What do you think?
Rate this book
The Face on Your Plate: The Truth About Food
The best-selling author of When Elephants Weep explores our relationship with the animals we call food.
In this revelatory work, Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson shows how food affects our moral selves, our health, and the environment. It raises questions to make us conscious of the decisions behind every bite we take: What effect does eating animals have on our land, waters, even global warming? What are the results of farming practices—debeaking chickens and separating calves from their mothers—on animals and humans? How does the health of animals affect the health of our planet and our bodies? And uniquely, as a psychoanalyst, Masson investigates how denial keeps us from recognizing the animal at the end of our fork—think pig, not bacon—and each food and those that are forbidden. The Face on intellectual, psychological, and emotional expertise over the last twenty years into the pivotal book of the food revolution.288 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2009
44 people are currently reading
2360 people want to read
About the author
Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson
50 books256 followersHe has written several books books critical of psychoanalysis, psychotherapy and psychiatry as well as books on animals, their emotions and their rights.
He currently lives in New Zealand with his wife, two sons, three cats and three rats.
He currently lives in New Zealand with his wife, two sons, three cats and three rats.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 139 reviews
November 7, 2015
I have been a vegetarian for a number of years, and leaning toward being a vegan. That is to say, I try to avoid milk, cheese, and eggs. So, most of the ideas in this book are not new to me. Most animals kept in captivity for the purpose of food really do suffer. Immensely. There are no two ways about it.
Jeffrey Masson rebuts all of the sayings that meat-eaters use to rationalize their addiction to meat, poultry, and fish. And he makes a every one of the rationalizations sound truly pathetic. There are no good reasons for eating meat; just denials. Masson goes into some depth, about why meat-eaters are in denial. Basically, people just don't want to think about it; the horrendous suffering that animals undergo--all animals that are used for food--is overwhelming.
The one surprising thing that Masson writes is that if you want to do the simplest thing that will reduce animal suffering the most, it would be to avoid milk, cheese, and eggs. Masson maintains that the harvesting of dairy products actually causes more suffering than the harvesting of meat! He goes into some detail as to why this is; and after understanding the reasoning behind this claim, I would have to agree.
Of course, the reasons for being a vegan can go beyond simply the moralistic ideas of preventing suffering. The health advantages are enormous. The reduction of environmental harm is huge, too.
I strongly recommend this excellent book to all who really care about the world, about animals, and their own health.
Jeffrey Masson rebuts all of the sayings that meat-eaters use to rationalize their addiction to meat, poultry, and fish. And he makes a every one of the rationalizations sound truly pathetic. There are no good reasons for eating meat; just denials. Masson goes into some depth, about why meat-eaters are in denial. Basically, people just don't want to think about it; the horrendous suffering that animals undergo--all animals that are used for food--is overwhelming.
The one surprising thing that Masson writes is that if you want to do the simplest thing that will reduce animal suffering the most, it would be to avoid milk, cheese, and eggs. Masson maintains that the harvesting of dairy products actually causes more suffering than the harvesting of meat! He goes into some detail as to why this is; and after understanding the reasoning behind this claim, I would have to agree.
Of course, the reasons for being a vegan can go beyond simply the moralistic ideas of preventing suffering. The health advantages are enormous. The reduction of environmental harm is huge, too.
I strongly recommend this excellent book to all who really care about the world, about animals, and their own health.
July 14, 2009
I am not a vegetarian or vegan, but this book definitely gives me pause and makes me consider.... Actually in the last few years the taste of meat has not been pleasant to me. Animal lover that I am, I dont know why I have continued eating sentient beings. This book gets down to the nuts and bolts of how much of our planet we are using up to feed the livestock which we as Americans love to eat. Now other countries are getting the taste for meat and deforesting in order to raise same livestock. Plant crops can feed more people on less land and water, without hurting the water and air and land. If you have any interest in saving our planet, not just due to global warming, but also due to mankinds inhumanity to animals and each other, this is a good one. I wish I had read it years ago. Some of the figures are staggering.
February 26, 2009
When I first picked up this book I thought I already knew everything there was to know on the issue. I was wrong. Especially on the fish chapter of the book. I'm not really into fish. They're so strange, so different, but I respect them and I learned a lot about them. For instance, We share 85% of our DNA with fish (98% we share with primates). Crazy, right?
I also believed the myth that fish have a teensy memory span. Not true. Fish have a memory span of at least 3 months and probably much longer (it hasn't been tested further than three months). Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson quotes Culum Brown, (U of Edinburgh biologist) "Fish are more intelligent than they appear. In many areas, such as memory, their cognitive powers match or exceed those of 'higher' vertebrates, including non-human primates."
Fish are freaky, they made no sounds but their sporadic out-of-water wriggling and flopping seem unnatural and clearly anguish-driven. The author says, "It is a bit puzzling why we feel that something not like us deserves less respect. That it's death is less troubling." Here, here. Some people think fish are vegetables. You know those people who say, "I'm a vegetarian but I eat fish." Those people really need to read this book.
And this book sxplores the lives of all the animals we eat. Pigs, cows, chickens. It explores what they eat. It's disgusting. But this book is wonderful and had me gasping with surprise which I really didn't expect. I wish it could be required reading for everyone. Unfortunately, I'm afraid that the only people that will pick it up will be vegans, vegetarians, or people already interested in vegetarianism. That's a shame because this is really good stuff.
I also believed the myth that fish have a teensy memory span. Not true. Fish have a memory span of at least 3 months and probably much longer (it hasn't been tested further than three months). Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson quotes Culum Brown, (U of Edinburgh biologist) "Fish are more intelligent than they appear. In many areas, such as memory, their cognitive powers match or exceed those of 'higher' vertebrates, including non-human primates."
Fish are freaky, they made no sounds but their sporadic out-of-water wriggling and flopping seem unnatural and clearly anguish-driven. The author says, "It is a bit puzzling why we feel that something not like us deserves less respect. That it's death is less troubling." Here, here. Some people think fish are vegetables. You know those people who say, "I'm a vegetarian but I eat fish." Those people really need to read this book.
And this book sxplores the lives of all the animals we eat. Pigs, cows, chickens. It explores what they eat. It's disgusting. But this book is wonderful and had me gasping with surprise which I really didn't expect. I wish it could be required reading for everyone. Unfortunately, I'm afraid that the only people that will pick it up will be vegans, vegetarians, or people already interested in vegetarianism. That's a shame because this is really good stuff.
July 14, 2009
An eye opening account of our factory farms. I've been a vegetarian for almost ten years, after reading this I'm considering becoming vegan. The animals used for producing animal products are treated worse than the ones simply raised for their meat. Although, my main reason for being a vegetarian is for my personal health it is hard to ignore or as, the author states, deny, the treat of animals and the environmental effects of being a carnivore.
I have visited enough feedlots, dairy farms and hog farms to have seen first hand most of information the author discusses but I was surprised to learn that sugar is not vegetarian (it contains bone meal made from cow's bones.)
I have visited enough feedlots, dairy farms and hog farms to have seen first hand most of information the author discusses but I was surprised to learn that sugar is not vegetarian (it contains bone meal made from cow's bones.)
November 10, 2008
This is a straightforward argument for why people should start eating a vegan diet, cutting out eggs and dairy products as well as meat and fish. In addition to the cruelty of "factory farm" food production, Masson also discusses the environmental damage caused by raising animals such as cattle, pigs, and chickens in such massive quantities. For many readers, this information won't be revelatory, but it'll certainly make you stop and think.
September 27, 2009
Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson is a thinker of considerable originality, a writer of rather modest talent, and a man of strong opinions who does not suffer from a lack of self confidence in the correctness of those opinions. Masson, a complex and fascinating character, is an accomplished Sanskrit scholar who trained as a psychoanalyst and worked with Anna Freud in London compiling her father's writings. Masson edited the definitive version of Freud's letters to Wilhelm Fliess, a work of considerable scholarly importance. He also had a messy falling out with Anna Freud, in part over the issue of whether Freud "sold out" on the issue of childhood sexual abuse.
Given that background, it's hardly surprising that when Masson decided to write "the truth about food," the resulting book would be serious, copiously footnoted, and boldly, if somewhat sloppily written. Although Masson comes across as a bit of a fanatic on veganism, nonetheless, The Face on Your Plate is still a good and disturbing, basic book on the subject.
