very small. Some people like meat, and that's fine. Like I said, it's not for everyone -- but everyone is welcome at my table for dinner. (Just not at once, it's a small table.)

Wow, is it pick on EG day on this thread or what?

I'll bite, in regards to comment about other people harassing you about what's on your plate...

Afishnamedpig, I work and study nutrition in animal agriculture and manage to get along (even in a historically conservative field) despite being a lacto-ovo vegetarian for 14 years now. Knock on wood, but I've never had any problems with ppl not respecting my choices or rudely asking me why I’m not ordering the steak. Granted I'm into animal welfare not rights, but perhaps preaching at ppl isn't the best way to ‘win friends and influence people’. I tend to think that when you tell someone that their livelihood depends upon ‘murder’, you just closed the door on that discussion.

Now as to why a lot of people think animal rights activists are complete nutjobs, I think you have PETA and ALF to thank for that, and perhaps those groups (and others like them) are why a lot of the general public is so dismissive about everyday vegans.

When I clicked on this thread I thought it was lamenting upon that horrid little diet book. And I agree it is horrid, but becoming 'vegan' to loose wait is not really being vegan, you're just cutting animal products out of your diet bc you think they have too many calories.

It’s also laughable to think that if everyone went vegan, animals would no longer be eaten, milked, or kept for egg and fiber production. A vegetarian or vegan diet is a privilege that we can choose to indulge in because it makes us feel good (mental or health wise) and because we’re comparatively wealthy enough to do so. If I’m worried about providing a healthy, affordable, balanced diet for me or my family and I live in poverty, vegetarian or vegan options are not available to me.

In short calling everyone else a murdering/raping evil person is a classist, privileged statement.

"Murder" doesn't mean killing a random life-form; ..."Murder" refers to the killing of a human being.

Cows didn't evolve naturally...If we did not continue maintaining them, they'd die."

I disagree. I believe "murder" is a term used to describe the killing of a sentient being, human or pig. It's killing. We can use that term if you'd like.

And as for the cow quote.. are you serious? Cows would DIE if we DIDN'T KILL THEM????!!!?!?!

AND, wildberry:

"Animals don't have a right to life. Animals kill each other all the time. Other animals kill humans. Animals don't believe that humans have a right to life. (Most) humans don't believe that animals have a right to life."

oh my god.

So. humans kill humans, humans kill animals. Maybe we shouldn't have the right to live?!?!

And I, and a lot of enlightened veg*ns, don't believe meat is a food group. So it's not cutting out anything, its eating healthy.

So we evolved by eating meat. Guess what? We don't need it anymore. Our bodies aren't designed for it. Look at our dull teeth and long intestines. Then look at a dog, ferret, or cat.

As for the eating disorder-veganism issue, I love you samhita and I think you're hearts in the right place. However, I get a tiny bit offended because of this.

I have two eating disorders. It's all under control for the time being, but I've been vegetarian and vegan long before I developed an eating disorder. I continued my veg*n eating and everyone thought it was just because I was disordered. In fact, I'm still vegan and thriving.

Jumping into the fray...

I had an eating disorder for years and was introduced to veganism by a well-meaning (and long-time vegan) girlfriend who said, "you wouldn't need to be bulimic if you went vegan. you could keep your weight down just by cutting out animal products." I remained vegan until I entered treatment for my eating disorder.

Look, some people come to veganism because they BELIEVE in the principles. Some people use it as a way to hide an eating disorder. Some people can be vegan and be healthy. Some people can't.
I believe in the principles of veganism but I cannot do it, because once I start restricting groups of food I spiral into restricting more and more groups of food for far less rational reasons. This doesn't mean that veganism causes eating disorders, but there IS a very high prevalence of vegetarianism and veganism among people with eating disorders. Kmari sounds like someone who has been able to successfully recover from an eating disorder while being vegan. Add me to the list of people who could not. I think we would all get a little further in this discussion if we acknowledged that this is a complicated and intensely personal issue.

Having been a vegetarian or pesco-vegetarian for the last five years (or so, can't remember), I can honestly say that the only thing that ALL vegetarians and vegans have in common is that we don't eat cows.

I whole heartedly believe that there are just as many reasons to be a vegetarian as there are vegetarians. Some people do it because of care for the animal, others for the environment, and yes, some people really do it because they want to lose weight. I personally did it because of the fact that it's easier for me personally to stay regular when I don't eat meat. Fish doesn't have this effect on me, so I continued to eat it in moderation. And I also used it as a coping mechanism for some bad eating habits. Replace the voice in your head that says "don't eat" with "don't eat meat." It works.

Were any of you even partially drawn to veganism or animal activism because it was radical? If so, quit playing the semantics game with the word 'extreme'.

Samhita never said that all vegans have eating disorders. She opened up about a very personal and difficult personal struggle. She also expressed concern that other people who might be vegan were battling with the same issue, and maybe that this book would encourage people with that issue to become vegan for the wrong reason.

The whole eating meat-murder/rape correlation is lame. Or extreme.

Lastly, don't have a cow, woman.

Returning to the Samhita's original post with thoughts on vegetarian/veganism and disordered eating:

I love vegetarian and vegan food, and while I've never identified as either, I've lived with vegetarians and spent a chunk of my life eating vegetarian food, maintaining a nutritionally balanced diet that way, and enjoying it.

The biggest personal barrier to actually choosing to be a vegetarian or vegan for me, is actually my struggle with disordered eating. I've never had a diagnosed eating disorder, but I have a fucked-up enough relationship with food that I've decided it's too problematic for me to declare certain foods verboten. I have no problem minimizing the amount of meat I eat, for example, but to categorically say no to meat turns eating into a "good food/bad food" thing for me. And it makes eating with family and in other social circles too fraught. Maybe that's lame on my part, and maybe (hopefully) I'll be able to get passed it at some point, but that's where I am right now.

I don't think it's hateful or a sign of anti-vegan prejudice to raise the question of the relationship of restrictive diets (I mean what you eat, not weight loss diets) of all kinds--whether religious, social, political, fad, or otherwise--to disordered eating, body image, and feminism. Samhita wasn't claiming to have answers to all these questions, and I don't see her saying being vegan per se is bad. But the questions she asks are questions I think all of us should ask ourselves about our relationship with the food we eat.

I'm glad you're doing well Kmari. :) I totally agree that wanting to loose weight doesn’t turn you into a vegetarian or a vegan, and people shouldn’t assume that’s why you make the dietary choices you make.

On the other hand, being vegetarian or Vegan isn’t necessarily more healthy than eating meat. I can be unhealthy in my dietary choices and manage to fall in any of those lifestyles.

But to what you said about our teeth and intestines.
First bc it's a pet peeve of mine, cats are obligate carnivores so they're not comparable to us on a metabolism/ nutrition basis.

And second, I would say our teeth are definitely that of an omnivore- one that has a recent evolution of cooked food. Our intestines are more complicated and longer than a true carnivore (ie the cat) but less complicated and shorter than an actual herbivore (ie the ruminant or even the hind-gut fermentor). It is remarkably similar to that of the pig and dog, which are both omnivores.

Did you ignore the rest of my post? My point was that animals don't give other animals the right to live, including humans. Humans have not given animals the right to live. We HAVE given each other the right to live, we make laws, citizens are bound to them. People kill others, they don't obey the laws, as a citizen they are punished. Because of our agreements to follow these laws we have our rights. If we don't follow them our rights get taken away. Animals don't follow our laws, they don't get our rights. Like I said, convince some animals to agree to our laws, and I will gladly advocate giving them their right to live.

Did you ignore the rest of my post? My point was that animals don't give other animals the right to live, including humans. Humans have not given animals the right to live. We HAVE given each other the right to live, we make laws, citizens are bound to them. People kill others, they don't obey the laws, as a citizen they are punished. Because of our agreements to follow these laws we have our rights. If we don't follow them our rights get taken away. Animals don't follow our laws, they don't get our rights. Like I said, convince some animals to agree to our laws, and I will gladly advocate giving them their right to live.

Kmari: Dogs, ferret, and cats aren't omnivores. They are carnivores. Last I checked, Humans still had incisors. Our teeth are set up to eat BOTH meat and plant products and so are our intestines. To say that humans bodies can't handle meat is flat out ridiculous, and your support for it (by only listing carnivores instead of other omnivores, like chimps,) is ridiculous as well.

Faerylore put that much more eloquently.

I didn't ignore your post, I certainly read it and obviously we have differing ideas on the sanctity of life.

The only thing that separates humans from other animals is our ability to reason. You would think we would be able to use our reason for better things than killing, huh.. but I guess not!

As far as the body being designed for meat thing, I don't particularly agree with that because of the research I have done, and continue to do, but I respect that opinion.

Our teeth look way more like herbivore teeth than omni- or carni-teeth, (and yes cats and ferrets were carni examples, but still good comparisons although the dog is closer as it is, disputably, an omni) and while our intestines may still be shorter than other herbivores, perhaps this is a result of our continuing evolution as humans? Perhaps they used to be shorter and we're evolving to the point where we seriously cannot handle meat.

