My god it’s full of meat

Tuesday, 7 February, 2012

From a short work by US science fiction and fantasy writer Terry Bisson… the transcript of a conversation between two extraterrestrials who are studying humans:

Just one. They can travel to other planets in special meat containers, but they can’t live on them. And being meat, they can only travel through C space. Which limits them to the speed of light and makes the possibility of their ever making contact pretty slim. Infinitesimal, in fact.

Related: , , ,

Ethics and livestock feed, being vegan may not be the answer

Tuesday, 14 September, 2010

Guardian writer George Monbiot discusses his decision to abandon veganism, which he originally embraced in 2002:

In the Guardian in 2002 I discussed the sharp rise in the number of the world’s livestock, and the connection between their consumption of grain and human malnutrition. After reviewing the figures, I concluded that veganism “is the only ethical response to what is arguably the world’s most urgent social justice issue”. I still believe that the diversion of ever wider tracts of arable land from feeding people to feeding livestock is iniquitous and grotesque. So does the book I’m about to discuss. I no longer believe that the only ethical response is to stop eating meat

Related: , , , , ,

How do you like your tremendomeatatarianism? Rear, medium?

Monday, 8 March, 2010

New word of the day: tremendomeatatarianism. A tremendomeatatarian is someone who only undertakes to eat meat that is “tremendously delicious”.

The tremendomeatatarian respects the fact that his food came from a living being, which died to provide him with dinner, and which may have suffered or be rare and overfished. Or perhaps it’s bad for the environment. Any of these things are costs, so the good utilitarian must balance them out. So he vows that he will respect that sacrifice by only eating meat if it is tremendously delicious.

For my part I undertake to devise neologisms only if I can also pronounce them.

Related: , , , ,

To be vegetarian or not, maybe we should ask the plants we eat?

Thursday, 24 December, 2009

Plants have no more desire than animals to be eaten by humans

But before we cede the entire moral penthouse to “committed vegetarians” and “strong ethical vegans,” we might consider that plants no more aspire to being stir-fried in a wok than a hog aspires to being peppercorn-studded in my Christmas clay pot. This is not meant as a trite argument or a chuckled aside. Plants are lively and seek to keep it that way. The more that scientists learn about the complexity of plants – their keen sensitivity to the environment, the speed with which they react to changes in the environment, and the extraordinary number of tricks that plants will rally to fight off attackers and solicit help from afar – the more impressed researchers become, and the less easily we can dismiss plants as so much fiberfill backdrop, passive sunlight collectors on which deer, antelope and vegans can conveniently graze.

Related: , , , ,