In The Face on Your Plate, Masson explains why he is a vegan, and urges the reader to consider becoming a vegan or a vegetarian, or at the very least, eating less meat. Although Masson writes with a touch of self-righteousness that ranges from mildly off-putting to infuriating, he makes a powerful and even convincing argument for the proposition that eating meat is not good for humans, the animals they eat, or the environment. Masson's argument that these animals are sentient beings who suffer from the way they are treated is hard to take issue with, and the details of the way cows, chickens, pigs and fish are cruelly treated before being killed are graphic and disturbing. Masson also explains how raising animals for food uses a wasteful amount of resources, and why a vegetarian diet is more health that one which includes meat and animal products. In a chapter on denial, Masson draws on his background as a psychoanalyst to try to explain how we use denial that meat comes from once living animals in order to be able to keep on eating them. It's an interesting chapter, but its ideas seem somewhat underdeveloped and pretentious. Masson also includes a description of his diet, which was not interesting.
Really, Masson's book is best when it leaves aside such things as denial and diets, and turns to its central thesis: that "we like our meat disguised," because the more natural it looks, i.e., the more it looks like what it is -- a dead animal that was killed to make food -- "the more likely it is to cause disgust and physical aversion." Masson's chapters on the short, pain filled and sad lives of the cows, chickens, pigs and fish we eat certainly flesh out that thesis.
I've always been of a divided mind about Masson. I hated his book The Assault on Truth, but greatly admired his edition of the Freud letters to Fliess. Some of Masson's worst faults are on display in The Face on Your Plate, but so are some of his greatest strengths. Among those strengths are the ability to write boldly and persuasively. The bottom line is that even though I still find Masson to be irritating and smug, The Face on Your Plate has convinced me to do some hard thinking about what I eat, and to try meatless Mondays. If the definition of a good book is one that gets you to think, and maybe even to change your mind, then this is a good book.
Given that background, it's hardly surprising that when Masson decided to write "the truth about food," the resulting book would be serious, copiously footnoted, and boldly, if somewhat sloppily written. Although Masson comes across as a bit of a fanatic on veganism, nonetheless, The Face on Your Plate is still a good and disturbing, basic book on the subject.
In The Face on Your Plate, Masson explains why he is a vegan, and urges the reader to consider becoming a vegan or a vegetarian, or at the very least, eating less meat. Although Masson writes with a touch of self-righteousness that ranges from mildly off-putting to infuriating, he makes a powerful and even convincing argument for the proposition that eating meat is not good for humans, the animals they eat, or the environment. Masson's argument that these animals are sentient beings who suffer from the way they are treated is hard to take issue with, and the details of the way cows, chickens, pigs and fish are cruelly treated before being killed are graphic and disturbing. Masson also explains how raising animals for food uses a wasteful amount of resources, and why a vegetarian diet is more health that one which includes meat and animal products. In a chapter on denial, Masson draws on his background as a psychoanalyst to try to explain how we use denial that meat comes from once living animals in order to be able to keep on eating them. It's an interesting chapter, but its ideas seem somewhat underdeveloped and pretentious. Masson also includes a description of his diet, which was not interesting.
Really, Masson's book is best when it leaves aside such things as denial and diets, and turns to its central thesis: that "we like our meat disguised," because the more natural it looks, i.e., the more it looks like what it is -- a dead animal that was killed to make food -- "the more likely it is to cause disgust and physical aversion." Masson's chapters on the short, pain filled and sad lives of the cows, chickens, pigs and fish we eat certainly flesh out that thesis.
I've always been of a divided mind about Masson. I hated his book The Assault on Truth, but greatly admired his edition of the Freud letters to Fliess. Some of Masson's worst faults are on display in The Face on Your Plate, but so are some of his greatest strengths. Among those strengths are the ability to write boldly and persuasively. The bottom line is that even though I still find Masson to be irritating and smug, The Face on Your Plate has convinced me to do some hard thinking about what I eat, and to try meatless Mondays. If the definition of a good book is one that gets you to think, and maybe even to change your mind, then this is a good book.
November 19, 2010
I'm not a vegetarian; I like meat too much. I had no expectations going into the book, but I found myself getting annoyed with the author's preachiness. If you believe that animals are on this earth to be eaten, you must be a religious fundamentalist. I'm not, but can you blame early humans for taking advantage of all food sources? I don't buy that we are supposed to be herbivores.
His other opinions were rather annoying as well. All animals have feelings and we must respect them. Whole Foods is a wonderland for vegans. His pediatrician wife believes that diet can help with autism. Frankly, I was more fascinated by the notion that he is 25 years older than his wife and at age 68, he has two small sons.
I sighed when I read his assertion that when we take honey from bees, we are robbing them. When he claimed that he won't consume maple syrup because trees are wounded to collect it, I rolled my eyes. When I got tot he nearly 90 pages of footnotes, I resolved to not think about this book again.
His other opinions were rather annoying as well. All animals have feelings and we must respect them. Whole Foods is a wonderland for vegans. His pediatrician wife believes that diet can help with autism. Frankly, I was more fascinated by the notion that he is 25 years older than his wife and at age 68, he has two small sons.
I sighed when I read his assertion that when we take honey from bees, we are robbing them. When he claimed that he won't consume maple syrup because trees are wounded to collect it, I rolled my eyes. When I got tot he nearly 90 pages of footnotes, I resolved to not think about this book again.
August 14, 2021
Vejetaryen ya da vegan değilim, ancak son zamanlarda vejetaryenlik merakım artarken birden kendimi vegan okuma çemberine katılırken buldum. Bu kitapla başlıyoruz.
Açıkçası okuması zor bir kitaptı benim için. Yazar uzun zaman vejeteryan yaşadıktan sonra vegan olmaya karar veriyor, ancak çok katı kuralları olan bir vegan değil. Bu kitabı yazarken çokça araştırma yapmış, endüstriyel hayvan çiftliklerini gezmiş, ne şartlarda yaşadıklarını, ortamı ve çevreye olan zararlarını anlatmış. Evet bir farkındalık oluştu, keskin bir geçiş belki çok zor geliyor ama bu durum nereye kadar gider zaman gösterecek.
“Her büyükbaş hayvanın otlamak için yaklaşık 120 dönümlük bir alana ihtiyacı vardır ve “getirisi” yaklaşık 226 kg ettir.”
“Bir inek bir insanın 20 katı atık üretir.”
“Hayvan yetiştirmek çok miktarda su tüketimine neden oluyor... 453 gr lık sığır eti elde etmek için 49.120 lt su harcamak gerekiyor... Bir porsiyon biftek elde etmek için yaklaşık 9.842 lt su gerekiyor.”
“Yaklaşık 1 kg hayvansal protein elde etmek için harcanan su, 1 kg tahıl proteini üretmek için harcanan suyun 10 katı kadardır.”
“Vegan olmak, bir insanın hayatı boyunca ortalama olarak 2.000 hayvan kurtarmasını sağlar.”
Açıkçası okuması zor bir kitaptı benim için. Yazar uzun zaman vejeteryan yaşadıktan sonra vegan olmaya karar veriyor, ancak çok katı kuralları olan bir vegan değil. Bu kitabı yazarken çokça araştırma yapmış, endüstriyel hayvan çiftliklerini gezmiş, ne şartlarda yaşadıklarını, ortamı ve çevreye olan zararlarını anlatmış. Evet bir farkındalık oluştu, keskin bir geçiş belki çok zor geliyor ama bu durum nereye kadar gider zaman gösterecek.
“Her büyükbaş hayvanın otlamak için yaklaşık 120 dönümlük bir alana ihtiyacı vardır ve “getirisi” yaklaşık 226 kg ettir.”
“Bir inek bir insanın 20 katı atık üretir.”
“Hayvan yetiştirmek çok miktarda su tüketimine neden oluyor... 453 gr lık sığır eti elde etmek için 49.120 lt su harcamak gerekiyor... Bir porsiyon biftek elde etmek için yaklaşık 9.842 lt su gerekiyor.”
“Yaklaşık 1 kg hayvansal protein elde etmek için harcanan su, 1 kg tahıl proteini üretmek için harcanan suyun 10 katı kadardır.”
“Vegan olmak, bir insanın hayatı boyunca ortalama olarak 2.000 hayvan kurtarmasını sağlar.”
June 9, 2011
Dear Jeff: Please get a better editor. You have some good stuff in here, but you gallop off on so many unrelated tangents as to bury some of your most informative material, and not all readers are as patient or forgiving as I am.