If we don't NEED meat -- and we don't -- then why would we choose to eat it?

But now I'm getting a little off topic, and heated, so I'll leave it alone now except for this:

I despise the book skinny bitch. I've read it, and I almost hurled. It's disgusting, especially that they named it that. I read an interview with one of the authors and she was just making excuses.. I hate it.

"Faerylore put that much more eloquently."

she certainly did :) Its funny how some people can be respectful and disagree at the same time, huh?

anyways, I think it's ridiculous to ignore the facts: We don't need meat to survive, no other species drinks another species milk after weaning, and it's just plain cruel to raise and murder/kill other beings for our pleasure.

So I don't really care that you think I'm ridiculous, I'm doing something I feel is right and compassionate. I believe the human body is not designed for meat. Sue me. :D

And samhita, I do love you, no offense to you at all:)

Oh, and dogs are usually believed to be omnivores.

And next time I'll be sure to list the animals you reccomend.

Also, I would hardly call them incisors. They can't even rip through a piece of meat, much less raw meat. But believe what you want! :)

There are some crazy ideas showing up here, and I know better than to respond, but I've just got to add 2 small points.
FemiDancer-Animal Rights vegans know and understand that ending animal cruelty means ending the existence of some domesticated species--at least in their current numbers. That's the point. It's like this--say humans genetically engineered a breed of mentally disabled humans for slave work--and then, after many generations, we realized that breeding and using mentally disabled slaves is wrong. Do we keep breeding them just because we made them to begin with? No. We'd stop breeding and manipulating because it's wrong. And so it is with other domestic species--in theory. If some live without our interference, that's great, but in the theoretical vegan future, there would be no domestic animals. Animals would be able to live for their own purposes. I know I will never see this happen, but I "act as if" this is the goal, because it minimizes suffering.

Wildberry: "When an animal becomes intelligent enough to understand our laws and obey them, then by all means, lets give them rights."

At what point is a person smart enough to earn rights? What about children? The mentally disabled? Apes? What counts as human? Cities? Religion? Wearing clothing? Speech? And to what degree is it required for a person or a culture to earn human status? Speech has been scientifically documented in apes and parrots. So has superstition in pigs, tool use in crows, forethought in dolphins, etc.
Just because animal rationality doesn't suit a human lifestyle does not mean they are senseless and ought to be dominated.
No one is saying we should share our legal system and neighborhoods with bears and cows--as if that's what they want. I'm talking about minimal interference--recognizing that an animal has it's individual desire to live, and letting it be.

Just because it's "unrealistic" does not mean it's an unworthy ideal.

"If we don't NEED meat -- and we don't -- then why would we choose to eat it?"

"anyways, I think it's ridiculous to ignore the facts: We don't need meat to survive, no other species drinks another species milk after weaning, and it's just plain cruel to raise and murder/kill other beings for our pleasure."

Look, I could pretty much turn that whole argument around. We are capable of eating meat, so why not eat it? We eat it because it tastes good to us. It tastes good to us because that is what we evolved to eat. I do agree with you, though, that its a little weird that we drink the milk of other species, which was intended for their young. But I really love cheese. Oh well.

I don't go hunting. I don't kill for pleasure. If I were to kill an animal I would find it very unpleasant. I do like to eat animals though. So sue me. The farmers who kill the cows don't do it for pleasure. They do it for money.

My guess is that our incisors aren't effective at cutting through meat because we don't need to. We've been cooking meat for ages. We also have tools that we can use to cut the meat, so we don't have to stick our faces in it to tear it apart.

And it really isn't murder. Murder implies illegality, murder is illegal. Since it's not illegal, it's not murder.

I feel that this supposed "tension" between feminism and veganism is misinformed. Veganism is a loving and compassionate diet/lifestyle intended to directly confront the oppression of animals by directly withdrawing support from an exploitative food industry. There are many parallels between the oppression of women and animals in our society, and combating the oppression of one of these groups can go along way to challenging other oppressive practices.
I do, however, acknowledge that many organizations and writings on veganism, including PETA and the Skinny Bitch book, prey upon the insecurities of young women in their promotion of a vegan diet. This does not represent the views of the vegan movement as a whole any more than a white, appropriated liberal feminism should be taken as representative of a diverse feminism. Many vegans share the feminist disgust at the use of sexism and the promotion of an “ideal� female body type to promote veganism as part of a well-developed theory of oppression.
That being said, I am a healthy, fit vegan and actually gained 15 pounds after converting from vegetarianism. If weight loss was my goal I would not still be vegan 4 years later. Veganism has helped me get over many of my unhealthy attitudes towards food, and I now thoroughly enjoy cooking a diversity of nutritious foods.
I do recognize that there is an element of elitism in veganism as a movement practiced primarily by the white middle class. However, as I do place myself in this category, I feel that practicing a vegan lifestyle is something that I find myself able to do to create a more compassionate world. Again, a vegan’s commitment to anti-oppression often stems beyond mere animal rights to addressing a broad spectrum of oppression based on race, gender, class, sexuality or ability—just as a feminists rarely limit themselves to a narrow gender-based analysis. Building bridges across veganism and feminism as anti-oppressive practices is a far more useful analysis than focusing on any “tensions� that exist between them.

Kmari, I beg to differ on our teeth looking like that of an herbivore. The current state of our teeth is due more to our being able to eat cooked foods, they wouldn’t last long if they were exposed to the diet of a true herbivore. Herbivore teeth morphology is designed to handle a lot of grinding, you should see some of those molars. For that matter, cattle have no upper front teeth, so we certainly don’t resemble them. Moreso, for a lot of these species, their teeth esp the molars keep on growing throughout their lives. Ours (sadly) do not. Even with their adaptations, the teeth of cattle and horses see extreme wear over a lifetime and can end up being little more than nubs in their geriatric years, and our teeth esp our molars, are no match for that. Our teeth have not evolved for a diet that’s high in roughages. Our teeth are also not designed to eat raw meat, we cannot rip and tear the way a true carnivore would need to.

What I think you mean (and please correct me if I’m wrong) is that as humans we’re no longer tied and bound by what biology gave us. After we figured out how to grind and cook foods, we no longer needed the teeth that our ancestors probably had (I’m not anthropologist). Indeed what I remember of reading about recent evolution is that humans might be evolving to have less in the way of teeth. I, unfortunately, was not one of the people born without wisdom teeth though. If you look at the teeth of the apes and monkeys, you’ll see that they’re similar to ours only larger, stronger, there’s more of them etc. They also have stronger jaw muscles than us, though they (I’d assume) evolved with a similar diet up to the time we started cooking our food.

As for the intestines… we are not built like a strict herbivore. We’re not even close to the efficiency of horses (the hind-gut fermentors I mentioned above here somewhere) or cattle (which as ruminants are way cooler than the rest of us). In short, because of technological advances (agriculture, cooking, food processing/grinding, nutritional research) we can function as herbivores very well, take away all of that, and I sincerely doubt that a human would do well as an herbivore. That said, we have the tech advances to allow it, and I’m glad. :)

Funny, B12, which we need, comes from meat and animal products and can only be obtained in vegan diets through supplements. Seems to me like our body needs that.

Funny that the supplements get it from natural sources so we can ingest it easier :) purely a convienience for our sake. And it's also available in foods, not just supplemented foods, like seaweed and such. And foods grown in organic soils. :)

and thank you for being respectful faerylore, I do enjoy talking with you!

And katiedivina, I think i love you :D lol.

"If we don't NEED meat -- and we don't -- then why would we choose to eat it?"

Any reason people want to. Supposedly, some people do it specifically to piss animal rights people off. That's asinine.

I am not a vegetarian. I like vegetarian food (except hummus), but I like meat in moderate amounts, for the taste. Also, animal based fats like mayonnaise.

I am sad to see the conflict occurring on this thread.

Again, I am a meat eater, and I'm not sorry. I will not claim being vegetarian or vegan are restrictive, but eating meat, and simply buying prepared food at times, along with taking my nutritional supplements, is the most convenient way for my family.

That said, I do not believe it is a matter of "giving" animals rights, any more than the concept of "giving" humans rights. The general public and the law, recognizes rights that should already exist. In any case, animals do have the right to be treated humanely, even if they will be used for the benefit of humans. This includes research animals and animals used for food. That much has been recognized by law. I shall allow others to debate the concept of murder.

Sorry, Kmari, for being rude in my posts, but I have no good personal experience with vegans, and therefore have a bias to anyone who calls themselves vegan, because every example of a self-identified vegan I've had to deal with in real life has been negative. However, my main point is that it is fine for you to object to meat eating on moral grounds, but it is spurious of you to object to meat-eating on the grounds that human beings are not designed to eat it. It is quite clear that our bodies are designed to eat meat, though not meat alone. As beings with moral capability, we can decide for ourselves whether it is ethical to continue to eat meat, but a human being who does not eat meat or meat products is leaving out a part of the normal human diet. I will agree that our bodies are not designed to handle the lactations of other animals, however.

