It’s nice to get 2010’s very worst major media article on vegetarianism out of the way on only the second day of the year. Newsweek has a stunningly awful piece on lapsed vegetarians. In nearly every paragraph, the reporter feels obligated to add her idiotic analysis. Like here:
For as long as people have been foreswearing meat, they’ve also been sneaking the occasional corn dog. The difference is, vegetarians used to feel guilty about their sins of the flesh-consumption. Now, thanks to the cachet attached to high-end meat, they are having their burgers without sacrificing the moral high ground.
News flash: a person who sneaks the occasional corn dog, or eats grass-fed burgers, is not a vegetarian.
And just when you thought this piece couldn’t get any worse, the last paragraph is a truly majestic grand finale of suckiness:
While it’s true that sustainably raised, grass-fed beef may be better for the consumer, it’s hard to argue that it’s ultimately better for the cow. What these steak apologists seem to be missing is that no matter how “lovingly” the cow was raised, no matter how much grazing or rooting he did in his life, he gave up that life to become their dinner. Carnivores who only ate the flesh of animals that had died of natural causes at the end of long, satisfying lives might have a claim to moral superiority, but what to call them? Corpsevores? And if these organic farm animals have such great lives, isn’t the more humane thing to eat a cage-raised, industrially processed chicken? At least we’d be putting it out of its misery.
So, if someone insists on eating meat, he should buy from the farm that subjects its animals to the greatest amount of cruelty?
Also, to reference a quote from the article, am I the only person to have noticed that the word “primal” has become a sure tipoff that the speaker is an annoying idiot? (Thanks, Robyn & Christian.) Link.