Masson makes some decent observations of agribusiness throughout his book, such as:
[W]hen I talk to farmers about how they treat the animals on their farms, I come up against a strange fact: while the general public and most research scientists all acknowledge that farm animals suffer, the farmers responsible for them have a tendency to deny it.
He also cites scientific studies that contradict the meat industry’s claims that animals don’t experience pain when, for example, chickens are debeaked with a searing blade. The Brambell Report on farm animal welfare concluded:
“Between the horn and bone [of the beak] is a thin layer of highly sensitive soft tissue, resembling the quick of the human nail. The hot knife blade used in debeaking cuts through this complex horn, bone and sensitive tissue causing severe pain.”
Despite my already being familiar with many of the facts of factory farming presented within its pages, The Face on Your Plate dad have some new information for me. For example, biologists have noted that the sound hens continually make in battery cages is identical to the specific call for help hens make to roosters when they are in distress.
I also appreciated that Masson devoted an entire chapter to the ethical and environmental consequences of the seafood industry. Many a vegetarian and even vegan will lament that one of the first questions we are asked is “Do you eat fish?” More than a few people call themselves “vegetarians” and continue to eat fish, perpetuating the myth that fish aren’t even worth considering as animals.
However, at times Masson gets a little silly. He realizes not everyone is willing to become vegan, but he does encourage them to be more mindful in their food choices. At one point, he suggests:
Asking about how chickens are kept when you buy eggs, or how the dairy cows live when buying milk, is a fine beginning.
Ok, that might have been feasible in the days of the general store, but when one considers that the vast majority of Americans buy their milk and eggs at chain grocery stores—and that the food was most likely trucked hundred or thousands of miles to get there—the thought of asking such queries at point of purchase seems ridiculous. (Imagine grilling the 17-year-old Walmart clerk as to the treatment of the cows who produced the cheese on a Great Value frozen pizza.)
Masson admits that while he is a committed vegetarian who tries his best to be vegan, he is not vegan all of the time. I truly appreciated his honesty. Masson writes:
What is the difference? I have a visceral reaction to meat, but not to butter or cheese or milk chocolate. Perhaps because of the disguise: it is hard to eat a chocolate chip cookie and think “suffering.”
I’m the same way, so I found it very comforting that a well-known animal welfare writer struggles with some of the same problems I do.
Masson makes some decent observations of agribusiness throughout his book, such as:
[W]hen I talk to farmers about how they treat the animals on their farms, I come up against a strange fact: while the general public and most research scientists all acknowledge that farm animals suffer, the farmers responsible for them have a tendency to deny it.
He also cites scientific studies that contradict the meat industry’s claims that animals don’t experience pain when, for example, chickens are debeaked with a searing blade. The Brambell Report on farm animal welfare concluded:
“Between the horn and bone [of the beak] is a thin layer of highly sensitive soft tissue, resembling the quick of the human nail. The hot knife blade used in debeaking cuts through this complex horn, bone and sensitive tissue causing severe pain.”
Despite my already being familiar with many of the facts of factory farming presented within its pages, The Face on Your Plate dad have some new information for me. For example, biologists have noted that the sound hens continually make in battery cages is identical to the specific call for help hens make to roosters when they are in distress.
I also appreciated that Masson devoted an entire chapter to the ethical and environmental consequences of the seafood industry. Many a vegetarian and even vegan will lament that one of the first questions we are asked is “Do you eat fish?” More than a few people call themselves “vegetarians” and continue to eat fish, perpetuating the myth that fish aren’t even worth considering as animals.
However, at times Masson gets a little silly. He realizes not everyone is willing to become vegan, but he does encourage them to be more mindful in their food choices. At one point, he suggests:
Asking about how chickens are kept when you buy eggs, or how the dairy cows live when buying milk, is a fine beginning.
Ok, that might have been feasible in the days of the general store, but when one considers that the vast majority of Americans buy their milk and eggs at chain grocery stores—and that the food was most likely trucked hundred or thousands of miles to get there—the thought of asking such queries at point of purchase seems ridiculous. (Imagine grilling the 17-year-old Walmart clerk as to the treatment of the cows who produced the cheese on a Great Value frozen pizza.)
Masson admits that while he is a committed vegetarian who tries his best to be vegan, he is not vegan all of the time. I truly appreciated his honesty. Masson writes:
What is the difference? I have a visceral reaction to meat, but not to butter or cheese or milk chocolate. Perhaps because of the disguise: it is hard to eat a chocolate chip cookie and think “suffering.”
I’m the same way, so I found it very comforting that a well-known animal welfare writer struggles with some of the same problems I do.
February 18, 2013
I borrowed this book from the library (I was actually browsing cookbooks at the time). I am not vegetarian however I don't eat a lot of meat as I find it doesn't really agree with me and I admit the thought of eating the flesh of a previously living creature does feel somehow wrong. The author quotes Cesar Chavez early in the book who said if you want to lessen animal suffering in the world you would do better to eat meat and give up dairy and eggs. As part of his research for this book the author visited dairy farms and hen laying facilities and witnessed the misery and suffering the animals endured so people can enjoy their milk and eggs. Technically it is possible to obtain milk without harming a cow unfortunately that is not how milk is obtained today and reading about the suffering a cow goes through in a high milk production dairy farm made uncomfortable reading and has certainly made me think about my consumption of the dairy foods I love like cheese and creamy sauces. The chapter on aquaculture also gave some uncomfortable moments such as bathing live eels in dry salt which slowly desiccates their bodies. The chapter on denial did ring true that we want the meat but we don't want to hear about the slaughterhouse. This book has certainly left a lasting impression on me and made me question my food choices it has also prompted me to read some more about Chavez and Isaac Bashevis Singer both of who are quoted in the book.
June 5, 2014
As a vegan, I had already heard about/read about a lot of the facts and argument he presents in this book. I also thought some chapters were better than others. But there were two things I really liked. I liked that the author dedicated a whole chapter to discussing the cruelty and environmentally dangerous practices involved in fishing, as I think fish are often easily overlooked in discussions about food ethics. I also like that the author chooses to address the process of denial in one of the chapters, because I think this is something that many people can relate to, but also something that ultimately prevents people from changing. I know that it's still possible to be in denial about denial, ie. you can still read about denial and refuse to engage, but ultimately I hope that by addressing it Moussieff Masson has prompted at least some readers to think more deeply about how they react to certain information.
Finally, this is a very personal book, written in a very personal style and contains lots of personal antidotes. A lot of reviewers on here seem to dislike this about the book. However, I think it works, because there are so many other books out there on the market that discuss similar issues (Eating Animals, Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs and Wear Cows etc.)I think he can afford to be a little bit more personal and opinionated in delivering his version.
Finally, this is a very personal book, written in a very personal style and contains lots of personal antidotes. A lot of reviewers on here seem to dislike this about the book. However, I think it works, because there are so many other books out there on the market that discuss similar issues (Eating Animals, Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs and Wear Cows etc.)I think he can afford to be a little bit more personal and opinionated in delivering his version.
July 21, 2009
I...I dunno. It wasn't that well written, it didn't reveal any earth-shakingly new ideas/facts/arguments, and I felt patronized by its whispy tone and the assertion that if I only KNEW what was going on, I'd be a vegan. I know a lot about how food is produced--because I read a lot, I'm interested, and I grew up on a non-picture-perfect farm--and I need more than admonishment and gross-out tactics to persuade me about the benefits (spiritual and otherwise) of not eating meat.
October 27, 2012
Sometimes hard for me to read... breaks my heart. People need to know the truth.
January 28, 2013
Some books are written by authors whose biography and personality are seemingly absent. I say seemingly because every book written is, of course, infused with the author’s character and experience regardless of their visibility. Then, there are some authors whose presence is integral. It is impossible to separate them from their work. Sadly, not all authors are good writers. Many are uncomfortable with speaking in public. This, perhaps, should not be too surprising given their preferred medium is the written, not spoken, word.
Books and food are subject to the whims of personal taste; books about food even more so. Books about food, whether they are collections of recipes, comprehensive guides to household management ranging from Mrs. Beeton to Martha Stewart, and studies on how and where particular ingredients are produced, are always popular. They are not always well written. The author’s personality, which is not always pleasant, may leave an after taste.