EG, Atkins is omnivorous. Omnivore=animal products + plant products. Atkins certainly allows people to eat vegetables and whole grains. If it didn't, they would be dying of scurvy, no?

"I whole heartedly believe that there are just as many reasons to be a vegetarian as there are vegetarians. Some people do it because of care for the animal, others for the environment, and yes, some people really do it because they want to lose weight."

There's tons of other reasons too, right? I've even heard of some people not eating meat because they just don't like the flavors of meat.

"but I have a fucked-up enough relationship with food that I've decided it's too problematic for me to declare certain foods verboten."

Whoa, I can sorta relate. I very rarely declare certain foods verboten too, but that's because I'm an omnivore with little culinary common sense who will buy weird-looking food just to see what it's like.

http://www.veganhealth.org/b12/plant

"Unlike animals, most, if not all, plants have no B12 requirement for any function, and therefore have no active mechanisms to produce or store B12."

"Of all the foods studied below, only tempeh in Indonesia or Thailand, dulse, Chlorella, raw nori, and coccolithophorid algae warrant much further attention for providing B12. Unless these foods are shown to correct B12 deficiency consistently, vegans should not rely on them as a B12 source."

Sounds like these plant foods with B12 in them aren't readily available to everyone...nor are they conclusively good at removing b12 deficiency.

"However, my main point is that it is fine for you to object to meat eating on moral grounds, but it is spurious of you to object to meat-eating on the grounds that human beings are not designed to eat it."

I'm pretty sure it's fine for me to not eat meat on both grounds. Just because we don't believe the same things doesn't mean you're right and I'm wrong. Just thought I'd point that out. :)

Katiedivina, you are great! You too, Joselle,

This thread is devolving into a fair amount of nastiness, but I can't help making an appeal.

Vegans and vegetarians get A LOT of crap from people about their dietary choices all the time. If you are someone who is giving them said crap, in any form (ie, assaulting them with the patently stupid claim that people should eat meat just because they can, or "meat is delicious" OR acting suspicious as though you suspect them of having an eating disorder), you are not behaving in a defensible manner. It's disrespectful, and says much more about your own close-mindedness and insecurity than anything else.

Furthermore, it's not cool or funny or cute to act cynical and judgmental about vegans/vegetarians on the grounds that you think they're all priveleged, white, neo-hippies, etc. I have to admit that I've never really run into this attitude anywhere else except the internet, but I'm kind of shocked at how prevalent and genuinely mean-spirited it is. I live in Washington DC, where there is a fairly wide cross section of nationalities and religions that endorse veganism. Several of the most popular vegan eateries in the area are frequented almost entirely by people of color. I'd love to take some of the people who like to rage about all vegans being spoiled aryan rich kids to lunch there sometime.

Its not a matter of not believing the same things. It's a matter of completely ignoring biological fact. What biological basis do you have to suggest that humans aren't supposed to eat meat, aside from the teeth and digestive tract, which have already been pointed out as more similar to omnivores than strict herbivores or carnivores.

"EG, Atkins is omnivorous. Omnivore=animal products + plant products."

+ fungus products! I like mushrooms. :)

My opinions still stand. I have already stated what I believe. I honestly don't care if anyone doesn't think I have a basis for that. It's good enough for me.

I think humans are evolving to be herbivores, I think we CAN be herbivores and are designed currently as potential herbivores, because obviously humans thrive as herbivores.

I don't feel I need to back up my own opinions. :)

"One of the things that Alice Waters seems to overlook is that domesticated species are here for human beings, or at least because of human beings, on a basic historical level. Cows didn't evolve naturally; human beings domesticated cow ancestors specifically in order to eat them and drink their milk. Those species would not exist without our interference, and they are not adapted to live in any natural habitat. If we did not continue maintaining them, they'd die."

We do understand that these species would die out and are absolutely okay with that. We were wrong to breed them in the first place and now need to correct that mistake.

Imagine you're born into a life where as soon as you were old enough you would be impregnated, have the baby you give birth to taken away minutes after, be hooked up to machines which cause painful sores until your milk slows and the entire process is repeated until you get too old and you're killed. Wouldn't you rather they just not breed you at all if this was their only reason for doing so?

Look, I could pretty much turn that whole argument around. We are capable of eating meat, so why not eat it? We eat it because it tastes good to us.

Because it causes incredible pain and suffering to another sentient being. It doesn't really work the other way around. If we don't need to cause pain and suffering to another to live, then the bottom line is, if we still choose to, it's condoning torture simply to pleasure our taste buds.

We're capable of eating other humans as well. Just because our bodies are capable of something doesn't mean it's ethical to do it.

Hello Mina

Uh, don't let me talk about exploitation of girls and women in media anymore and please ignore those threads. I've caused myself some trouble.

"I live in Washington DC, where there is a fairly wide cross section of nationalities and religions that endorse veganism."

Also, I got the impression that vegan food is automatically kosher and halal too, so if you want to stick to one of those diets you can pick anything on a vegan restaurant's menu without accidentally ordering something treyf and/or haram.

Moonwatcher, that's not what "omnivorous" means. "Omnivorous" means "eats everything"--that's why we use the "omni" prefix.

It's easy to say, EG, that if my friends don't agree with me I'll just find new ones, but don't you think that's a little unfair.

No, I don't. If it comes down to having friends who continually harrass me, make little of my values, and won't cut it out when I tell them to, then I see no value in having them. I suppose you could keep them if you have a lot invested in being martyred, but I really don't see any other reason. Do you really think I've never espoused an unpopular view? If my religious friends started badgering me about believing in God, I'd drop them, because that would show such a profound disrespect for the way I've chosen to live my life that I would no longer find the comfort and pleasure in their company that I seek in friends. Really, "don't be a jerk" is too high a standard for one's friends?

while you certainly have the right to tell other's when you feel that they are being obnoxious, you should probably think about how it makes you feel when anti-feminists say the same to you.

I...don't care. I don't care what anti-feminists think. I'm not interested in their points of view. Their opinion of my charm or lack thereof is immaterial. And certainly everybody is entitled to have that sentiment about me.

Those sorts of rants are analogous to If one of my Wiccan friends started rabbiting on about how Wicca is the ONLY way to live life, how everyone not practicing Wicca is a deluded fool at best and like a rapist or murderer at worst. Tell me, how do you think that non-Wiccans would react? Would noting how Wicca is a marginalized belief system in this country and how its adherents need to blow off steam make his or her behavior any less obnoxious? How would you feel if I decided to rant on and on about how anyone who believes in God is a deluded fool, an idiot, contributing to the dumbing-down and anti-intellectualism of American culture, and on the side of Bush? Atheism is marginalized; would that make my behavior less obnoxious to the believers on this site?

Sure, we domesticated animals, but does that mean that they exist for us? Perhaps they would die without our intervention now, but does that mean that it's ok and we should merely accept things as they are?

It depends. I see no reason to keep on breeding and raising cattle if we don't eat them--what would we get out of the deal?

And just because an animal is domesticated and requires human intervention does not mean that we do (or should) eat them. We certainly don't eat house cats, dogs, hamsters, etc.

Dogs certainly are eaten in certain cuisines. We domesticated dogs and cats for different reasons, however--protection, vermin control, herding, and companionship. That's what we use them for, that's why we bred them, that's why we continue to breed them (in contemporary US, companionship seems paramount). We get different things out of them; but we didn't domesticate cattle for any of those things. We domesticated cattle to eat. And to do some labor, such as pull plows and suchlike--now that we have the internal combustion engine, it's pretty much food all the way.

If we don't NEED meat -- and we don't -- then why would we choose to eat it?

Speak for yourself.

Really, you want to know why meat-eaters react defensively? It's because of these sorts of solipsistic, self-righteous assumptions about other people's body chemistry. Leaving aside the B12 issue, walk a mile in my metabolism and tell me that "we DON'T" need to eat meat. It's funny--but all the doctors and nutritionists I've consulted about problems sleeping through the night due to hunger, about quite wretched headaches, etc. And their judgment accords with my own observations about my life, which is that when I eat meat, I feel fuller and more sated for longer than when I don't. But since that doesn't fit into your one-size-fits-all view of human biology, I guess it doesn't exist.

Opinions don't have a right or wrong, because they are opinions. Opinions which can be disproved based on all factual evidence, can still be opinions, but that doesn't make them factually right. We might be evolving into herbivores, but our current bodies are certainly that of omnivores.

Awesome EG, I like being called self-righteous because I don't believe in the torture and killing of animals. Nice.

And I don't have a one-size fits all view, you basically just put those words in my mouth.

I believe I said, if we DONT NEED MEAT. Maybe you need meat, I'm not judging that so please don't say I am. Kthx.

What you think is certain, I think is incredibly uncertain. I think there is a good amount of data that proves the uncertainty. So that doesn't make it what you want. So please stop saying stuff like that.

