Home     About        FAQs        Feedback    Take Action    Downloads     MythWatch   Advanced Advocacy    Store   


HUMANE MYTH
IN THE MEDIA:
Vegans, Vegetarians Eating Meat



Bookmark and Share          "

 HUMANE MYTH GLOSSARY

Abolition
Animal advocacy
Animal husbandry
Animal protection
Animal rights
Animal welfare
Animal welfare industrial complex
Animal-using industries
Co-option
Commodification
Conflict of Interest
Conscience
Conscientious objection
Critical thinking
Cruelty-free
Disillusionment
Doctrine of necessary evil
Happy Meat
Hogwashing
Humane myth
Humane slaughter
Neocarnism
Non-participation and Non-cooperation
Non-violent social change
Open Rescue
Path of Conscience
Plant-based diet
Privilege of domination
Speciesism
Suffering
Sustainable
Utilitarianism
Values-based activism
Vegan


 
Deconstructing the Myth

This article is an example of the emerging cultural mythology being constructed around "humane" animal products. The author asserts that meat eating is enjoying a cultural renaissance, that consumption of "humane" meat (which also happens to be "succulent... sturdy and supple") solves the ethical problems associated with industrialized farming, so much so that long-time vegetarians are not only taking up meat eating again, but some of them are now actually raising and killing animals themselves. Much credit for these developments is given to Bill Niman of Niman Ranch, whose business income grew by 26 percent last year based on increased demand for "humane" meat.

The author claims that 10,000 years ago, with the proliferation of agriculture, "gregarious animals found that they could survive better in the company of humans. The grain grown on small family farms became feed for domesticated cows, chickens, donkeys, goats, sheep, camels and pigs. A classic win/win situation that helped put milk, cheese and—yes—meat on the table."

Did the institution of animal exploitation arise, as the author suggests, due to some sort of social contract between humans and other animals, who willingly chose to be confined, controlled and killed? Would it be any more sensible to claim that human slaves somehow chose to enter a "symbiotic" relationship with slave owners?

Later in the article, the author suggests the vegetarian movement has reached a plateau, partly based on the release of new studies refuting earlier scientific work that demonstrated that eating animal products is unhealthy, and also due to the "philosophical palate fatigue" of vegetarians, which purportedly made them more than ready for the palate delight of the "humane" meat revolution.

Other than a nod to the coincident timing of the emergence of "humane" farming with the public's growing awareness of mad cow disease and industrialized farming's incredible excesses, the author never acknowledges even the possibility that this new trend toward "humane" meat as an alternative to vegetarianism has something to do with the machinations of a multi-billion dollar industry.

It goes without saying that the growing mythology of "humane" animal products conveniently solves the industry's worst public relations problems, and at the same time, encourages the public to purchase a new and more profitable line of products. So is this merely a coincidence, as the author suggests, or the predictable result of the hundreds of millions of dollars the industry spends each year to influence what we think, buy, and consume?

For example, many of the studies promoting the health benefits of eating animal products that the author refers to have been funded by the animal-using industry. Further, as far back as 1991, the animal-using industry had a detailed strategy for co-opting the animal rights movement, a strategy that involved getting large established advocacy organizations to join the industry in publicizing "win-win" reforms in lieu of challenging the institution of animal use itself. Is it a coincidence that the wife and business partner of Bill Niman, whom the author credits with pioneering the "humane" meat movement, was a presenter at the nation's largest animal advocacy conference last year?

In these cynical times, it is more important than ever to realize that behind every profit-making myth, there are one or more myth makers serving a hidden agenda.

"Every wrong seems possible today, and is accepted. I don't accept it."

--Pablo Casals




 

They're what's for Dinner: Free-range pigs at Jim Dunlap's TLC Ranch

Back in Rack
It isn't yet politically correct to eat meat, but it is a lot less politically incorrect. The back-to-the-pasture movement is letting carnivores feel good about themselves again.

It goes without saying that the growing mythology of “humane” animal products conveniently solves the industry’s worst public relations problems, and at the same time, encourages the public to purchase a new and more profitable line of products.