Since the Second World War and the popularity of foreign travel, the increased availability of hitherto unknown ingredients and the industrialization of food production, the range of writing about food has significantly expanded from traditional cook books to titles dedicated to foreign and national cuisines, memoirs, travel, diets of various kinds and much more. Recently, however, a genre of books about food has emerged that is different. These are books which explore, expose, question and challenge how the food we eat today is produced. Some of these books are stamped with the author’s personality and come with a bias while others are university press published scientific studies. Some are targeted toward a general market and others for a specialised one. Some have broken through and become best sellers. Others may not have received the same recognition but are, nonetheless, important in what they say.
Eric Schlosser’s Fast Food Nation (New York: Harper Perennial, 2005) and Michael Pollan’s The Omnivore’s Dilemma (New York: Penguin, 2006) are incredibly successful books that captured the public’s attention. They and other titles like them helped to provoke a debate about the food we eat and how it is produced unparalleled since the publication of Upton Sinclair’s unprecedented novel, The Jungle, in 1906.
Schlosser, Pollan and others including Barbara Kingsolver’s Animal, Vegetable, Miracle: A Year of Food Life (New York: HarperCollins, 2007) and Marion Nestle’s Food Politics (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002), either failed to address the moral issue of killing animals for food or framed it as a regretted necessity. For vegans like me who are most likely more informed about food than the average person, it left us wondering why even in this debate about food animal rights is absent or, if considered, trivialized and dismissed.
Then, Peter Singer and Jim Mason’s The Way We Eat (New York: Rodale Press, 2006) came along. Peter Singer is, of course, the internationally recognized philosopher who successfully bridges the chasm between the rarefied worlds of academia with more mainstream public debate about how we should live. His books are routinely reviewed. He is frequently profiled in newspapers and magazines. He is often featured on radio and television. This is with all good reason. Philosophy is only important when it helps people to make informed decisions. Singer’s work strikes a chord with the public. With all this in mind, I looked forward very much to reading Singer and Mason’s The Way We Eat. Clearly, it is a fine example of a well researched and clearly written book. But it was not as strong as I thought it should be in advocating veganism, however, I understood why it struck a nuanced position. Nonetheless, this left me feeling there is still a need for a definitive book making the case for veganism which successfully breaks through to the mainstream market in the same way that Schlosser’s Fast Food Nation and Pollan’s Omnivore’s Dilemma did.
Turning to The Face on Your Plate it is impossible to separate it from the author, Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson. I read it with the anticipation I’m holding the break-through vegan book I’ve been hoping for. I sincerely hope it is but we will only know in the fullness of time.
Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson has lived a most interesting life. It can be crudely divided into the Freud Period and Animal Period. In his Freudian Period, Masson was awarded a Ph.D. in Sanskrit from Harvard University. He became Professor of Sanskrit at the University of Toronto. Here, he trained as a Freudian analyst, graduating as a full member of the International Psycho-Analytical Association. Then, he became Project Director of the Sigmund Freud Archives, with access to Freud’s papers in London and the Library of Congress. He eventually concluded Freud was mistaken when he (Masson) no longer believed sexual abuse caused human suffering to the extent that he (Freud) thought. The Freudian world thought this was heretical. He was fired from the archives. This all led to a book by Janet Malcolm, a lawsuit brought by Masson and a series of books by Masson critical of Freud, psychoanalysis, psychiatry and therapy. Then, in 1995 his Animal Period began with the publication of the international best-seller When Elephants Weep co-authored with Susan McCarthy. This was followed by seven more books about animals, including Dogs Never Lie About Love and The Nine Emotional Lives of Cats. A vegetarian for most of his life; however, since writing about the emotional world of farmed animals in The Pig Who Sang to the Moon, he describes himself as “veganish.” (p. 139)
The Freudian Masson and the Animal Masson come together in The Face on Your Plate. As would be expected in a book on this topic there are the obligatory chapters on the environmental impact of intensive animal agriculture (Chapter One: “The Only World We Have”); on animal welfare (Chapter Two: “The Lives They Lead”); and on fish farming (Chapter Three: “The Fishy Business of Aquaculture”). These chapters are researched, documented, written and argued well. Woven throughout are the author’s personal experiences (e.g., raising vegetarian children, visiting farms, researching and writing books about animals). The writing style is informed and informal, emotional and empathetic. It never preaches, which it could so easily do, and, it has to be said, books of this type often do.
Of the two remaining chapters, the least interesting one is Chapter Five: “A Day in the Life of a Vegan.” As may be expected by the title, Masson shares with us information and tips about, well, a day in the life of a vegan. After 30 plus years of veganism, Masson clearly did not write this chapter for the likes of me! So, I suspect, this chapter will be of much more interest to those who are aspiring and becoming or are already vegan.
The Face on Your Plate is well worth reading; however, what makes it required reading is Chapter Four: “Denial.” This is where Masson, the psycho-analyst, and Masson, the vegan, come together in a fascinating exploration of the reasons why we choose to not see the face on the plate let alone willingly look into the eyes that look out at us. Whether it is in, first, the individual and a reluctance to admit the inevitable fate that befriends us all (death) or whether it is, second, societal and when we look back and ask with hindsight, “Why the Holocaust? The Gulag? The Killing Fields? Why Srebrencia? Why Rwanda? Why Darfur?” (p. 150), Masson suggests denial is a relatively recent phenomenon. Enter Masson, the psycho-analyst, or, as I should say, Masson, the critical psycho-analyst.
'The reason that denial played such an important role in Freud’s psychological theories is that for Freud, repression was the very cornerstone of psychoanalysis. No repression, no neurosis, no therapy, no profession. It was also, let me be the first to admit, an enormous step forward compared to the psychology Freud inherited in Vienna during his time.' (p.155)
Masson explains denial as a “specific psychic defense against an overwhelming reality” and a “technique for survival, indeed, the defense mechanism of the twenty-first century.” [Emphasis in original] (p. 153)
Denial, then, is a “convenient overarching mechanism” which we employ to avoid thinking about something. (p. 160) The denial about animals as food frequently begins with our parents. They reluctantly betray us when, as innocent children, we ask where meat comes from. “Could it be that the disgust [felt about eating meat] is in fact a displacement?” he asks. “In time we overcome this, as we increasingly swallow the prevailing attitudes toward food in our culture; but some may be left with a lingering feeling of guilt.” (p. 139) We live in a “willed ignorance” of denial. Knowing what we know but denying it. (p. 147)
Throughout this chapter Masson discusses various examples to illustrate how the mechanisms of denial function. “Here is a partial list,” he writes,
'(1) humans are omnivores; always have been, always will be. (2) It tastes good. (3) We need meat to live in a healthy manner. (4) Animals eat each other, so why shouldn’t we? (5) Everyone does it. (6) I was raised that way. (7) To refuse to eat meat is to make yourself a social outcast.' (p. 151)
He explores other examples in more fascinating depth. For example, we imagine a “domestic contract” between the consumer and the artisan food producer whose free-range animals are slaughtered nonetheless (p. 141). Plants feel pain, too, don’t you know? “The future may prove me wrong,” he concludes. “But until such time, to compare plant suffering with the suffering of humans and animals seems morally irresponsible. In fact, I do not believe the rebuke is meant seriously.” (p. 146)
But can denial ever be justified? Is it better to live in denial of our inevitable death? Should we worry about tragic chapters in the history of humanity that we have no control over but agonize over in hindsight? What about tragedies happening now? The former is truly beyond our control but, he writes, “we can stop killing animals. What is amazing about all these defense mechanisms is how powerfully they work just below the surface of our awareness.” (p. 152)
“We must remove ourselves from whatever blind hides our vision,” Masson concludes, “and look out at the horizon to face what we see there. We owe animals no less. We also owe ourselves no less, it turns out.” (p. 165) The “face” of this author not only informs the reader but also engages with his personality. Time will tell whether The Face on Your Plate will take its rightful place as the authoritative book of its kind. But there can be surely no better way to describe the author’s mission.
Books and food are subject to the whims of personal taste; books about food even more so. Books about food, whether they are collections of recipes, comprehensive guides to household management ranging from Mrs. Beeton to Martha Stewart, and studies on how and where particular ingredients are produced, are always popular. They are not always well written. The author’s personality, which is not always pleasant, may leave an after taste.
