Kate, you are absolutely right. I have no major food allergies, food will not kill me, and if I started eating meat again eventually it would not even cause me pain and would have no major long-term health problems. I have a huge amount of food privilege and I did not take it into account before writing this piece at all. That is, to put it somewhat gently, very fucking stupid of me. Especially since this post is supposed to be directly addressing issues of choosing to do things/not choosing to do things, it goes directly counter to my point not to acknowledge the immense amount of privilege I have simple because I can make that choice. Before I say anything else I just want to thank you for calling me out on that.
And now I want to re-think everything I thought in this post with that in mind, because it does matter, and food privilege is central to what I'm talking about here, in a way. I don't think I've thought everything through clearly yet, but this is what I've come up with:
My statements about "choosing to eat meat so that I can find restaurants easier" was definitely poorly thought out, and I'm sorry if it hurt you. However, I don't think I was calling your choices "fucked up" (or at least I wasn't trying to, maybe I did, maybe since I've never experienced not having this privilege I can't entirely understand it, which is a legitimate possibility, but I'm trying here, I really am, to figure out what I believe about morality and choices and life... I got distracted somewhere. This is a serious conversation, stay on topic.) Maybe if I walk through it step by step? I have the privilege of being able to choose what I eat from a vast array of things. This is due to several factors, the first and most basic being biology. I also have money, education, live in a certain part of the world, etc. This all adds up to having privilege in regards to food and choices about my food. In this scenario, where I have choices about my food, where I have all the food privilege I could want, I have the opportunity to choose to eat meat, or choose not to. In this case, my choice will not affect my heath in any away (well, it's more complicated than that, but let's just say health is not an issue). If health is not an issue, and food privilege means that this is so, then my choice to eat meat or not can be based on other things. For me, one of those other things is the consideration of life as a valuable construct. If we accept that the lives of all creatures are equal (which is a pretty huge thing to accept, but for the point of argument it is necessary to accept that my internal philosophy is one which I believe in, yeah? I'm totally willing to hash out issues with that at a separate time.) Anyway, if we accept that all lives are equal, and we accept that because I have food privilege I can choose whether or not to be the cause of the end of those lives, it is hard for me to morally justify choosing to end those lives due to convenience to me.
However this is only in my personal situation. Let's run through it again if I didn't have food privilege, like, um, a shitton of people don't for all sorts of reasons. So say I do not have food privilege. I am Kate, or Alena, or someone else who will die/be caused significant harm/agony if I eat certain foods. My diet is restricted in some fashion and in a way I can not do anything about except not eat those things. This is a frustrating situation, there are no "cures" to it, and so I take the only option available to me by eating as healthy as I can and also eating what I can eat without death/harm/agony/etc. In this case, the only choice involved with food is trying to get a balanced diet and keep your body running with fewer resources than someone with food privilege. This is an unfortunate state of affairs, but let us accept that this is the case. Now, we can still accept in this case that all lives are basically equal, and that the individual without food privilege still could theoretically not eat meat. In many cases, this would mean cutting out a lot of meals that are kind of necessary to the well-being of this person. In that case, the person can choose to eat meat, or choose to personally suffer. That's a very different choice than the one that the person with food privilege got to make. In fact, I don't really think it's a choice at all. It might look like there are two options, but there is actually only one that you can pick. Without food privilege, I would have to choose to eat meat. This is morally regrettable, because it does lead to loss of life. However, it is also completely and utterly morally different from the earlier scenario.
Basically, what I'm trying to say is, I stand by calling choosing to end a life over choosing not to end a life due to convenience fucked up. However, I do not thing choosing the only available healthy diet over choosing not to end a life at the expense of personal well-being to be fucked up.
And I'm sincerely sorry that I, even indirectly, said otherwise. It was not my intention, but you're right, I was coming from a place of privilege and didn't check it before hand and this was, in short, bad.
I feel like I've been very long winded, but I hope you can see where I'm coming from. And I hope if I've still missed something or you want to talk about some other aspect of this that you'll point it out. I know that we've clashed heads about this before, but I think that the basic argument comes down to my failure to recognize my privilege, and therefore a failure on both sides to recognize that we're arguing completely different scenarios half the time! I really think that if we talk it out we can understand each other better. (I certainly understand my own argument better having looked at it more closely and with the lens of food privilege) (which is going on my list of "privileges I have and need to recognize more often") (which is a list that actually exists in my diary).