Imagine you're born into a life where as soon as you were old enough you would be impregnated, have the baby you give birth to taken away minutes after, be hooked up to machines which cause painful sores until your milk slows and the entire process is repeated until you get too old and you're killed.

Do I have a memory? The ability to think? The ability to understand the passage of time? The ability to conceive of a future? Will I at any point have them? Will any member of my species? What is the situation with my species and mother-infant bonding?

Animals aren't just human minds in other bodies, so I don't find those sorts of imaginary projections particularly useful.

it's condoning torture simply to pleasure our taste buds.

Again, the self-righteous among vegans and vegetarians don't seem to be able to conceive of the fact that just because eating meat is a choice for them, doesn't mean it's a choice for anybody else. I would not find life particularly worth living if I didn't eat meat. Either I would be in recurring physical pain and discomfort, or I would have to spend a hugely disproportionate amount of my time planning precisely how to avoid this state of affairs. Meat doesn't just taste good because of some cruel quirk of fate; meat tastes good because we've evolved to eat it. If you can get by without it and not feel a sense of intense misery and deprivation, bully for you. Stop wagging your fingers at the rest of us, and if you don't, stop wondering why meat-eaters respond harshly.

FemiDancer: "We might be evolving into herbivores, but our current bodies are certainly that of omnivores."

Again, I am a meat eater and I'm not sorry. But all that means is we are *able* to have a diet that includes meat. Vegetarians and animal rights activists have some very good arguments. The ones I consider most important are those regarding personal health, and general safety of the food supply. And yes, one size does not fit all. (Animal rights activists should take note of professional concerns regarding "vegan" pet food for their companion animals.)

And I agree people's own rights and choices should be respected, EG. People demanding others see things the same way, or to behave as they want them to, smacks of -ism, feeling superior, or elitist. I would never stop vegetarians (or environmentalists) from living the way they do, and feel for them when in environments where their lifestyle actually is a strain, because of lack of food choices or public understanding. It was pretty hellish for three vegan former coworkers living with me in a small city in Japan. Busy as they were, they pretty much lived on salad, and could hardly enjoy parties at bars and restaurants where meat and seafood was the bulk of the menu.

And I think the thread derailment is complete.

On other hand, please raise your hand if you think lab-grown meat would be extra cool sometime in the future? Wouldn't that be neat? Maybe they could make it Calorie-free (tm) and add it to the vegan "Skinny Bitches" cookbook.

*raises hand*

I think our B12 deficiency if we don't consume animal or animal products is pretty good evidence that we need meat or animal products as human beings. The fact that I nor my ancestors lived anywhere near possible B12 containing plants supports that at least most Europeans for the past few thousand years have not been evolving into an only plant diet, and we've only been cultivating plants as a consistent source of food for about 10,000 years. The plants that we have cultivated, however, are still not sources of B12.

Nice discussion. I'm not vegan, but I wanna throw in an interesting aside: vegan food is *super* tasty :)

I eat like at least 2-3 times in the local vegan restaurant. Really really original tasty stuff. I was surprised since I was a victim of "vegan stereotypes"...

But I decided to go for it and try vegan food, and there is some super tasty stuff on there. I wouldn't go 100% vegan, but... wow. Well worth a try.

"Nice discussion. I'm not vegan, but I wanna throw in an interesting aside: vegan food is *super* tasty :)"

Yes, but at least at the local vegan/raw food restaurant, the hummus is questionable. I considered it sharp (flavor) and gritty. I am hoping it is the fault of the cook, not the food. I hear so much in praise of hummus.

Have you tried raw foods? I like cookies and "bread," but have not tried pies.

====
On other hand, please raise your hand if you think lab-grown meat would be extra cool sometime in the future? Wouldn't that be neat? Maybe they could make it Calorie-free (tm) and add it to the vegan "Skinny Bitches" cookbook.
=====================

*raises hand*

Hehe, and I thought I was the only one cooking up such ideas hehe :) Yeah that's real awesome.

I was watching some science show about them doing all this stuff like making human organs in the laboratory, and producing new lifeforms and all kinds things,

and the same day there was another vegan debate on the ethics of feeding on animals, so I was like hmmm "wouldn't it be cool if they could grow lab replicas of meat in the future that has the nutritional value of meat, but has nothing to do with animals"

That would solve a lot of these things.

i am a feminist. i am a vegan. i also struggle with anorexia.

unfortunately, there are still a whole lot of misunderstandings floating around about what differentiates a person with anorexia from one with disordered eating. while i won't assume i can clear the sky of clouds in one swift blog comment, i hope people will forgive me for being long-winded and let me bring a few things to the table.

anorexia is more than a fear of being fat, a low body weight, a model sipping celery juice before she hits the runway. anorexia is a bodily response to a culture characterized by callousness toward life; a culture intent on paring down dimensions, of which size is only the most obvious example. when you bear the brunt of some of the hurt this causes, you become sensitive to what it feels like, and when you see that hurt in others, you feel it doubly. it can be a seductive fantasy, then, to believe that by absorbing as much of that hurt as you can within yourself, you prevent it from spreading to others. this pathology separates anorexia from disordered eating.

understanding this, it becomes clearer why an anorexia sufferer would be drawn to the plight of nonhuman animals. in this society, nonhumans are subjected to the paring down i described earlier, and in many cases the paring down of women, who make up the majority of anorexia sufferers, and the paring down of nonhumans looks quite similar. veganism, then, seems a logical choice - not because salads have less calories than salami, but because exploitation resonates deeply with those who have become sick as a result of it.

i go through all of this because i hope to make clear that anorexia sufferers who practice veganism not only are capable of, but will likely be drawn to, doing so for ethical reasons. on the other hand, a person with disordered eating, whose preoccupation with calories and weight truly is just that, might adopt the diet as just one more mode of restriction.

this is not to say that veganism can't pack a one-two punch. an anorexia sufferer wants to restrict their intake - that's absolutely true. any diet with that as a component is bound to look attractive. but veganism is also a way of reacting with your body to the pain in the world. and unlike self-imposed starvation, which manifests from a fantasy that one can absorb another's pain, this diet choice is empowering, and can make a positive, real difference.

i've been hospitalized many times over the course of my anorexia. of the four inpatient stays i've endured, only once was i allowed to follow a vegan diet. i can't fully express how much anger i feel at being told by medical professionals that my veganism is wrapped up in my disease, and that they do not allow "restrictive" eating of any sort on their floors. what they do not understand is that veganism, rather than closing me off further from the world, has opened up pathways of hope for me. when i defend veganism as a way of life, it draws my attention to the fact that eating can be a direct attack on the oppressive systems that cause illnesses like mine. it has also opened my eyes up to a different way of viewing my body - i can't be emaciated and encouraging others to give my diet a try. and during the one hospitalization where i was allowed to remain vegan, i put on twenty pounds in five weeks, restoring my body enough so that it could function outside of a ward.

anorexia sufferers can use veganism as a way to mask their symptoms, yes. but they can also use it as a tool for their own liberation. i won't kid myself into claiming that i'm out of the woods with anorexia, but veganism has helped empower me to get on my way.

"Speaking personally, I used to be vegan and honestly, when done right and with support it can work really well. But then I started to realize one of the main reasons I was doing it was because it was keeping my weight down in a really extreme way (read: eating disorder) but I could cover it up in the guise of a political identity. So when young women tell me they are vegan, I am always inquisitive as to the method of their veganism. It is a very extreme diet that needs supplements to make sure you are not deficient in nutrients. It is frustrating, the lack of real nutritional information available to young women to teach us how to eat properly in a way that is healthy, maintains a healthy weight and keeps us happy. I certainly continue to struggle with it and I am almost 30"

Samhita, I would like to say thank you for opening up like this. I cannot fucking believe that some people are reacting with such viscious comments. What you say about veganism working very well, and qualifying your suspicion based on your experience should've been a clear indication that in no way shape or form you deem this lifestyle as any less worthy of following. Wow. I mean, wow - whoever said you were inept at 30, gee, I am very happy they are all with the program on nutrition, congratulations to them. Too many of us are inept, I guess.

Moving on. I am one of those meat eaters who probably should eat less, but will never give it up. Still, people who give vegetarians and vegans a hard time are ignorant. What we consume - what we choose to consume - should not be such a contentious issue as it is being portrayed here. But it is because this issue is just not simple.

I understand the point of the person who brought up veganism in minority populations in DC, but...c'mon, you can't even find fresh produce in poor city neighborhoods - neighborhoods that don't have farmer's markets either. It simply isn't a choice for the majority of Americans. And for this to be deemed as laziness is one of the most ignorant, in fact, fuck it...not worth even engaging.
As for the "extreme" label - I have to agree with it. If you believe I am ignorant, then that is your opinion, so be it. It absolutely limits the social engagements someone can participate in, where they can shop, etc. For the most part, every function now has vegetarian options, but vegan foods are rarely available.

She said that when she meats young women who identify as vegans, she wonders about their method of veganism.