Since the Second World War and the popularity of foreign travel, the increased availability of hitherto unknown ingredients and the industrialization of food production, the range of writing about food has significantly expanded from traditional cook books to titles dedicated to foreign and national cuisines, memoirs, travel, diets of various kinds and much more. Recently, however, a genre of books about food has emerged that is different. These are books which explore, expose, question and challenge how the food we eat today is produced. Some of these books are stamped with the author’s personality and come with a bias while others are university press published scientific studies. Some are targeted toward a general market and others for a specialised one. Some have broken through and become best sellers. Others may not have received the same recognition but are, nonetheless, important in what they say.
Eric Schlosser’s Fast Food Nation (New York: Harper Perennial, 2005) and Michael Pollan’s The Omnivore’s Dilemma (New York: Penguin, 2006) are incredibly successful books that captured the public’s attention. They and other titles like them helped to provoke a debate about the food we eat and how it is produced unparalleled since the publication of Upton Sinclair’s unprecedented novel, The Jungle, in 1906.
Schlosser, Pollan and others including Barbara Kingsolver’s Animal, Vegetable, Miracle: A Year of Food Life (New York: HarperCollins, 2007) and Marion Nestle’s Food Politics (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002), either failed to address the moral issue of killing animals for food or framed it as a regretted necessity. For vegans like me who are most likely more informed about food than the average person, it left us wondering why even in this debate about food animal rights is absent or, if considered, trivialized and dismissed.
Then, Peter Singer and Jim Mason’s The Way We Eat (New York: Rodale Press, 2006) came along. Peter Singer is, of course, the internationally recognized philosopher who successfully bridges the chasm between the rarefied worlds of academia with more mainstream public debate about how we should live. His books are routinely reviewed. He is frequently profiled in newspapers and magazines. He is often featured on radio and television. This is with all good reason. Philosophy is only important when it helps people to make informed decisions. Singer’s work strikes a chord with the public. With all this in mind, I looked forward very much to reading Singer and Mason’s The Way We Eat. Clearly, it is a fine example of a well researched and clearly written book. But it was not as strong as I thought it should be in advocating veganism, however, I understood why it struck a nuanced position. Nonetheless, this left me feeling there is still a need for a definitive book making the case for veganism which successfully breaks through to the mainstream market in the same way that Schlosser’s Fast Food Nation and Pollan’s Omnivore’s Dilemma did.
Turning to The Face on Your Plate it is impossible to separate it from the author, Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson. I read it with the anticipation I’m holding the break-through vegan book I’ve been hoping for. I sincerely hope it is but we will only know in the fullness of time.
Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson has lived a most interesting life. It can be crudely divided into the Freud Period and Animal Period. In his Freudian Period, Masson was awarded a Ph.D. in Sanskrit from Harvard University. He became Professor of Sanskrit at the University of Toronto. Here, he trained as a Freudian analyst, graduating as a full member of the International Psycho-Analytical Association. Then, he became Project Director of the Sigmund Freud Archives, with access to Freud’s papers in London and the Library of Congress. He eventually concluded Freud was mistaken when he (Masson) no longer believed sexual abuse caused human suffering to the extent that he (Freud) thought. The Freudian world thought this was heretical. He was fired from the archives. This all led to a book by Janet Malcolm, a lawsuit brought by Masson and a series of books by Masson critical of Freud, psychoanalysis, psychiatry and therapy. Then, in 1995 his Animal Period began with the publication of the international best-seller When Elephants Weep co-authored with Susan McCarthy. This was followed by seven more books about animals, including Dogs Never Lie About Love and The Nine Emotional Lives of Cats. A vegetarian for most of his life; however, since writing about the emotional world of farmed animals in The Pig Who Sang to the Moon, he describes himself as “veganish.” (p. 139)
The Freudian Masson and the Animal Masson come together in The Face on Your Plate. As would be expected in a book on this topic there are the obligatory chapters on the environmental impact of intensive animal agriculture (Chapter One: “The Only World We Have”); on animal welfare (Chapter Two: “The Lives They Lead”); and on fish farming (Chapter Three: “The Fishy Business of Aquaculture”). These chapters are researched, documented, written and argued well. Woven throughout are the author’s personal experiences (e.g., raising vegetarian children, visiting farms, researching and writing books about animals). The writing style is informed and informal, emotional and empathetic. It never preaches, which it could so easily do, and, it has to be said, books of this type often do.
Of the two remaining chapters, the least interesting one is Chapter Five: “A Day in the Life of a Vegan.” As may be expected by the title, Masson shares with us information and tips about, well, a day in the life of a vegan. After 30 plus years of veganism, Masson clearly did not write this chapter for the likes of me! So, I suspect, this chapter will be of much more interest to those who are aspiring and becoming or are already vegan.
The Face on Your Plate is well worth reading; however, what makes it required reading is Chapter Four: “Denial.” This is where Masson, the psycho-analyst, and Masson, the vegan, come together in a fascinating exploration of the reasons why we choose to not see the face on the plate let alone willingly look into the eyes that look out at us. Whether it is in, first, the individual and a reluctance to admit the inevitable fate that befriends us all (death) or whether it is, second, societal and when we look back and ask with hindsight, “Why the Holocaust? The Gulag? The Killing Fields? Why Srebrencia? Why Rwanda? Why Darfur?” (p. 150), Masson suggests denial is a relatively recent phenomenon. Enter Masson, the psycho-analyst, or, as I should say, Masson, the critical psycho-analyst.
'The reason that denial played such an important role in Freud’s psychological theories is that for Freud, repression was the very cornerstone of psychoanalysis. No repression, no neurosis, no therapy, no profession. It was also, let me be the first to admit, an enormous step forward compared to the psychology Freud inherited in Vienna during his time.' (p.155)
Masson explains denial as a “specific psychic defense against an overwhelming reality” and a “technique for survival, indeed, the defense mechanism of the twenty-first century.” [Emphasis in original] (p. 153)
Denial, then, is a “convenient overarching mechanism” which we employ to avoid thinking about something. (p. 160) The denial about animals as food frequently begins with our parents. They reluctantly betray us when, as innocent children, we ask where meat comes from. “Could it be that the disgust [felt about eating meat] is in fact a displacement?” he asks. “In time we overcome this, as we increasingly swallow the prevailing attitudes toward food in our culture; but some may be left with a lingering feeling of guilt.” (p. 139) We live in a “willed ignorance” of denial. Knowing what we know but denying it. (p. 147)
Throughout this chapter Masson discusses various examples to illustrate how the mechanisms of denial function. “Here is a partial list,” he writes,
'(1) humans are omnivores; always have been, always will be. (2) It tastes good. (3) We need meat to live in a healthy manner. (4) Animals eat each other, so why shouldn’t we? (5) Everyone does it. (6) I was raised that way. (7) To refuse to eat meat is to make yourself a social outcast.' (p. 151)
He explores other examples in more fascinating depth. For example, we imagine a “domestic contract” between the consumer and the artisan food producer whose free-range animals are slaughtered nonetheless (p. 141). Plants feel pain, too, don’t you know? “The future may prove me wrong,” he concludes. “But until such time, to compare plant suffering with the suffering of humans and animals seems morally irresponsible. In fact, I do not believe the rebuke is meant seriously.” (p. 146)
But can denial ever be justified? Is it better to live in denial of our inevitable death? Should we worry about tragic chapters in the history of humanity that we have no control over but agonize over in hindsight? What about tragedies happening now? The former is truly beyond our control but, he writes, “we can stop killing animals. What is amazing about all these defense mechanisms is how powerfully they work just below the surface of our awareness.” (p. 152)
“We must remove ourselves from whatever blind hides our vision,” Masson concludes, “and look out at the horizon to face what we see there. We owe animals no less. We also owe ourselves no less, it turns out.” (p. 165) The “face” of this author not only informs the reader but also engages with his personality. Time will tell whether The Face on Your Plate will take its rightful place as the authoritative book of its kind. But there can be surely no better way to describe the author’s mission.
August 6, 2015
I really enjoyed this book. I think it would be a good one to read for one who is just starting to venture into veganism or is interested in the matter. The cover is great because it really makes you think about the disconnect between the food on your plate and where it is coming from.
The book talks about denial both on a macro and micro level, the first moments when children learn what meat really is and where it comes from, and has a chapter each for land mammals and water mammals. Food waste, water contamination, E-coli, work hazards to humans, amount of fecal waste and subsequently high methane emissions, are all talked about. So many negative consequences of factory farming and eating meat in general that sometimes it's a wonder why it is all a) still being done, and b) why it is still legal. A shift needs to happen to encourage the sustainability of humanity, all other animals, and our planet. We are wasting so much time, resources, energy, all while killing innocent animals just so that we can fuel our addiction to meat and continue eating these "high-end" foods, which really aren't so high end when you look at the adverse health effects they create.
