|
Thinking
About Food
by Don Lutz, Gainesville,
FL (1st Prize in Editorial Contest)
Last spring an incident at the
local Earth Day Festival gave me pause to consider how people, and especially
children, think about the food they eat. Our local animal rights group
had a table at the event, showing videos, handing out literature, etc.
Part of the display was a poster showing the bloody head of a cow at the
slaughterhouse. And the next day we received a complaint about the poster.
It seems that a young child, I
believe around 8 or 9 years old, had seen the poster and become quite
upset. The complaining party suggested that such graphic examples of violence
should not be seen by children, and showing them was in bad taste at Earth
Day, after all, a family event.
This raises some important questions.
Should such a poster shock a young child? The only scenario that I can
imagine wherein a child would not be shocked, would be if that
child had actually been raised in a slaughterhouse, or in some
other way exposed to the blood and gore involved in animal slaughter.
Would a family life that revolves around subsistence hunting, as found
in some indigenous cultures be such an experience? Certainly to some degree,
but obviously hunting as practiced by most humans historically is just
not the same as the slaughterhouse, where animals are clearly abused,
may even be skinned alive, and of course are killed by the thousands.
But for most children, I would
say that yes, the sight of a bloody cow’s head hanging from a hook should
upset a child, or anyone for that matter. Except, of course, for
tough guys and gals. So if a child should be upset by graphic violence,
the next question must be, should we shelter the child from such reality?
We humans have a rather strange
relationship with what we eat. Whereas most animals obtain their food
for themselves, in the living state of nature, most humans get their food
by buying it from other humans. No foraging or gathering here. The result
is that we don’t really know our food anymore. Certainly not in
the way that a natural predator does, or even in the way that most humans
obtained food in any form - by hand. Up until just a few thousand
years ago, most human children learned early on where food comes from.
They accompanied the grown-ups as they gathered food, and for those groups
who hunted, the child would experience the hunt at a fairly young age
as well.
The point is that we don’t know
enough about food to make important choices about what we eat. A child
should know that the killing of an animal for food requires acts of extreme
violence; animals try to escape, scream, cry, and often leave family and
friends behind when they die. The taking of many plant foods requires
no killing at all, but even when it does, the child learns, correctly,
that ‘killing’ a potato is just not the same as killing a deer.
But when we never see the live
animal, let alone the killing and slaughtering, we are left with an emotionless
experience when seeing the piece of flesh on the plate next to the potato.
It is all the same, just food.
One can make a strong argument
that most humans historically have exhibited an aversion to killing, despite
the fact that a few human cultures were based on hunting, and these aggressive
societies have come to dominate the modern human world. Violence is not
a pleasant pastime for most of us, and seeing it up close is likely what
led many religions to adopt a vegetarian philosophy. Especially if raised
to cherish nonviolence, children will naturally reject cruelty and killing.
To deny the child in the meat-eating household the truth about where his
or her food comes from is doing the child and the food, an ethical
disservice and injustice.
In other words, if the child learns
early on what it takes to put a chicken’s leg on a plate, s/he will likely
opt for beans, rice and veggies. But if the child is fed animal flesh
for a decade or more, before knowing where it comes from, an intelligent,
ethical choice is much more difficult. When you have been doing something
for so long, and being told it is good for you, it’s not easy to
suddenly consider that it might be cruel and heartless.
But some people, it seems, are
not affected by the slaughterhouse scene - they seem to be immune to compassion
at that level. Are they insane? Demented? Genetically programmed to kill?
Probably not. It’s more like simple biodiversity. Just as some folks are
more aggressive, or more athletic, or more intuitive, some of us are very
compassionate and some are not. It may be in our genes. More likely, we
are all born with similar potential, and circumstance dictates where and
how our moral character is expressed.
To teach a child to love a dog,
but be totally without feeling for a cow, is child abuse in itself. Children
want to feel empathy and express compassion for all others. But
of course, we don’t allow this. To care about cows, pigs and chickens
is anti-American, some would even say anti-Christian, and might hurt the
great American economy. Heaven forbid!
So in the final assessment, protecting
the child from the slaughterhouse reality is actually preventing him or
her from becoming aware of animal suffering. And from feeling empathy,
and acting on that precious emotion. The very process required for conflict
resolution, peace and harmony.
Clearly, we no longer have a healthy
relationship with nature and our animal kin. I can easily list over one
hundred wonderful books about animals in a bibliography, but they can
never totally replace the sensory and emotional experience of being with
nature firsthand. When we learn about the other animals only from human
animals, our understanding will always be limited.
Must humans kill indiscriminately?
Do we really think we can know deer only by learning to hunt and
kill them? Or know fish by dragging them from their homes with
a hook and line? How blindly ignorant can we be of the lives of cows,
pigs and chickens, when we see them only in cartoons, or in pieces on
a plate? What can we know of the families, feelings, needs, pleasures
and sorrows of farm animals, when 90% of the literature about them comes
in the form of cookbooks?
Copyright
© 2002 Don Lutz
|
|
|