Paging Dr. Freud...hee...

Ahem.

Note to those debating meat vs. vegan and evolution, teeth, feelings, etc. This topic is about eating disorders. If you're ranting about cows or dolphins or how much you like steak, you're off topic. And that's just the sad stereotype on both sides of the fence (preachy vegans vs. jerky meat eaters who love to bug them).

So in the interest of reminding what the topic is, I hope this helps.

1. Any diet where you have to limit what goes in your mouth causes you to pay attention to what goes in your mouth. Some attention is good and healthy. The hypothesis is that too much attention might evolve into, or cover, an eating disorder, if the attention is serving your need for control, power, etc. A diet "philosophy" can also be used to cover an obsessive need to control your food intake if you already have it.

2. If you are on Atkins, you cut carbs (or something, I don't know much about Atkins.) SOME people on Atkins might have eating disorders, or use Atkins as a way to control their diet a LOT. It's hard to say no to pasta and pizza all the time and not feel forced, and then they just get used to that forced feeling, or have that forced feeling and denial fulfill a need for control.

3. Similarly, vegetarians limit a whole category of what their culture eats (meat) and might get used to that limiting feeling too. MIGHT. Then (going down the scale of "extreme" where "more extreme" simply means "cutting more" not "unhealthy" or "weird"):

4. Vegans, cutting more than vegetarians, pay attention and cut more. Raw foodists even more. The guy on the banana diet the most. The most extreme is she who cuts the most.

5. If you're following that, you either:

A: Don't see the logic. Cutting NEVER gets out of hand with diets. You never knew a vegan who was too obsessive. It couldn't happen.

B: See the logic but would prefer not to talk about it, and prefer not to have anyone else talk about it, because you care less about eating disordered vegans than the hassles of your everyday vegan life.

ANY diet can be something that can evolve dangerously. Our society is sick with the number of unhealthy things out there that are normalized, so we all limit to some degree, where in a perfect world (and in some cultures) everything prepared is nourishing. Veganism is particulary pernicious in the lengths people go to to limit, though, in this category, because to the novice at risk, it's easy to convert. You don't see many people just converting to kosher with all that involves. It's hard to suddenly adopt a whole new religion. But a woman can say she's vegan all of a sudden, and just start limiting anything to do with an animal right THEN. It's easy, and that's a whole lot of limiting in our meat-ready culture. So I can definitely see how it could be used as a cover, and it bears many of our experience with people who were exactly that: eating disordered vegans. If you're vegan and not eating disordred, congratulations. Your diet is healthy, and apparently, psychologically, you can handle all you must do all day in our meat and cheese loving culture to maintain it. However, not everyone can or does consistently. Is that so hard to imagine?

Taryn, thank you. That is so interesting and inspiring, on a human level, to me at the lengths to which a body in pain will go to in order to resonate with something else. It takes my breath away how much animal suffering would fit the bill. I never would have tied those things together (my post was about disordered eating, not anorexia according to your definition, obviously) but I really feel more informed having read what you posted. Thank you. Thank you.

"The reason why we have such large brains is because of our high protein diet"

Our brains are mostly fat.

=========
i've been hospitalized many times over the course of my anorexia. of the four inpatient stays i've endured, only once was i allowed to follow a vegan diet. i can't fully express how much anger i feel at being told by medical professionals that my veganism is wrapped up in my disease, and that they do not allow "restrictive" eating of any sort on their floors. what they do not understand is that veganism, rather than closing me off further from the world, has opened up pathways of hope for me. when i defend veganism as a way of life, it draws my attention to the fact that eating can be a direct attack on the oppressive systems that cause illnesses like mine. it has also opened my eyes up to a different way of viewing my body - i can't be emaciated and encouraging others to give my diet a try. and during the one hospitalization where i was allowed to remain vegan, i put on twenty pounds in five weeks, restoring my body enough so that it could function outside of a ward.
=============

Taryn, that's an awesome story, thanks for posting it. Very educational and enlightening.

Yes, Taryn, thank you for your illuminating post. The way you draw together the many different issues is really helpful to me. Good luck in your continued recovery.

"Really, you want to know why meat-eaters react defensively? It's because of these sorts of solipsistic, self-righteous assumptions about other people's body chemistry. Leaving aside the B12 issue, walk a mile in my metabolism and tell me that "we DON'T" need to eat meat. It's funny--but all the doctors and nutritionists I've consulted about problems sleeping through the night due to hunger, about quite wretched headaches, etc. And their judgment accords with my own observations about my life, which is that when I eat meat, I feel fuller and more sated for longer than when I don't. But since that doesn't fit into your one-size-fits-all view of human biology, I guess it doesn't exist."

seriously, there is no reason to be so vicious. You can accuse vegans and vegetarians as being closed-minded all you want, and sometimes this is warranted, but your assumption that animals exist only for the sake of humans is just as closed-minded as well. I personally made no argument about biology. I don't particularly care if eating meat is a biological imperative or not. I choose not to eat meat for ethical not biological reasons and I haven't died yet. Just because we have "evolved" to do something doesn't mean that we have to. I make a choice not to eat meat, just as you make the choice to disregard my choice because you disagree with it. Perhaps a little sensitivity for difference is needed on both sides. I do not push my views onto others, but if someone asks me about it or acts like a douche-bag to me about it I am not going to hold back.

I've been plus-sized all my life and when I went vegan, that didn't change a bit. After 3 years of no animal products, I still wear a size 16 in jeans.

With that said, I still find it really odd that so many people take it upon themselves to tell me that I'm unhealthy. First, I'm unhealthy for being overweight because it obviously means I eat too much fattening foods. Then, however, I'm unhealthy because vegans "can't eat anything" and we don't have any sources of protein, calcium, B12, etc.

There have even been a few times where people will say, "I could never be a vegan. I'd starve!" Which is ridiculous, considering I really don't have the body type of someone who can't find food to eat.

Also, it's really fucking annoying that this thread had to become a meat vs. vegan debate. It's not even relevant to the original post, but you can always leave it to someone to start preaching. That includes ALL diets, too... trust me. People who eat meat say just as much shit as vegans do. I've never approached someone who ate meat and told them they are murderers or that their diet is wrong, but I've had more than enough omnivores give me shit while making really ridiculous comments. Seriously, just fuck off.

ok, sorry for the rant and keeping the thread off track; it's been a shitty day.

delurking because this is a subject close to my heart.

firstly, I think it's bizarre that comments on a pro-choice blog are expounding the opinion that there's no ethical problem with slaughtering animals because if not for us they wouldn't be alive. surely we all know the difference between actual and potential life by now?

I'm a vegan for ethical reasons, but I actually agree with most of the substance of this post. I have tendencies to disordered eating that can sometimes be exacerbated by the need to read labels carefully, etc. In general veganism actually helps me; it lets me channel my food obsession into questions of ethics rather than calories, lets me redefine "pure" eating as something that isn't totally self-obsessed and self-destructive. and I'm certainly healthier, mentally and physically, than I was before I went vegan. yet that can also be counterproductive; if I were able, it would probably be better for my mental health to just let go of thinking a lot about food. I know people in recovery for eating disorders who are not vegetarian or vegan for that reason, or similar.

Although I understand that it's frustrating to have your ethical choice constantly cast as unhealthy, disordered etc, the refusal of the vegan community to really engage with how eating disorders affect vegans is really...I don't know. It feels kind of..blind. I definitely don't feel supported by the vegan community. I think there's a tendency in the vegan community to respond to any political critique of veganism/vegans/AR activism "with OMG you're missing the point it's all about the animals their suffering rules all". And obviously I'm concerned with animal rights or I wouldn't be here. But I'm also feminist, anti-racist, aware of class, and I find that the AR community can be really dismissive of those issues. I've heard so many statements like "who cares if they're made in a sweatshop, they're vegan" or "who cares if the ad objectifies women, glamorises emaciation, eroticises violence, fetishises race; it draws attention to an animal rights issue" or "OMG poor people don't know what they're talking about, it's clearly cheap and easy to be vegan, all you need to do is find time to go to the farmer's market, know where it is, educate yourself on vegan nutrition, have the cultural and subcultural awareness to know where to look for vegan recipes, have the mental energy to face the shit you'll get, let go of the eating tradition that's been a source of family and community solidarity and pride, hang out with mainly young white middle-class punk kids and learn from them", etc, etc. I think most political movements have a tendency to dismiss others as less important. But animal rights is a particularly bad offender, and it's not okay under any circumstances anyway.

seriously, there is no reason to be so vicious....but if someone asks me about it or acts like a douche-bag to me about it I am not going to hold back.

Well, exactly. Lucretia called meat-eaters rapists and murders. I consider that to be both vicious and douche-baggy.

I have to read through the first (124?) comments but this REALLY pissed me off.

"It is a very extreme diet that needs supplements to make sure you are not deficient in nutrients.