There is a really cute story about chickens interacting with humans, dogs, cats, and rats from pages 77-78 showing they can be good companions.
All in all, a really good book. Nice and short read, too.
Some favourite quotes:
"The human appetite for animal flesh is a driving force behind virtually every major category of environmental damage now threatening the human future—deforestation, erosion, fresh water scarcity, air and water pollution, climate change, biodiversity loss, social injustice, the destabilization of communities, and the spread of disease." - World Watch Magazine"
"Our sense of uniqueness is not confined to intelligence: we have for years insisted we are the only animal to use tools (false, as Jane Goodall was able to show for chimpanzees; many animals, including birds, use tools on a regular basis); the only animal with culture (false; every wolf has to be taught wolf culture); (...)."
"The EPA, hardly considered a radical environmental group, takes the view that factory farm run-off (we are talking about 3 trillion pounds of waste) is a greater source of pollution of our rivers and lakes than all other industrial sources combined."
"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has warned that high nitrate levels in the drinking water of people who live close to these excrement lakes suffer high levels of spontaneous abortions, or, worse, "blue baby" syndrome, which can be fatal."
"As the world's appetite for meat increases, countries across the globe are bulldozing huge swaths of land to make more room for animals and the crops to feed them. From tropical rain forests in Brazil to ancient pine forests in China, entire ecosystems are being destroyed to fuel our addiction to meat."
"Nearly 40% of world grain is being fed to livestock rather than being consumed directly by humans."
"According to Lester Brown, guru of the environmental movement (...), in 2007 farmers produced 222 million tons of soybeans. Of this, some 15 million tons were consumed directly as tofu or other products based on soy used by humans."
"Here is the thing: we eat every day. We put our forks into something or someone three times a day. We cannot disengage ourselves, even if we wanted to. We are all involved in agriculture on a daily basis. We vote with every meal. We make a difference with every bite. We cannot choose to ignore this issue, thinking it has nothing to do with us. It has everything to do with us."
"Eggs are immensely complex. If you stop to think about it, there is something a bit odd about eating the egg of a bird - frying the yolk and scrambling the albumen. If we don't think about it, however, or simply refuse to do so, it can feel entirely natural."
"We are the only species who drink, as adults, the milk of another species. Perhaps that is why lactose intolerance is high among humans."
"According to an FAO report, The State of World Aquaculture - 2006, whereas in 1980, aquaculture accounted for 9% of fish consumed by humans, in 2006 that figure stood at 43%, and it is expected to climb."
"While true, no serious scientist suggests that plants feel pain in anything resembling the degree that humans and animals do. They have no central nervous system; they do not run away; they are not part of a community bound by ties of friendships and loyalties; and they have no visible emotions with which we can empathize."
"We may well be wrong, but so far no serious research has ever been done to suggest otherwise (in spite of the fanciful conclusions of books like The Secret Life of Plants). The future may prove me wrong. But until such time, to compare plant suffering with the suffering of humans and animals seems morally irresponsible."
The book talks about denial both on a macro and micro level, the first moments when children learn what meat really is and where it comes from, and has a chapter each for land mammals and water mammals. Food waste, water contamination, E-coli, work hazards to humans, amount of fecal waste and subsequently high methane emissions, are all talked about. So many negative consequences of factory farming and eating meat in general that sometimes it's a wonder why it is all a) still being done, and b) why it is still legal. A shift needs to happen to encourage the sustainability of humanity, all other animals, and our planet. We are wasting so much time, resources, energy, all while killing innocent animals just so that we can fuel our addiction to meat and continue eating these "high-end" foods, which really aren't so high end when you look at the adverse health effects they create.
There is a really cute story about chickens interacting with humans, dogs, cats, and rats from pages 77-78 showing they can be good companions.
All in all, a really good book. Nice and short read, too.
Some favourite quotes:
"The human appetite for animal flesh is a driving force behind virtually every major category of environmental damage now threatening the human future—deforestation, erosion, fresh water scarcity, air and water pollution, climate change, biodiversity loss, social injustice, the destabilization of communities, and the spread of disease." - World Watch Magazine"
"Our sense of uniqueness is not confined to intelligence: we have for years insisted we are the only animal to use tools (false, as Jane Goodall was able to show for chimpanzees; many animals, including birds, use tools on a regular basis); the only animal with culture (false; every wolf has to be taught wolf culture); (...)."
"The EPA, hardly considered a radical environmental group, takes the view that factory farm run-off (we are talking about 3 trillion pounds of waste) is a greater source of pollution of our rivers and lakes than all other industrial sources combined."
"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has warned that high nitrate levels in the drinking water of people who live close to these excrement lakes suffer high levels of spontaneous abortions, or, worse, "blue baby" syndrome, which can be fatal."
"As the world's appetite for meat increases, countries across the globe are bulldozing huge swaths of land to make more room for animals and the crops to feed them. From tropical rain forests in Brazil to ancient pine forests in China, entire ecosystems are being destroyed to fuel our addiction to meat."
"Nearly 40% of world grain is being fed to livestock rather than being consumed directly by humans."
"According to Lester Brown, guru of the environmental movement (...), in 2007 farmers produced 222 million tons of soybeans. Of this, some 15 million tons were consumed directly as tofu or other products based on soy used by humans."
"Here is the thing: we eat every day. We put our forks into something or someone three times a day. We cannot disengage ourselves, even if we wanted to. We are all involved in agriculture on a daily basis. We vote with every meal. We make a difference with every bite. We cannot choose to ignore this issue, thinking it has nothing to do with us. It has everything to do with us."
"Eggs are immensely complex. If you stop to think about it, there is something a bit odd about eating the egg of a bird - frying the yolk and scrambling the albumen. If we don't think about it, however, or simply refuse to do so, it can feel entirely natural."
"We are the only species who drink, as adults, the milk of another species. Perhaps that is why lactose intolerance is high among humans."
"According to an FAO report, The State of World Aquaculture - 2006, whereas in 1980, aquaculture accounted for 9% of fish consumed by humans, in 2006 that figure stood at 43%, and it is expected to climb."
"While true, no serious scientist suggests that plants feel pain in anything resembling the degree that humans and animals do. They have no central nervous system; they do not run away; they are not part of a community bound by ties of friendships and loyalties; and they have no visible emotions with which we can empathize."
"We may well be wrong, but so far no serious research has ever been done to suggest otherwise (in spite of the fanciful conclusions of books like The Secret Life of Plants). The future may prove me wrong. But until such time, to compare plant suffering with the suffering of humans and animals seems morally irresponsible."
July 4, 2016
When you pick up a book with a title such as this and a cover that features an adorable baby calf on a plate, you kind of understand that there is a very deliberate agenda here. And so, I was wary. The first half of the book however was really informative and very well written. It was educational and stripped for the most part of the heart string tugging and guilting, which made it easier to read objectively. It was very enlightening and particularly the section on farmed fish (side note, almost instinctively spelled that like 'Phish,' so...should probably lay off them for a bit) was horrifyingly eye opening. So overall, the first half of the book was compelling and had a didactic approach. Then came the inevitable moralizing. At first he made some good points: why kill another living being so that we can eat meat? I'm like yeah well that makes sense, why do it? Especially knowing about the atrocities committed to the animals and the environmental impacts of the industry. I mean the industry is also pushing out small time farmers, and meat and dairy have proven adverse effects on human health. But this guy just goes onnnnnn to the point where I'm like ok fuck you I'm going to eat bacon wrapped salmon dipped in a chicken just out of spite. He also spent a weird amount of time talking about Frued's theories on dicks? I guess it was supposed to tie into his chapter on denial but to me I'm thinking he's just got a dick thing of his own. At the end he wrapped up this book by going on about how easy it is to be a vegan, he's like in the morning I eat organic nuts, mejool dates, bla bla. All this is also interwoven with other things you want to avoid like too much salt, caffeine, gluten, etc. Im like fuck, does this guy even eat?! Anyway, here's my beef with him (pun fully intended): aside from the obnoxious moralizing, he spends a lot of time talking about WHY you should eat this way but fails to mention that it's not necessarily feasible for people of a modest income. He goes on about eating local, eating foods in season, getting organic. And I agree with everything he says, like we SHOULD do that in a perfect world. But, most people can't afford to eat 17$ organic dates and shit like that, so, I'm interested in reading a book that would not only highlight the cruelties of the animal food industry, but also suggest financially feasible solutions to people who don't have a bunch of money but still care about their health, animal welfare, and the environment.
