
I had a roast chicken dinner tonight. I was served mashed potatoes and gravy, a side of summer vegetables and half of a chicken for the main course. Yes. I said half. Now I consider myself an athlete, but I'm no Michael Phelps, and I certainly don't need half of a chicken for dinner. Between my two roommates and I, we were responsible for the consumption (or attempted consumption) of a chicken and a half. As I walked to my table to eat, trying to pick my jaw up off the floor, I put myself in the position of a vegetarian or vegan and pondered the ethics of my huge meal. In
The Omnivore's Dilemma, Pollan explains that many people have no problem with eating meat, just as long as it is a block in a package. He points out that there are more people against hunting because of the principle of killing an animal than are actually against eating meat in general, when really the animal that was hunted is probably a lot better to eat and had a better life than the meat that comes in a supermarket. The thing that struck me as strange when I was eating dinner was how much food was being wasted. How is it that I was served a huge amount of chicken without the choice to have less? Thinking about it made me realize a whole different set of ethics with eating meat versus vegetarianism, and that is the waste factor. It's definitely surprising to think about how much of an animal is actually being consumed compared to how much is simply thrown out.
In class on Thursday, we made vegan lentil soup. Learning how to make such a wholesome meal out of only vegetables was a pleasant surprise. Very little waste was generated, and what waste we did have was easily compostable. It certainly didn't convert me to veganism or even vegetarianism, but from now on I know I will be more conscious of the types of meat I eat and the impact that it has. I really should have saved that chicken I couldn't finished for dinner, it would have made a mean stock for soup!
No comments:
Post a Comment