PLEASE, Samhita. It sucks that you automatically put it in line with an eating disorder because that is what YOU were doing. Why don't you look up some vegan blogs and see what we eat? This site constantly talks about how women are portrayed this way or that, and you do the EXACT same things with vegans.

This is the first time I've ever felt compelled to comment on a post, so here goes.

I am very surprised by the number of posts claiming 'we have evolved to be able to eat meat, so eat meat we ought/should/may/must'. How does the mere capability of doing something - in this case, the capability of eating meat - imply that we are morally justified in doing it? As Hume says, there is no 'ought' from an 'is'.

I think it unfortunate that this discussion of veganism has reverted to 'evolution' and 'nature' to justify what are actually choices that we, as rational animals, can make. Certainly, these kinds of explanations based on supposed biological necessity would be shot down by feminists if they were used to justify violence towards women. We need to get past the idea that might - or intelligence, or evolution - makes right.

I agree with those who have suggested that calling meat eaters murderers and rapists is both unhelpful and inaccurate. Murder is a legal concept that applies only to humans, so one cannot murder an animal by definition. But it is fallacious to say 'killing animals is legal, therefore it is not wrong'. The law is supposed to reflect wrongness - though we might disagree with certain laws - rather than the other way around. Moreover, to say that something is right just because it is legal, is equally problematic.

As for 'Skinny Bitches' ... I am sure a lot of vegans would be happy for people to stop eating animals, even if they're doing it for the wrong reasons. Similarly, I'd be happy for other men and women to act in feminist ways because they are motivated by the recent articles showing that feminists have better sex. I have problems with the idea that the authors' weight is supposed to give them the right to be bitches to us fatties, but otherwise...

=====ourcatastrophe====
I think most political movements have a tendency to dismiss others as less important.
=======================

Ditto...

Which is a shame, since the vast majority of the population is passive. Those of us who are active in some manner, should find more ways to work together. There's already too little of activism to go around anyway...

Instead of vegans vs. vs. enviromentalists vs hunger-fighter etc...

There's obviously a lot of common ground that a lot of movements can find and use that to grow stronger together.

Currently there's a lot of "my activism is more important to society than yours, so that means yours has no value.

I also have to add that I love how me pointing that Alice Walker's comment doesn't take into account the number of species that we did create for our own benefit has somehow been morphed into "all animals are here for our purposes!" I don't think trees are here for my use, but that doesn't mean I don't think that wood furniture is a good idea.

I don't think that anything naturally evolved is here "for" humans--I don't subscribe to any theories of fate or suchlike.

I'd like to respond to the sushi comment as well!

Sushi refers to the seasoned rice. There are delicious veggie combos. I had to chime in because it is one of my all-time best loved foods :)
Pretty much anything "omni", you can have a vegan version of it. ("Omni" is not a negative term, it is just a shortened form of "omnivore" since it's shorter than "those who eat meat and cheese").

First of all, the "sanctity of life" comments make me wonder if I'm actually on an anti-abortion site.

I associate my collection of cookbooks and clipped recipes with Grandma, Mom, Dad, and comforting, positive connotations. Even if I was vegan, I wouldn't want such a title poisoning a shelf of food-related literature (with the exception of Anthony Bourdain, since nastiness complements decadence). When I do imagine who is behind such a title as "skinny bitches," I picture two really horrible, bitter little girls with no sense of humor. Wouldn't you rather peruse a book adorned with Nigella Lawson's radiant smile and ample bosom?

My friends' diets are a range of pretty much everything. We don't give each other grief about our choices (though we do make fun of each other from time to time). In fact, I probably cook better vegetarian (and vegan) food than a majority of veggies you know. I also know the tastiest restaurants to find animal-free food.

The fact is, some of us just can't or don't want to omit animal products from our diets. Lean animal protein makes me feel good....if I could eat fish at every meal, I would! Maybe it's my blood type, or my digestive system, but if I went vegan I would have a constant case of the runs, not to mention farting like a mental patient for much of the time. I would also be deficient of energy. I'm old enough to know what suits my body...kind of like how I make other choices with my body.

Can't we just not to admonish others on their dietary needs/choices? Is that difficult? If so, you're just going to have to deal with it anyway.

I too wish these comments could get back closer to the OP, but I can't pretend like I haven't just read a lot of frightening misinformation.

Fact: A properly planned vegan diet is healthier than a meat-based diet. Unfortunately, we as a society have a lot invested in believing otherwise. I highly recommend the book "Diet for A New America" by John Robbins for its thorough debunking of certain claims made by those who choose to eat animal products (like the protein myth, the link between calcium and osteoporosis, the "benefits" of animal fat [heart disease, cancer]) and those who are unable to see that the only people benefiting from the use of animal products are those in agribusiness -- and they're not even benefiting, because of the ridiculous envrionmental impact of meat-based diets...

Does this food pyramid look unreasonable to anyone? Or just delicious? http://www.vegsource.com/nutrition/Pyramdlr.jpg

Lucretia called meat-eaters rapists and murders. I consider that to be both vicious and douche-baggy.

As both a meat-eater and a rape victim, I found Lucretia's comment--and similar arguments for veganism framed in those terms--hurtful, offensive, hateful. It is exactly those kinds of comments--the same kind of hyperbole peddled by PETA--that make me defensive and hostile towards veganism as a movement.

jcastle: There is no fact there yet :) As scientists are still arguing about some very very basic things in that area... There is still no "definite* judgement on which is "healthier".

Personally, I would find either to be equally plausible when they do reach a definite judgement on which is definetely better.

The relativity factor: another thing that is getting more and more accepted as of late is *genetics*.

I.E. that there is no one-size-fits-all judgement.

There's plenty of proof to that right now. Certain peoples (tribes, continents, nationalities, climates) thrive on a type of food, where that same food causes health problems in another group.

A statement such as "Fact: A properly planned vegan diet is healthier than a meat-based diet." is the same as "fact: blue looks better on people than red"

Taryn, thank you for sharing your story.

I just need to state that anorexia isnt always like that. I also suffer from it, and mine holds no resemblance to your description. I'm a meat eater, and yes I generally avoid (land)meats because of the fat and calorie content, but overall I really dont care about animals at all. yes yes, I'm a terrible person, ok, go ahead and berate me. Thats just how I am. My anorexia stems mostly from a need to feel in control of my life, and also from a fear of being a woman, so I try to not eat fat or have much fat on my body so I wont get my period. My anorexia has really nothing to do with being small or cultural ideals. Its purely about controling what goes into my body and keeping myself from having to face being a woman.

What I do find interesting is how you(teryn) say that eating a vegan diet helps you to cope with your anorexia. I adhere to an organic diet(which does pretty much eliminate meat products, since I live in a small town without a lot of free range or organic meat avaialable, and since I'm severely lactose intolerant, I guess I pretty much eat vegan) and it helps me have a sense of control over my food choices. When I'm eating all organic and little to no meat it makes me ok with eating, and in turn gaining weight and recovering from my eating disorder, in a sense.

Thats why I find it odd when people say that being vegan or vegatarian is used(not all the time, of course) as an excuse for those with eating disorders. For me(well, w/ an organic diet), and a lot of people I know, its helped them take food back, and deal with it in their own way, and get themselves healthy again.

"And I think the thread derailment is complete.

"On other hand, please raise your hand if you think lab-grown meat would be extra cool sometime in the future? Wouldn't that be neat? Maybe they could make it Calorie-free (tm) and add it to the vegan 'Skinny Bitches' cookbook.

"*raises hand*"

I think it would be cool too! :D

Wow, I wish I had commented yesterday, but I had no idea that the thread would go out of control.

I am a vegetarian who eats a vegan diet (I don't call myself vegan because while I don't eat animal products, I may wear them). I went vegetarian 15 years ago for lots of reasons and went to eating vegan for health reasons. After I stopped eating dairy and processed oil, I lost 15 pounds. I got the idea from a diet book - Eat to Live by Dr. Fuhrman, and since I was already was a vegetarian, it wasn't difficult for me and I wanted to lose 15 pounds.

So, I can see where someone who wants to lose weight is coming from when they get the Skinny Bitch book. And I can totally see where someone might use a vegan diet to cover for an eating disorder. If you eat only kale or other salad greens and nothing else, you will not be getting enough caloires in, although you might be getting in all the basic vitamins and minerals and protein you need (fun fact - calorie for calorie, kale has more protein than steak and more calcium than milk).

However, I started eating this way as a diet almost a year ago, and in addition to losing weight, I have become much healthier. The doctor was amazed at my last check up at how far down my cholesterol has gone down, how low my blood pressure has gotten, and I haven't had a cold or flu since I started. So, I find it difficult to believe that eating in a vegan way is somehow unhealthy or that you need a degree in nutrition to make it work.

I see people everyday who need to suppliment their diets. My mother, an omni, takes a multivitamin everyday because otherwise she wouldn't get enough vitamin A, C, or iron. Milk is fortified with vitamin D because there is an across the board deficiency in D in the populace.