Conclusions:
Learned shit about the industry
was properly horrified and outraged
felt he perpetuated the stereotype that all vegans are holier-than-thou
was bored as fuck by the end
Conclusions:
Learned shit about the industry
was properly horrified and outraged
felt he perpetuated the stereotype that all vegans are holier-than-thou
was bored as fuck by the end
Read
June 28, 2020 I always find it rather hard to rate non-fiction, so I won’t. I feel like it’s more about learning from such a book than judging the writing skills. And this piece of literature taught me a lot!
During the ongoing COVID19-pandemic and consequent lockdown, I have had time to immerse myself in the world of veganism. It started out as a 30-day challenge, but I got really interested after watching debates on YouTube and reading a paragraph on farming in 'Sapiens', written by Yuval Noah Harari. Consequently, I decided to buy some books as well.
The Face On Your Plate covers many aspects around meat- and dairy-consumption. The book is mainly separated in three topics: namely, the climate, our health, and the ethics of involving animals in our choices. The last one speaks to me the most, since it includes compelling arguments to go or stay vegan (more on my personal journey in a later paragraph). Masson mentions numerous arguments for and against veganism while considering them objectively. To name some examples: getting enough protein, top-of-the-foodchain, meat-eating as a tradition, humans being natural carnivores, and humane ways of slaughter.
Two remaining chapters are included. One is about ‘Denial’, a very philosophical and extensive research into the psychology of our consumption habits. Mainly, Masson asks (and answers) why it is so hard to stop eating meat and how society hides facts with denial and disguisal.
The last chapter covered the writer’s personal journey, and for me it was the weakest part by far. The chapter includes enormous amounts of information on different types of organic, biological, and local food, crammed into short paragraphs. The writer even comes off as being a bit too sentimental in my opinion, and consequently this weakens his earlier statements. For example, he states that it makes him uncomfortable how maple syrup is collected, since it leaves long-lasting wounds on trees. That seems odd considering he earlier finds the plants-have-feelings-as-well argument not to be taken seriously (with which I do agree). I honestly could not care less about trees with wounds; they don’t feel pain. There’s only so much you can do. I would have liked it if this chapter was left out entirely, since it wasn't very relevant. I would have preferred the attention to stay fully focused on meat and dairy consumption.
However, I appreciated the writer’s honesty as well. Masson even says that strictly speaking, he cannot be considered a vegan, and reflects on his behaviour of consuming dairy every so often, mentioning products do not all scream ‘animal harm’ in the same way. In the end, the message is not to become a vegan, but to take a moment and consider where your food comes from. Based on that information you have gathered, the choice of changing your habits is yours only. Even though I didn’t agree with the writer on every topic, I agree with him on this message; more transparency in the media and industries, and thereafter individual consumption remaining a personal choice (although now an unbiased one). For example, reasons to stop eating honey are not compelling to me – since bees do not have central nervous systems, and therefore I don’t believe they can suffer (at least in no way comparable to livestock). The writer, however, finds honey consumption 'robbery' (true, of course), and does not want to be involved, again showing a sentimentality with which I agree to disagree.
I started this book as a vegetarian experimenting with veganism, and I came out of it as a never-going-back vegan. Although I must say, this was greatly enhanced by videos and podcasts brought into the world by Earthling Ed, an animal welfare activist. I can’t believe I previously saw vegans as annoying hippies. I guess this was also why I found the chapter ‘Denial’ so interesting. It’s dishonest to now know veganism is portrayed in the media so one-sidedly. Even more so, the lies that come with advertisements (dairy cows are happily roaming about, and free-range eggs come from happy chickens). Most of all, I can't believe I didn't stop to think about all the processes involved in the meat- and dairy industry. I am shocked by the fact that babies are kept from mother cows, and that you basically can’t drink milk without killing a cow indirectly (since all dairy cows will be sent to slaughterhouse eventually, and their newborn sons awaits the same fate). What makes me uncomfortable too is that we artifically selected and breeded so many animals into existence only for them to suffer endlessly.
I would recommend this book (or to watch videos of Earthling Ed) for anyone who is interested in pyschology, the climate, animal welfare, and your body. Thus, to everyone.
Quotes:
'We can choose to stop eating meat because we feel it is wrong to do so. I don't believe any other animal has this astonishing ability.'
'The question is not: can they reason? Nor: can they talk? But: can they suffer?'
'We are programmed not to question too intensively what society deems essential to its own survival. (...) We must be prepared to perceive something we have been encouraged and accustomed to ignore. (...) Surely one part of becoming an adult is freeing ourselves from the prejuidices instilled in us as children and forming our own views.'
'You cannot get milk without involving the death of an animal, hence meat. (...) We are the only species who drink, as aduls, the milk of another species.'
'Humans seem to take a perverse pleasure in attributing stupidity to animals when it is almost always entirely a question of human ignorance.'
'We benefit; the animals suffer the consequences.'
'People don't know what meat is. They don't think of an animal when they use the word meat. (...) We train children from a young age by providing them with picture books about idylic farms where the humans live in harmony with the animals. Children are given McNuggets or fish sticks to eat, which don't look like animals at all. the children are trained to dissociate. (...) The reality of our food must be repressed into our unconscious to allow us to go on eating.'
'Some writers have proposed the idea of an unwritten domestic contract between humans and our domesticated species that includes killing. (...) Are we so blinded by our own needs that we can no longer recognize pure self-interest? A contract cannot be made by one party, and death is not usually the time when your rental agreement expires. (...) How ideal could a place be when its raison d'etre is to kill the occupants?'
'What should we call something that we deliberately choose not to know about? And what do we call it when an entire society takes its path?'
'We must not refuse to see with our eyes what they must endure with their bodies.'
'We disguise what we eat either literally (in packaging) or with euphemisms-pork, not bacon, or sausage, not pig; beef, steak, or hamburger, not cow; mutton, not sheep; venison, not deer; veal, not calf; and perhaps most notoriously, pate de foie gras, not goose liver.'
'It is only when the curtain of denial has been torn aside that we are free to make the choices each of us must make for ourselves.'
During the ongoing COVID19-pandemic and consequent lockdown, I have had time to immerse myself in the world of veganism. It started out as a 30-day challenge, but I got really interested after watching debates on YouTube and reading a paragraph on farming in 'Sapiens', written by Yuval Noah Harari. Consequently, I decided to buy some books as well.
The Face On Your Plate covers many aspects around meat- and dairy-consumption. The book is mainly separated in three topics: namely, the climate, our health, and the ethics of involving animals in our choices. The last one speaks to me the most, since it includes compelling arguments to go or stay vegan (more on my personal journey in a later paragraph). Masson mentions numerous arguments for and against veganism while considering them objectively. To name some examples: getting enough protein, top-of-the-foodchain, meat-eating as a tradition, humans being natural carnivores, and humane ways of slaughter.
Two remaining chapters are included. One is about ‘Denial’, a very philosophical and extensive research into the psychology of our consumption habits. Mainly, Masson asks (and answers) why it is so hard to stop eating meat and how society hides facts with denial and disguisal.
The last chapter covered the writer’s personal journey, and for me it was the weakest part by far. The chapter includes enormous amounts of information on different types of organic, biological, and local food, crammed into short paragraphs. The writer even comes off as being a bit too sentimental in my opinion, and consequently this weakens his earlier statements. For example, he states that it makes him uncomfortable how maple syrup is collected, since it leaves long-lasting wounds on trees. That seems odd considering he earlier finds the plants-have-feelings-as-well argument not to be taken seriously (with which I do agree). I honestly could not care less about trees with wounds; they don’t feel pain. There’s only so much you can do. I would have liked it if this chapter was left out entirely, since it wasn't very relevant. I would have preferred the attention to stay fully focused on meat and dairy consumption.