Source: METRO-ACTIVE by Christina Waters   Mar 2008   3/19/2008
Click here for direct link to source
Excerpts:

VEGAN, locavore, vegetarian, omnivore—politics makes strange dining partners of us all. And now, in ways unforeseeable just a decade ago, politics is helping to create a new renaissance in, of all things, meat-eating.

Not for any single, or simple, reason. Perhaps it hasn't yet become politically correct to eat meat, but it has become a lot less politically incorrect. And for that we can thank pioneers like Bill Niman...

...

A dish of succulent braised pork with chanterelles created by Ristorante Avanti chef Ben Sims from Dunlop's free-roaming, organic pigs gave me a glimpse of what's at issue. The meat was robust and slightly sweet, the texture sturdy and supple. The chef was inspired. The menu acknowledged the pork's provenance. Visitors can visit the ranch, see the pigs, ask questions and be as convinced as I was when I toured the ranch that these animals lived large and rooted around to their hearts' content. Maybe this is part of why meat is back on the menu.

A quick rewind might help set the table. About 10,000 years ago, when agriculture sprang up across the globe, gregarious animals found that they could survive better in the company of humans. The grain grown on small family farms became feed for domesticated cows, chickens, donkeys, goats, sheep, camels and pigs. A classic win/win situation that helped put milk, cheese and—yes—meat on the table.

...

Soon, even with the mechanization of husbandry (i.e., factory farming) made possible by the 19th century industrial boom, fewer people could afford the end product. Meat became a special occasion food—and most of the week, the working classes ate grains, breads and legumes. That "chicken in every pot" usually showed up only on Sundays. And sometimes only for the rich.

After World War II, First World lifestyles and incomes supported and encouraged the consumption of meats. Inexpensive ground beef and roasts became everyday fare for the middle and upper-middle classes. And with those came high cholesterol, diabetes and obesity. Synergized by the publication of the animal welfare manifesto Animal Liberation by Peter Singer, in the 1970s the back-to-the-land movement joined forces with warnings about animal fats and heart health, and suddenly the word "vegetarian" was on everyone's lips. Avoiding meat became not only fashionable, it flattered the budgets of those without trust funds.

Mad, Bad and Dangerous to Gnaw

Restaurants added meat-free entrees to their menus. Natural foods stores refused to carry any meat or fish or poultry. Books for vegans looking for ways to pump flavor and nutrition into their diet did brisk sales. Just as vegetarians reached philosophical palate fatigue, new medical research came out with the astonishing news that eggs were not bad for us, that lean meats might not lead to heart attacks and that carbohydrates like bread and potatoes were in fact the evil empire.

Call it coincidence, but just as the discovery of mad cow disease and the unsavory details of factory farming and stockyard practices came to light, organic farmers began raising chickens not only for eggs, but also for their meat. Looking to the free-pastured practices of Niman Ranch—not to mention the profitability of chops, steaks and roasts bearing the Niman brand—ranchers began putting pigs on their pastures, letting them roam and forage freely before taking them down to the road to be slaughtered, and then selling the all-natural, artisan-butchered cuts at farmers markets and small local restaurants. For top dollar.

...

So given the increasing availability of small-farm-pastured, sustainably produced meat, are former vegetarians turning into omnivores?

"For sure," says farmer Dunlop, himself a vegetarian for a dozen years. "I was in the same boat when I was in school, and did homework on factory farms and saw the suffering, the incredible stress that these animals undergo," he recalls. "But I started eating meat again once I began raising my pigs."

Chef Sims doesn't keep statistics, but he does have the kind of anecdotal evidence that confirms Dunlop's hunch. "Once I started putting Niman Ranch, humanely raised meat on our menu a year ago," says Sims, "two friends of mine, both vegetarians for over 17 years, started eating meat again at our restaurant."

And for the CEO of Niman Ranch, the numbers support a resurgence of thoughtful meat-eating.

"Our company grew 26 percent last year," Swain notes. "And not just in the Bay Area."


Back to Media Database Index