Furthermore, I see people everyday who restrict, from the 8 year old who will not eat foods that touch other foods, to Jews who keep kosher and Muslims who eat halal. Interesting enough, Samhita put out that she couldn't eat her grandmother's fish soup. Neither could an Indian friend of mine, who is vegetarian for religious reasons, and has been so since birth. My father wouldn't touch a vegetable with a 10 foot pole unless it was canned peas. So, it's not like vegetarians and vegans are the only ones who restrict, and make it difficult to eat out when they do.

So what if I restrict? What if I have to take one suppliment? It's not like other people don't. I don't think any of that is wrong per se, and restricting to lose weight isn't wrong either. It's when you restrict and are unhealthy about it. But then, I could say the same about people who restrict themselves to take-out all the time, as well as those with eating disorders.

Also: to the sushi eater. Sushi is my favorite food, and there are so many tasty vegetarian sushis out there! Don't feel like you have to eat fish to eat sushi!

I guess my point here (sorry for the rambling) is that there are people who eat this way for many non-animal rights reasons, and some of that is to lose weight and be healthier. But that's not a bad thing either, and it can make people much healthier than if they were eating a standard American diet of sodium-laden meat and high fructose corn syrup.

Samhita, veganism is 'extreme' in precisely the same way different sexual behavior (such as lesbianism) is 'extreme': it is not mainstream. because of this those who are vegans share and support one another, engage in discourse about their choices, and about the ethics of choices.

Quite often (and I am aware that I am generalizing) those who are 'mainstream' do not question their choices, because the path is well marked.

This has interesting similarities to feminism: here, we discuss ethics, support those who share our beliefs, and promote an awareness that feminism itself is a choice that pervades all our lives, affects our decisions as citizens, consumers, and knowledgeable beings.

You have unfortunately chosen to use a word that is used often employed to marginalize difference, whether or not this was your intention.

One more thing: the idea that vegetarianism is somehow the purview of the rich and white people.

The largest population of vegetarians in the world is in India, which is not full of rich white people.

When I was in the Peace Corps, I ate cheaply and better because I did not eat meat, and it was never a problem in the third world country I was stationed in. I also did not get the full range of parasites and other food poisoning that others did.

It is not expensive to eat vegetarian in this country, and I have gone through a whole spectrum of tax brackets, since college, from poverty to middle classdom. I have always had a strict budget and vegetarianism has always fit in nicely.

Samhita, veganism is 'extreme' in precisely the same way different sexual behavior (such as lesbianism) is extreme. It is not mainstream. Because of this, those who are vegans share and support one another, engage in discourse about their choices, and about the ethics of choices. People who live in cultures where vegetarianism and/or veganism are common are already members of the prevailing structure. Quite often (and I am aware that I am generalizing) those who are mainstream in a culture do not question their choices, because the path is well marked for them.

This has interesting similarities to feminism: here, we discuss ethics, support those who share our beliefs, and promote an awareness that feminism itself is a choice that pervades all our lives, affects our decisions as citizens, consumers, and knowledgeable beings.

You have unfortunately chosen to use a word that is used often employed to marginalize difference, whether or not this was your intention. If we are to practice greater sensitivity to word choice, based upon an awareness that words are powerful tools/weapons within a culture, you would do well to reconsider your insistence on using 'extreme' to describe veganism.

I have been a vegetarian for 14 years now. I chose a vegetarian lifestyle NOT as a means of controlling my weight, but because the thought of eating an animal's flesh makes my stomach turn. My husband is a vegetarian and my two children are vegetarians, we are all healthy. I was vegan for a few years and was extremely healthy, but had a hankerin' for eggs while pregnant with my second son. I was part of a vegetarian group for awhile and none of the women were in it for weight control either, quite a few of us would have been considered "plump".

Of course you are going to find women who are vegan and have eating disorders. You could probably find a women with eating disorders in any group of people you look at, remember, emotional eating is now considered an eating disorder.

Someone said earlier that there are many women who have eating disorders who eat meat, yet, we aren't attributing meat eating to an eating disorder. I knew a girl who used to work at McDonald's, she was a bulimic and would binge on the burgers that were going to be thrown out, I blame McDonald's for her eating disorder, anyone who eats McDonald's is hiding disordered eating habits.

As for privilege, wasn't meat eating once for the rich who could afford it?

I have been a vegetarian for 14 years now. I chose a vegetarian lifestyle NOT as a means of controlling my weight, but because the thought of eating an animal's flesh makes my stomach turn. My husband is a vegetarian and my two children are vegetarians, we are all healthy. I was vegan for a few years and was extremely healthy, but had a hankerin' for eggs while pregnant with my second son. I was part of a vegetarian group for awhile and none of the women were in it for weight control either, quite a few of us would have been considered "plump".

Of course you are going to find women who are vegan and have eating disorders. You could probably find a women with eating disorders in any group of people you look at, remember, emotional eating is now considered an eating disorder.

Someone said earlier that there are many women who have eating disorders who eat meat, yet, we aren't attributing meat eating to an eating disorder. I knew a girl who used to work at McDonald's, she was a bulimic and would binge on the burgers that were going to be thrown out, I blame McDonald's for her eating disorder, anyone who eats McDonald's is hiding disordered eating habits.

As for privilege, wasn't meat eating once for the rich who could afford it?

ugh, this has gotten nasty and ridiculous, and my comment probably won't even be read, but--

i'm a vegan, who's not outraged, but the b12 thing--i'm not an expert, but from what i understood, b12 is a nutrient that was once common in most healthy soils (thus its presence in some organic soil), but modern soil-depleting agricultural practices have made the presence of b12 in vegetables a thing not to be relied upon for most of us getting our food from, say, a grocery store.

thus b12 doesn't "prove" anything too easy. it sucks for omnivores too that the b12 content of vegetables is down (as well as other nutrients in modern grocery store vegetables).

I'm a vegan and a feminist. And I disagree that there are tensions between the two - for me, veganism is just a logical extension of feminism. It seems natural to extend my compassion to exploited non-human animals, just as I am outraged by the exploitation of humans. I recommend reading Carol J Adams' book, the sexual politics of meat. It's excellent.

I was so bummed to read the bit in the post about veganism being an extreme diet. I never thought I would read such a tired cliche on this otherwise excellent site. Um, ANY way of eating needs thought and planning. And the way I eat is not restrictive! I eat vegan versions of the foods I used to, and have discovered heaps of other delicous stuff. While Skinny Bitch may be super lame, and weight loss is a silly reason to be vegan, that doesn't mean veganism should be dismissed entirely.

Do I have a memory? The ability to think? The ability to understand the passage of time? The ability to conceive of a future? Will I at any point have them? Will any member of my species? What is the situation with my species and mother-infant bonding?

Animals aren't just human minds in other bodies, so I don't find those sorts of imaginary projections particularly useful.

All you have to do is interact with animals like cows, chickens and pigs to see that they feel pain and experience fear. For me, that's enough to believe that they should have the right to a free life. However, cows do grieve when their young is taken away from them. They cry out and fight to get them back. Many animals exhibit familial bonds and grieve when they lose a loved one. They are much more complex beings than most would like to think. And just because they're different from humans and have a different method of communication doesn't mean that they don't have basic self interests.

Stop wagging your fingers at the rest of us, and if you don't, stop wondering why meat-eaters respond harshly.

So when you speak up for women's rights to people who don't want to give up the oppression of women because they have an invested interest in it, are you wagging your finger at these people? I don't think so. You see injustice happening and feel the need to fight it. Just as we both see men as being no better than women, I also see humans as being no better than animals.

There's plenty of proof to that right now. Certain peoples (tribes, continents, nationalities, climates) thrive on a type of food, where that same food causes health problems in another group.

Alek, thanks for bringing this up...it was an extension on subject of blood type. I have type 0 negative, which could be an explanation why an all vegan (or even exclusively vegetarian) diet doesn't agree with me. In the past I went through non-meat consumption periods without thinking about it, and overall didn't feel quite as good (even though I had an otherwise balanced diet and ate veg proteins). Then I picked up one of those "eat for your blood type" books and it made sense. I certainly don't follow the "plan," but I am aware that if I eat too much of certain groups (wheat and grains that are not "ancient grains") I feel TERRIBLE.

There are probably other hereditary factors as well, so I'm not really interested in hearing others tell me I still need to do it because they "have the same blood type and it works for them."

The Book Skinny Bitch does promote maintaining a healthy weight/losing weight. Which, lets be honest, is a messasge most Americans (including myself) NEED. Being fat is unhealthy. It's not PC to say so, but it's true, and it's a real growing problem (parden the pun).

The book simultaneously promotes veganism. But the girls point out a lot of other reasons to eschew meat, dairy, artificial sweeteners, cigarettes, soft drinks, white sugar, and processed foods besides just the fact that they can (and will) make you fat.

The book talks on every page about science, nutrition, political issues, animal abuse, and all kinds of political propoganda and manipulation of public opinion.

