For fellow vegetarians... are we hypocritical?!


Question: I have been a veggie for 4 years, and last year, (1 year ago, not a few months ago) I thought about how hypocritical a lot of veggies are... We eat tofu and other soy products grown in deforested rainforest, and yet we say we are supporting the animals...? So now I have switched to eating only local, veggies stuff. What do you think?


Answers: I have been a veggie for 4 years, and last year, (1 year ago, not a few months ago) I thought about how hypocritical a lot of veggies are... We eat tofu and other soy products grown in deforested rainforest, and yet we say we are supporting the animals...? So now I have switched to eating only local, veggies stuff. What do you think?

Actually, if you do your research, you will find our that the deforestation of the rainforest isn't for growing a few blocks of tofu for the veggies, most tofu and soy, especially if it is organic, is US and Canada grown. The crops that are killing the rainforest are mostly corn and soy. Once they are harvested, they are sent mostly to Europe and US corporate farms to feed the cattle and pig which will then be slaughtered for fast food chains.

If you consider the amount of shipping costs, harvesting costs etc....the little amount of tofu we buy would cost so much more of it was grown int he rainforest. It is the big corporations that can afford to ship it around for their fast food chains, and those products are certainly not organic.

I would think that if Kraft or McCain's had veggie options, they could be in on the rainforest crops...but not little companies.

So, look for local products, it's not so hard. There is a website call http://100milediet.org/ that you might be interested in.

Good luck, your concerns are commendable. We should always think about where are food is coming from and what kind of impact we create by purchasing it....in most cases, crap like fast food causes a greater impact then most realize, or care to know.

:)

It's good to eat closer to home, but that's not the definition of hypocrite. Hypocrite would be saying you shouldn't eat animals, but then eating them. I think it's weirder to say you're against cruelty to animals but then eat eggs from battery hens and dairy from factory farmed cows.

Whatever makes you feel better.

omg, I'm in the wrong section

It depends on the vegetarian.
It is hypocritical to think that we're doing more than other people to prevent cruelty to animals and the environment. Wheat combines and industrial monoculture do terrible damage to the earth and kill a lot of animals, without consuming any meat at all. However, it's not hypocritical to do the best you can to avoid brutality and cruelty in a food system that doesn't give you many options. The key is to not be condescending to other people, and to be open to new ideas about the environment and animal treatment.
It's only hypocritical if you don't consider the harms of your actions, and if you imagine that you're more moral than other people. Otherwise, it's just another choice to make in life.

Local is always best, for sure. BUT soy products are not as bad to the environment as we are told from some vegetarian nay-sayers. When you are talking about deforestation you are probably thinking of the Amazon being bulldozed for soy and cattle farms. What is lesser known is that most of this soy is produced to feed the cattle whose meat is destined for affluent countries.

Here's an article all about the deforestation of the Amazon and the Beef-Soy link: http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=...

Claire, that was an awesome answer. It's not very often I see an educated response in here. (yes, even mine sometimes.)

I have no problems with how people live their lives. But as a farmer, I can tell you that planting/harvesting the soy which ends up as tofu takes a drastic toll on wild game and machinery. It seems that most of the people in this forum only care about animals pre-destined for slaughter and not wild animals.

I think that being a vegetarian in general is, how do i say this politely, dumb. You not eating meat doesn't do anything in the least bit to "help the animals", there are still millions of more people around the world chowing down and they ain't stopping any time soon.

lets not forget the deforestation in the rain forest for Palm oil which can be found in almost everything. you either support the animals or the vegetation. if all of a sudden all humans stopped eating meat, what will we do with all the cows we have now. they will only procreate and need to eat grass and other veggies. in order to support a creature we have genetically raised above natural selection, we would have to cut down something to make room. god knows these new species of cows won't be able to fend for themselves. they are so far into domestication they would not be able to. and thats just cows. as a vegetarian do you also feed your pets fruits and veggies? do you realize that meat has gotten the human race to the point in evolution that we are now thinking we should become vegans? i am no vegetarian, (and sorry for answering) but if a veggie could explain to me how they damage the planet less than carnivores(besides the gross factor), maybe i would consider. but honestly i like rain and i like to breathe, unfortunately there is one singular solution and that is to devastate the world population by 90%. no matter how little impact we have today, when the population increases 10% so does the damage we inflict. worrying about animals or plants won't make a difference except prolong the inevitable. i'm sad about it, but the only thing that can really be done about it by me would be to die and become food for the animals and plants.

It sounds like your going to analyze yourself into starvation. Cabbage products are not good for you if you are have hypothyroidism.. there is something wrong with everything.you are a hypocrite when you knowing do things on purpose.

Well YOU may be hypocritical but I am NOT and NEVER have been since starting to follow a vegetarian / vegan lifestyle.

The produce I eat comes from the local farmers markets, which is grown on local farms, NOTHING to do with deforested rainforest. I also eat produce from my own garden and the only thing I had to clear to grow that, was a washing line.

The main reason rainforests are deforested is to raise & feed cattle, which are then slaughtered to supply the meat industry (think Mcdonalds)

Most people that eat organic would also be buying local.

.

I'm not.

My diet is such for health reasons only.

treanrdy..i can garuntee i could find wood in your house somewhere that wasnt produced locally so to say u never have and never will contribute to anything like that is impossible...there will always be ways in which every person is contributing to the downfall of the environment...all we can really do is prolong it until we come up with longer term solutions...for instance chemical compounds that might be able to regenrate the ozone...i think thats where alot of funding should go...

Not really..You do your best and that's about all people can expect.. it's when you preach or look down on others for notbeing a veggie that makes it sort of hypocritical

Hypocrite vegetarians would be those who say they care for animals then maybe kicks a cat at the supermarket parking lot for getting to close to the new Jag..Or something like that (highly unlikely though)

Most of that rainforest is stripped for the purpose of raising livestock, so no I don't feel like a hypocrite.

not Hypocritical but Rational.
--------------------------------------...
A meat-based diet requires 7 times more land than a plant-based diet.
--------------------------------------...
The average agricultural land area in North America is 1.6 hectares per person (1.4 hectares after adjusting for the export of grain). Yet there are many countries in the world that use as little as 0.2 hectares (half acre) of farmland per person. These are the countries with plant-based diets.

An area equal to 0.2 hectares is the equivalent of having 5.5 square metres of land available to produce each day's worth of food. The average yield worldwide, for cereal crops in 1994 was 2,814 kilograms per hectare, an amount equivalent to getting 1.5 kilograms (14 cups of cooked grain) per day from 0.2 hectares. For root crops the average global yield in that year would have provided 6.8 kilograms of food per day from 0.2 hectares.2

Another example is the small footprint of land that fruit trees take up. A mature apple tree will produce about 20 bushels a year – enough for 400 pies. A fifth of a hectare (half acre) would yield enough fruit to provide about 115 apples per day.17 Tree crops also have the nice advantage of not being prone to soil erosion.apple trees

Any country with reasonable growing conditions should be able to feed their population a plant-based diet using 0.2 hectares of land or less per person. Areas with harsh winter climates also have summers with long days of sunlight, ideal for producing high yields. Grains, legumes and roots can be easily stored for use during off seasons. Areas with regular dry seasons are often balanced with wet seasons.





The consumer Foods information on foodaq.com is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for medical advice or treatment for any medical conditions.
The answer content post by the user, if contains the copyright content please contact us, we will immediately remove it.
Copyright © 2007 FoodAQ - Terms of Use - Contact us - Privacy Policy

Food's Q&A Resources