Eat less meat: Science says so! »
A study in Nature this week gives you a new round of paintballs to shoot at the non-vegan world in your mission to convince people that flesh-licking is for zombies. Basically, the researchers asked, “How the hell can we possibly feed the 9 billion people we’ll have on this planet by 2050?!?! FUCK!!!”
In a tiny little nugget of optimism, they found that it actually might be possible to do such a thing, IF we change a lot about how we deal with agriculture on this planet. That’s a huge if.
The team, from four different countries, looked at farm data and satellite images and probably went cross-eyed and bonkers and needed glasses from all the number-crunching.
They found that we could double food production AND reduce environmental impact, for only three easy payments, act now because this offer won’t last, if we:
- Stop clearing land for agriculture: We have enough land, we need to use it better.
- Catch the rest of the world up to the “developed” world in terms of crop yields (god help us, is that really a good idea?).
- Use fertilizer and other chemicals in a smart and frugal way.
- Stop throwing so much food out (a third of all food right now!).
- EAT LESS MEAT.
YES! The scientists actually say that moving toward plant-based diets will help end world hunger. According to one of the study’s authors, three-quarters of the world’s agricultural land is devoted to raising livestock, either for grazing or for growing feed.
So put that in your quiver. It’s not like scientific conclusions sway many minds (see: climate change), but it’s nice to know we’re right, you know?
Mother Jones loves sustainability, except when there’s delicious, fancy food involved »
Mother Jones published an interview with Naomi Pomeroy, a former vegetarian who opened a restaurant in Portland called Beast that’s basically Meat Time in Meat Town at the Meat Day Parade. Pomeroy was vegetarian until, she says, she started cooking meat for “personal-chef clients” and was all, IF I COOK MEAT I HAVE TO TASTE IT DUH, so she got waaaaaay into “sustainable” meat and thought, Oh, snap! I better open a restaurant that serves only meat because that’s the way to teach everyone about sustainable dining: SLOW FOOD FOREVA!, and then, well, she did. She’s obviously not the brightest bulb, but there are thousands of dumb-ass slow-food chefs who think the way to feed the world is through reducing meat consumption—and when it comes to their own menus there’s not a veg item in sight. You see, they mean “reducing the meat consumption for everyone else.” Lead by example? That’s asinine!
It’s like the whole Michael Pollan elitism thing: these slow food dummies are so intent on showing the world that there’s “sustainable meat” (a whopping less-than-1 percent of it!) that they ignore the much larger, more important lesson: WE ALL NEED TO EAT LESS MEAT. Well, not us vegans, but you know, the rest of you fuckers. The constant message the world needs to hear from the Slow Food movement is EAT LESS MEAT. Then, if they want to get into where the meat that people “should” eat comes from, fine. Let’s cross that bridge when we come to it. Global meat consumption has increased 500 percent since 1950 and people who care about sustainable dining should (one more time with feeling): EAT FEWER DEAD ANIMALS.
Anyway, none of that really bothered me because I’m used to silly shit like this in eco-hip media BUT THEN two editors of Mother Jones had to go and tweet about how vegans are UP IN ARMS about the article. Like WTF did you think, ladies?? You publish an article about a restaurant that’s all WOO DEAD ANIMALS WOO and of course you’re gonna get some people commenting who think eating animals is sad and awful. DEAL WITH IT. To tweet about it and point it out like, “OMG! Vegans have their panties in a bunch!” is just ridiculous. Can you imagine them antagonizing another group like this!?
Who do the editors of Mother Jones think reads them? There is literally not one person on earth (who has heard of the magazine) who thinks it’s anything other than a hippie rag. Mother Jones, you are granola-eating, Birkenstock-wearing, liberal gaywads from planet 1970s Hippie Socialist and you need to just ACCEPT THAT. Vegans are your natural allies; why are you trying to alienate us? Stop trying to be Good (which is THE WORST) or one of those obnoxious faux eco-sites that tells people to save the world by buying more reusable bags! You’re brand isn’t hip, no matter how many times you try to convince me to call you “MoJo,” and it never will be. YOU ARE CALLED MOTHER JONES. I mean, I hear that and I think of a woman teaching her daughter to use a Diva Cup, YOU KNOW? And there’s nothing wrong with that! Now, go breast-feed your seven-year-old and leave us vegans be. Or, you know, write less hypocritically about animal-eating issues.
[Note: To provide contrast between this article’s accompanying gross-ass pictures of Noami Pomeroy holding dead pigs as as she walks through a field, this editorial is accompanied by pictures of a living piglet, and some vegan salad. Sow and piglet photo by grongar; beet-and-leek-salad photo by haraldwalker]