The book was very informative, it promotes a healthy lifestyle, and I personally I loved it. It made me aware of a lot of things I didn't know about, and it prompted me to try a vegatarian diet for the first time (I cut out milk and cheese, but didn't go totally vegan).

There is no conflict between veganism and feminism. None.

There is a conflict between the trope of "skinny=healthy=better=desirable" and feminism.

Do you assume that women who study dance or go to the gym or bike to work or do Pilates if they are doing it to cover for their eating disorder?

I would really recommending changing the title of this post. I'm a vegan, I'm a feminist, I have issues with the "Skinny Bitch" title, because of the "Skinny."

I find it hilarious that lately there seems to be a daily let's talk about how being fat is baaaaad...

I cannot agree with any of you who support his book - something that says "Stop Being a Moron and Start Getting Skinny!" is fucking offensive to those of us who choose not to be, or cannot be skinny.

But I love how they try to incorporate all of us - Not skinny? It's ok! You can be a skinny bitch, too!
"...It has nothing to do with how much you weigh or what size you are! Skinny Bitches come in all beautiful shapes and sizes!"
http://www.skinnybitch.net/authors.html

Then why not use just plain "Bitch"?

Oh look, girls - yet another trite, stereotyping title upcoming:

"We're just wrapping things up on our third book, Skinny Bitch: Bun in the Oven."

I wonder why they didn't choose 'up the creek' or something equally creaky.

"Milk is fortified with vitamin D because there is an across the board deficiency in D in the populace."

I heard it's also because weird things happen if you dn't eat enough vitamin D to go with your calcium intake. You know, kinda like how high sodium itself is less of a problem than a messed-up sodium:potassium ratio but we hear "eat less sodium" a lot because it's easier for most people to cut sodium than to add potassium to their diets.

"As for privilege, wasn't meat eating once for the rich who could afford it?"

Yeah, I heard that was true in a lot of cases too. Not so much in Arctic and near-Arctic communities, though.

"So, it's not like vegetarians and vegans are the only ones who restrict, and make it difficult to eat out when they do."

Right on.

"The largest population of vegetarians in the world is in India, which is not full of rich white people."

Does anyone else remember when the lentil crop in India had some problem a few years ago, Indian authorities cut lentil exports because they didn't want vegetarians in India to face skyrocketing prices, and so lentil prices abroad went up until either the Indian lentil farms bounced back or importers renegotiated deals with lentil farmers in Africa (I forgot which)?

I don't like the title of this book or the media behind it. Stop being a moron and get skinny? Ok, so now people are stupid for choosing not to take on some stupid diet? I think there are alot of good reasons, including ethical and health reasons to be vegan, but trying to be vegan is not the best diet plan. I also am so tired of books that claim not to be diet books but are still behind the concept that women should be focused on their weight and calories. A book recently came out called "How to Eat like a Hot Chick" which claims to empower women by telling them the truth behind what kind of calories are in food, but how is that empowering by embracing the whole idea of counting calories in the first place.

Maybe I am alone on this planet but I would never bother to count calories. What has a bigger effect on health, then weight or calorie counting is eating what your body needs when it comes to getting enough vitamins and minerals and avoiding stress.

I know this is off topic, but as a biologist I can't help but correct this misconception.

Many animals exhibit familial bonds and grieve when they lose a loved one.

Yes, animals exhibit behavior that looks human. But it isn't. What you're doing is called anthropomorphizing. When I put a butterfly in a kill jar it flops around a bunch trying to escape, but that doesn't mean it is longing to flit from flower to flower, or that it is scared for its larvae, or regrets that it didn't get to visit Paris before it died. It means that the chemoreceptors sense something that is bad news, so a signal goes to the motor neurons to flop around a bunch, since that behavior has gotten enough of its ancestors out of scrapes to live to reproduce. Ants and other eusocial insects exhibit a high degree of familial bonding and become "angry" when their nest is disturbed, but this is entirely due to a phenomenon known as kin selection. Never mistake the drive to pass on one's genes as love. Other animals are more complex, and I would feel comfortable assigning human-like emotions to any animal that demonstrates a sufficient level of intelligence - chimps and grey parrots are two species I can think of where there is sufficient scientific evidence that they are capable of complex thought. But the fact of the matter is that animal rights activists are as much anti-science as creationists.

Meg, your assertion that being fat is unhealthy is not un-PC -- it's bigoted and factually incorrect. I'd suggest reading up on the issue at Kate Harding's blog, Shapely Prose, before commenting on the matter again.

My sister went vegan and is now losing her hair. She eats about as healthy as one would expect, takes supplements, chinese herbs and medicines. She is losing her hair. She is convinced she has an allergy to wheat and has stopped eating everything with gluten in it- even though there is no history of Celiac's in our family at all, I can digest wheat no problem.

She told me once that all I had to do to get thinner was to stop eating wheat gluten. I can tell that's what has happened to her.

She is sick all the time.

I eat a moderate diet, trying not to disorder eat, of a wide variety of foods. I eat meat, to a degree, but I don't make it the focal point of every meal of my day. I am not losing my hair. I am not malnourished. I get sick maybe twice a year; Fact is I can't even remember the last time I *was* actually sick.

So no, veganism doesn't work for everyone. And no, eating meat doesn't work for everyone. And I would love to get some insight in to how I could talk to my sister about her malnourishment without her getting defensive. But no one has any advice on that, and her therapist obviously doesn't see it. I actually suspect that she has developed an eating disorder. Would make sense- we were abused as youngsters, and I even have major body issues (which is why I've been really into Fat Acceptance and HAES lately).

As for "Skinny bitch", if they think that all you have to do is have a magic diet and follow it to be magically transformed into a skinny person, they obviously are smoking some crack. I HAVE starved, for over 8 months, and dropped 40 pounds- and was still a large size 10. So BITCH PLEASE! Ain't no one gonna be able to make me a size 2, no matter what.
Now I'm working on being cool with being a size whatever in a size 0 world. Ain't no diet or eating philosophy gonna help me with that one.

I just wanted to comment on all the ideas that vegans only go vegan to get skinny. I've been vegan for 5 years now and I never went to become skinny. I would also like to add that I don't take supplements or do anything else out of the ordinary and feel great. Every visit to the doctor has been extremely successful and I even ran a marathon a year ago! I feel great and I'm proud of myself. Part of me feeling so is from knowing I'm not harming any innocent creatures.
I would just like to add that everything that I have gained from this sight has taught me not be judgmental, but to look at each woman as an individual and what her motivations are. I feel a bit disappointed in some of these posts and just wanted to reconfirm everything I have been taught from all of you; Everyone has a different life story and reasons for doing what they do. Don't assume anything because it leads down paths that aren't always healthy. Veganism is not just a diet but a way to look at other creatures on this earth that aren't being treated fairly and trying to do something about it.

"Other animals are more complex, and I would feel comfortable assigning human-like emotions to any animal that demonstrates a sufficient level of intelligence - chimps and grey parrots are two species I can think of where there is sufficient scientific evidence that they are capable of complex thought."

How about when cats herd people?

But the fact of the matter is that animal rights activists are as much anti-science as creationists.

Wait... what?

That "many" animals experience familial bonds isn't a claim that "all" animals feel those bonds. You don't have to believe that all animals have the same level of cognitive abilities, emotions, or what-not to believe that it's wrong to intentionally harm them. For that matter, you don't have to believe that an animal's experience of the world is the same as a human's to believe that they have some moral worth.

Which is sort of an important point: Rights are a moral question, not a scientific one. That doesn't mean that a person who has a moral opinion about the rights of animals is somehow "anti-science". I don't have to anthropomorphize animals to think that it's wrong to abuse them. It's not about being pro or anti science- it's about whether we're making ethical choices.

The fact that I think that chickens generally don't have the intelligence levels that humans do, and that they probably have much less developed senses of emotion doesn't stop me from thinking that it's wrong to abuse them.

Ummmm ferrets are carnivores? I owned a ferret and know of others that own ferrets... they are omni - not carni.

My ferret, Weezie, loves bananas... her favorite food is bananas over anything! And bananas are not in meat family the last I heard.

I also have a cat that loves green beans - eats that over meat. So ummm this whole carni and omni thing over critters makes not one bit of since. I know of other cats that eats veggies too.

___________________________

And this: "Cows didn't evolve naturally...If we did not continue maintaining them, they'd die." WTF? If all animals and humans evolved then so did cows!! And if we let all cows on the loose - they would find a way to maintain themselves - they would try eating different things to survive!

I've heard the same about sheep. Sheep can never be wild because man has domesticated them - they would survive too!

Look at the domestic dog and cat! Not all of them go hungry... some eat well on their own [no all but some].... look at ferrel cats and wild dogs - they are fine!

Very dumb argument.

_____________________________

I cannot comment on the Skinny Bitch book because I have not read it.

________________________

I don't care if you are an omni, carni, vegetarian or vegan... you have to watch what you eat if you want to be healthy. Loosing weight means doing it safely. Remaining 'Skinny' means doing it safely.