Mangetout, please don’t tell me that you are one of those geniuses who will try to point out the “hypocrisy” of vegetarianism, with one of these bizarre arguments. I don’t know if you are or not, but you sound a little familiar…
There are umpteen of these types out there. Their mantra is SOOO predictable, it is very tiring. A particular (worn out) favorite is “Well, plants have feelings too! They don’t want to die!” Oh, yeah. Soooo clever. (And of course each person who brings this up thinks they are the FIRST to think of it…) :rolleyes:
I’m not a vegetarian, but I’m not anti-vegetarian either, I don’t eat a huge amount of meat either; it’s a choice and I’ve made mine.
And I am concerned about the humane treatment and welfare of meat animals, paradoxical as that might seem.
My question regarding the fake meats was asked in all ernestness; maybe it is a naive question to which everybody but me knows the answer (but that’s the whole idea of asking questions isn’t it?).
-I assure you, I’m not asking it because of any hidden agenda.
and on the ‘plants have feelings too’ - oh purrrlease! - yes, plants can suffer stress, yes, plants can ‘communicate’ with hormones and the like, but the famous experiment that was supposed to prove that a carrot screams when it is pulled, well, yes, it does, if you hook it up to a machine that makes a screaming sound as a measure of physical plant stress, but that’s not the same thing as measuring anguish.
Plants may have feelings, but some do want to die. Every plant I try to grow seems to have a death wish. Except my marigolds. (The Little Woman says they’re just weeds anyway)
Okay, Mangetout, I’ll take your word for it and treat your question as a serious one.
If we lived in some parallel universe in which the greater majority of people were vegetarian, and pigs actually had to be slaughtered and cooked *solely for the purpose of providing a comparison *, I could see your point. But the fact is that there are plenty of people around who know perfectly well what bacon tastes like. Any “extra” amount of bacon produced for testing purposes is easily outweighed by the amount not eaten by people who choose the veggie version. I know several people who choose veggie options like this because they are trying to lower the amount of fat in their diets.
Meat substitutes are nothing new. What do you think Baco-Bits are made of?
I’m quite interested in the whole meat substitutes thing and one of the best yet (I think) is Quorn, which is a sort of cultured fungal thing I think, but (probably because the market is smaller) meat substitutes just seem rather expensive.
anyway, I wonder if any of the companies producing the meat substitutes have ever actually carried out in-house taste comparisons…
Why is everyone treating me as if I’m being cantankerous? - I asked a simple honest question, that’s all
Baco-Bits were big in the '70s, IIRC. They were little bacon-flavored chunks (that contain no actual bacon) intended to be sprinkled on salads and such. You can probably still find them in the supermarket. My point was that the concept of faking meat products is nothing new.
As to why people might be assuming a cantankerous nature, your contention that meat substitues are the “moral equivalent of cosmetic testing on animals” was, IMO at least, somewhat absurd. Since you offered no support for your assertion, I read it as more a trouble-making post than a starting point for serious discussion. (Therein lies the difficulty of communicating via the written word. The lack of intonation, body language cues, etc. can easily lead to misunderstanding.)
I’m sure that some companies do indeed carry out side-by-side taste comparisons. I think it is Boca Burger that has an ad campaign for their veggie burger that goes something like, “Vegetarians celebrate. Meat lovers salivate.” They are obviously going after the non-veggie consumer. I’m sure they have worked to make their burger as meat-like in taste and texture as possible.
On the other hand, there are plenty of meat alternatives that offer similar flavors, but don’t try to mimic the texture or appearance of meat. For instance, I made a BBQ pizza the other day with BBQ-flavored seitan, which had a wonderful flavor but didn’t look or feel anything like BBQ’d chicken/pork. In this case, no one was trying to fool me into thinking I was eating meat, so I would assume that no animals were harmed during taste tests for this product.
and I really don’t want to get into an argument, but I think that:
IS support for the assertion…
…OK, a weak assertion and flimsy support, granted, it’s just something that hit me out of the blue the other day, it may not be a truly original question, but it’s not just something I picked up somewhere and am repeating parrot fashion.
Many of my vegetarian friends won’t use cosmetics that have been tested on animals as a matter of principle, no matter whether it’s one laboratory rabbit or a million that have died during the manufacturing/development process, I just wondered if the same logic could be applied to meat substitutes which, although not tested on animals, are probably tested alongside animals.
But your point that the meat substitutes eventually prevent the death of animals is a good one, this can’t be said of the cosmetics, so it’s not quite the same thing.
Without taking any sides on this issue, I just wanted to say that I was amused that someone with your username is involved in a discussion on vegetarianism.
(though maybe I’m the only one that is translating that name from French)
Seitan is wheat gluten. Like tofu, it has a fairly neutral taste on its own, so it can easily be seasoned. I also has a chewier, more “meaty” texture, so it is often used to mimic meat in recipes. White Wave, for instance, makes a “chicken-style” seitan.
I understand your point about the possible need for actual animals to be used in taste testing. But my feeling is, since the general population isn’t likely to become vegetarian any time soon, I can support the production of meat “fakes” on the assumption that the overall effect is a reduction in the amount of real meat being produced.
I suppose I can understand why someone whose reason for being vegetarian is mainly a moral one (as opposed to health or simple preference) would be turned off by any food product that mimics animal flesh. I think the same argument is made against the production of fake furs-that they glorify the use of real animal pelts and are, therefore, morally suspect.
maybe I deserve the scorn…
Don’t sweat it. I didn’t read scorn, but rather a request for clarification from people who have spent far too much time arguing the merits/moral justification of vegetarianism with folks who are more interested in being annoying than in being educated.
Yes, but remember that a literal translation (mangetout=‘eat everything’) does not always give you the full meaning!
In French, the word mangetout is used for a vegetable. What we know in English as “snow peas”. You eat the whole pod. Major delight of vegetarians, you know.