Before I say anything else I just want to thank you for calling me out on that.
And now I want to re-think everything I thought in this post with that in mind, because it does matter, and food privilege is central to what I'm talking about here, in a way. I don't think I've thought everything through clearly yet, but this is what I've come up with:
My statements about "choosing to eat meat so that I can find restaurants easier" was definitely poorly thought out, and I'm sorry if it hurt you. However, I don't think I was calling your choices "fucked up" (or at least I wasn't trying to, maybe I did, maybe since I've never experienced not having this privilege I can't entirely understand it, which is a legitimate possibility, but I'm trying here, I really am, to figure out what I believe about morality and choices and life... I got distracted somewhere. This is a serious conversation, stay on topic.)
Maybe if I walk through it step by step?
I have the privilege of being able to choose what I eat from a vast array of things. This is due to several factors, the first and most basic being biology. I also have money, education, live in a certain part of the world, etc. This all adds up to having privilege in regards to food and choices about my food.
In this scenario, where I have choices about my food, where I have all the food privilege I could want, I have the opportunity to choose to eat meat, or choose not to. In this case, my choice will not affect my heath in any away (well, it's more complicated than that, but let's just say health is not an issue).
If health is not an issue, and food privilege means that this is so, then my choice to eat meat or not can be based on other things. For me, one of those other things is the consideration of life as a valuable construct. If we accept that the lives of all creatures are equal (which is a pretty huge thing to accept, but for the point of argument it is necessary to accept that my internal philosophy is one which I believe in, yeah? I'm totally willing to hash out issues with that at a separate time.) Anyway, if we accept that all lives are equal, and we accept that because I have food privilege I can choose whether or not to be the cause of the end of those lives, it is hard for me to morally justify choosing to end those lives due to convenience to me.
(continued...)
Reply
So say I do not have food privilege. I am Kate, or Alena, or someone else who will die/be caused significant harm/agony if I eat certain foods. My diet is restricted in some fashion and in a way I can not do anything about except not eat those things. This is a frustrating situation, there are no "cures" to it, and so I take the only option available to me by eating as healthy as I can and also eating what I can eat without death/harm/agony/etc. In this case, the only choice involved with food is trying to get a balanced diet and keep your body running with fewer resources than someone with food privilege. This is an unfortunate state of affairs, but let us accept that this is the case.
Now, we can still accept in this case that all lives are basically equal, and that the individual without food privilege still could theoretically not eat meat. In many cases, this would mean cutting out a lot of meals that are kind of necessary to the well-being of this person.
In that case, the person can choose to eat meat, or choose to personally suffer. That's a very different choice than the one that the person with food privilege got to make. In fact, I don't really think it's a choice at all. It might look like there are two options, but there is actually only one that you can pick.
Without food privilege, I would have to choose to eat meat. This is morally regrettable, because it does lead to loss of life. However, it is also completely and utterly morally different from the earlier scenario.
Basically, what I'm trying to say is, I stand by calling choosing to end a life over choosing not to end a life due to convenience fucked up. However, I do not thing choosing the only available healthy diet over choosing not to end a life at the expense of personal well-being to be fucked up.
And I'm sincerely sorry that I, even indirectly, said otherwise. It was not my intention, but you're right, I was coming from a place of privilege and didn't check it before hand and this was, in short, bad.
I feel like I've been very long winded, but I hope you can see where I'm coming from. And I hope if I've still missed something or you want to talk about some other aspect of this that you'll point it out. I know that we've clashed heads about this before, but I think that the basic argument comes down to my failure to recognize my privilege, and therefore a failure on both sides to recognize that we're arguing completely different scenarios half the time! I really think that if we talk it out we can understand each other better. (I certainly understand my own argument better having looked at it more closely and with the lens of food privilege) (which is going on my list of "privileges I have and need to recognize more often") (which is a list that actually exists in my diary).
Reply
Leave a comment