Response to "Natural vs. Ideological."

Response #10

In Kelsey's blog, she talks about how eating ethics varies with "the economics, religion, notions of civility, notions of pleasure, et cetera, associated with a particular culture." Then she states how vegetarianism is often viewed as ideological and meat-eating as natural. However, meat eating really is not crucial for survival of human beings and David Degrazia, among other authors in the reader, supports this. Causing pain and suffering to animals is unnecessary and should not happen just for the sake of human consumption. Only in drastic instances, like if a person is starving and there happens to be a cow the person can slaughter, is animal slaughtering and consumption justifiable. Kelsey asks, "How do you view the consumption of nonhuman animals? Is it just natural or is it ideological?"

Society plays an important role in how people act, what people say, and who people are. It seems as though if everyone is doing something than that makes it okay. However, this is usually not the case. Just because the majority of a society or culture consumes meat does not mean they are right in what they are doing. I think consuming nonhuman animals is ideological for many reasons. There is no reason for humans to consume meat other than the notion that it tastes good. We do not need meat in our diets. When weaned from meat over a period of time and finally ceasing to eat animal flesh all together, a person will have a hard time going back to such a diet because the body can not break it down. I have found, after not eating meat for quite some time, that it just does not appeal to me any longer. I have lost my desire for the taste and I have accepted that my body really does not need meat or animal products to be sustained. People are fed animal products during childhood and this is why we continue to consume nonhuman animals. I know families that have children who have never touched a piece of meat before and they are perfectly happy children. They do not desire meat; they do not even understand why a person would. It is not in the nature of a human being to want to consume animal flesh. Eating animals is a practice people are exposed to at a young age. Society does not question it and most people continue this practice throughout their entire lives. This is why people find it to be natural and part of human instinct to want meat.

I know killing animals for consumption has been practiced since cavemen existed, but now that people have many alternative food sources and know animal products are an unnecessary part of a person's diet, we can finally end this practice. However, this does not mean we will anytime soon. Meat eating is a habit that can be hard to break and telling the whole population that it's okay and even better to not eat meat will just cause problems. People do not like to change their ways. When they are so used to consuming something so tasty, they won't give it up just because it's 'wrong.' Meat eating is embedded in people's minds as being natural and instinctual for humans but this is really not the case. Carnivorous animals, like cats, have instinctual habits to hunt and prey on animals but humans have no purpose in doing so. James Rachels stated, "People generally do not respond to ethical appeals unless they see others around them also responding. If all your friends are eating meat, you are unlikely to be moved my a mere argument (262).

My question to you is: Even after knowing the affects eating factory farmed meat have on the environment and the animals, why do some people still continue to eat meat other than the reason that it simply tastes good?