If presented with two food options with identical taste - faux sweet and sour "chicken," or real sweet and sour chicken - and we select the latter, "real" option, does that imply that we not only take pleasure in eating meat but that we insist on killing an animal?
Bologna is a common food item that is easily mimicked in both taste and "dietary" bennefit. We can purchase mock-bologna that tastes, smells, feels, etc. like the real version from the majority of grocery stores. Now, if presented with the alternative version of this lunch meat and the traditional version, will we select the latter, "real" option? If yes, this suggests that mere taste isn't the impetus for our collective insistence on torturing animals; something internal to us is motivating our desire to kill somebody (NOT something).
As a former omnivore who thoroughly enjoyed sausage, I was eager to find a faux substitute - what my mom accurately calls "make-believe-meat." My search was short; vegan "sausage" is available, the taste is quite similar if not identical to the traditional version (depending on how it is prepared), and far healthier. Now, if X were to hold both the alternative and "real" versions in front of Y, after Y has been informed of the similarities, etc. between the two, and Y insists on eating a pig, is that telling of the type of person Y is? It seems that we are all Y, which say's something about our culture: we demand death, we insist on it!
I don't know what the impetus is for this; however, it seems reasonable to argue that whatever the motivation it isn't moral or good.
Crossposted at Vegan Soapbox
I think it's completely reasonable to ask people to sacrifice a minute taste differential to minimalize animal suffering.
Excellent concept here.
I often argue against fake meats because I basically grew up vegetarian and I find it frustrating not personally knowing what is real and what is fake. I truly have to rely on omnivores or ex-omnivores to know because they can taste a difference that I can't really taste. And so that makes me angry that these foods are designed for people like me - vegans - and yet I don't feel safe enough to eat them because too many vegans want to 'trick' omnivores into thinking it's really meat.
I just wish everything were labeled "vegan" or "not vegan" clearly and that there was no mistake about it ever.
But, your point isn't about that. Your point is about choice and why so many people prefer "the real thing" when the realest, surest thing about it is the cruelty involved.
Hot dogs are one example where many omnivores simply can't tell the difference between real or fake, yet often insist on real. And that's so frustrating! My nephew's class had a hot dog day and he was going to bring veggie dogs, but the teacher wouldn't allow it! He had to bring buns instead and since he's vegetarian, he had to just not eat a full meal! ARGH!
The omnivore preference for "the real thing" not only reflects a bias against animals and a willingness to participate in cruelty, but it also sometimes reflects a bias against vegetarians and vegans and a willingness to deny them food!