However, I appreciated the writer’s honesty as well. Masson even says that strictly speaking, he cannot be considered a vegan, and reflects on his behaviour of consuming dairy every so often, mentioning products do not all scream ‘animal harm’ in the same way. In the end, the message is not to become a vegan, but to take a moment and consider where your food comes from. Based on that information you have gathered, the choice of changing your habits is yours only. Even though I didn’t agree with the writer on every topic, I agree with him on this message; more transparency in the media and industries, and thereafter individual consumption remaining a personal choice (although now an unbiased one). For example, reasons to stop eating honey are not compelling to me – since bees do not have central nervous systems, and therefore I don’t believe they can suffer (at least in no way comparable to livestock). The writer, however, finds honey consumption 'robbery' (true, of course), and does not want to be involved, again showing a sentimentality with which I agree to disagree.
I started this book as a vegetarian experimenting with veganism, and I came out of it as a never-going-back vegan. Although I must say, this was greatly enhanced by videos and podcasts brought into the world by Earthling Ed, an animal welfare activist. I can’t believe I previously saw vegans as annoying hippies. I guess this was also why I found the chapter ‘Denial’ so interesting. It’s dishonest to now know veganism is portrayed in the media so one-sidedly. Even more so, the lies that come with advertisements (dairy cows are happily roaming about, and free-range eggs come from happy chickens). Most of all, I can't believe I didn't stop to think about all the processes involved in the meat- and dairy industry. I am shocked by the fact that babies are kept from mother cows, and that you basically can’t drink milk without killing a cow indirectly (since all dairy cows will be sent to slaughterhouse eventually, and their newborn sons awaits the same fate). What makes me uncomfortable too is that we artifically selected and breeded so many animals into existence only for them to suffer endlessly.
I would recommend this book (or to watch videos of Earthling Ed) for anyone who is interested in pyschology, the climate, animal welfare, and your body. Thus, to everyone.
Quotes:
'We can choose to stop eating meat because we feel it is wrong to do so. I don't believe any other animal has this astonishing ability.'
'The question is not: can they reason? Nor: can they talk? But: can they suffer?'
'We are programmed not to question too intensively what society deems essential to its own survival. (...) We must be prepared to perceive something we have been encouraged and accustomed to ignore. (...) Surely one part of becoming an adult is freeing ourselves from the prejuidices instilled in us as children and forming our own views.'
'You cannot get milk without involving the death of an animal, hence meat. (...) We are the only species who drink, as aduls, the milk of another species.'
'Humans seem to take a perverse pleasure in attributing stupidity to animals when it is almost always entirely a question of human ignorance.'
'We benefit; the animals suffer the consequences.'
'People don't know what meat is. They don't think of an animal when they use the word meat. (...) We train children from a young age by providing them with picture books about idylic farms where the humans live in harmony with the animals. Children are given McNuggets or fish sticks to eat, which don't look like animals at all. the children are trained to dissociate. (...) The reality of our food must be repressed into our unconscious to allow us to go on eating.'
'Some writers have proposed the idea of an unwritten domestic contract between humans and our domesticated species that includes killing. (...) Are we so blinded by our own needs that we can no longer recognize pure self-interest? A contract cannot be made by one party, and death is not usually the time when your rental agreement expires. (...) How ideal could a place be when its raison d'etre is to kill the occupants?'
'What should we call something that we deliberately choose not to know about? And what do we call it when an entire society takes its path?'
'We must not refuse to see with our eyes what they must endure with their bodies.'
'We disguise what we eat either literally (in packaging) or with euphemisms-pork, not bacon, or sausage, not pig; beef, steak, or hamburger, not cow; mutton, not sheep; venison, not deer; veal, not calf; and perhaps most notoriously, pate de foie gras, not goose liver.'
'It is only when the curtain of denial has been torn aside that we are free to make the choices each of us must make for ourselves.'
January 6, 2017
Kitabın çok etkileyici bir kapağı var, içeriği de böyle olsaydı keşke. Masson bu kitabı "vegan olduktan" iki yıl sonra yazmış; " vegan olduktan" ifadesini tırnak içinde kullanıyorum çünkü kitap içinde öğreniyoruz ki aslında hayvan eti haricindeki konularda "esnek" davranmaktaymış, örneğin "bal" hayvan sömürüsü içermesine rağmen yazarımızı çok da alakadar etmiyormuş, yediği ürünlerde yumurta ve süt olup olmadığına çok fazla takılmıyormuş vs. Keşke veganlığı konu edinme iddiasında bulunan bir kitap yazmaya karar vermeden önce tutarlı olarak vegan olsaymış ve birkaç sene de mesele üzerine biraz daha netleşseymiş. Çünkü kitabın argümanı net değil, birbirini izleyen paragrafların içerdiği tutarsızlıklar ve konunun sürekli olarak dağılıyor olması yazarın yaşadığı kafa karışıklığını açıkça yansıtıyor. Çoğu bölümün sonu maalesef "mutlu sömürü" teşviğine çıkıyor, birden balıkların "huzur içinde" yetiştirildiği bir yerin övgüsü ya da Whole Foods marketin "şefkatli hayvan ürünleri" reyonları olumlu sözlerle konu edilmeye başlanıyor . Son bölüm ise gerçekten kafa karıştırıcı, mevzu hayvanlarla ilgili bir mesele olmaktan çıkıp glutensiz beslenme, organik tarım ve bunun gibi bir dizi diyet önerisi ile karmakarışık hale geliyor. Hayvanlarla ilgili bir kitapta glutene hayır denirken, bala evet deniyor :S Doğrusu kimseye tavsiye etmem, oldukça fazla kafa karışıklığının söz konusu olduğu hayvan hakları mevzusunda bu kitabın yaptığı şey kafaları daha da fazla karıştırmak.
July 4, 2012
This is a short and sweet introduction to animal rights as it relates to our food choices. Masson was 68 when he wrote this but had only been vegan for a few years, so he is well placed to empathise with the understandable reluctance to embrace such a lifestyle while still promoting it vigorously.
This book's strongest asset is that it has been researched rigourously and is rife with footnotes. Masson is a psychoanalyst by profession, which helps him to evaluate the research responsibly. It also equips him to analyse the complicated process of denial that keeps even the most compassionate of us eating animal products. He explains that this is the same mental reflex that can govern how we respond to and deal with the horror and negligence we read about and even see in our day-to-day lives, not just how we cope with the ways factory farming brings food to the plates of billions.
However, this isn't a heavy book. Masson's style is personal and conversational and he draws on many anecdotes from his own life in addressing vegan nutrition and his own gradual awakening to the damage caused by animal industries. His writing style can occasionally be clumsy in his quest to be affable, but it's a minor irritation compared to the wealth of useful information he presents in an accessible and persuasive fashion.
This book's strongest asset is that it has been researched rigourously and is rife with footnotes. Masson is a psychoanalyst by profession, which helps him to evaluate the research responsibly. It also equips him to analyse the complicated process of denial that keeps even the most compassionate of us eating animal products. He explains that this is the same mental reflex that can govern how we respond to and deal with the horror and negligence we read about and even see in our day-to-day lives, not just how we cope with the ways factory farming brings food to the plates of billions.
However, this isn't a heavy book. Masson's style is personal and conversational and he draws on many anecdotes from his own life in addressing vegan nutrition and his own gradual awakening to the damage caused by animal industries. His writing style can occasionally be clumsy in his quest to be affable, but it's a minor irritation compared to the wealth of useful information he presents in an accessible and persuasive fashion.
July 14, 2009
This book is not too enlightening if you have already read The Omnivore's Dilemma, or any other book that looks at what we eat. While I think the author has a valid lifestyle to promote (I am vegetarian), his argument loses might when he uses overly passionate and borderline inflammatory language to try to win support to his views. The author doesn't seem to get that using that approach will lose more people than win.
June 29, 2024
Great concise primer on factory farming that I wish everyone would read.
January 1, 2021
Amazing. Simply amazing. Masson lays out the facts beautifully and has been able to reaffirm my veganism.
December 10, 2010
A really great book shows us how everything is great and worth to die for
August 4, 2024
A CHALLENGING LOOK AT VEGANISM AND RELATED ISSUES
Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson (born 1941) is a former psychoanalyst, as well as a specialist in animal emotions; he has written many other books such as 'Dogs Never Lie About Love: Reflections on the Emotional World of Dogs,' 'When Elephants Weep: The Emotional Lives of Animals,' 'Against Therapy: Emotional Tyranny and the Myth of Psychological Healing,' etc.
He ponders, "There is something about cows I would like to understand. Chickens and pigs will gladly and easily become companion animals... This is rarely the case with cows. Why?... It baffles me, because if any animal should remain aloof, it is the cat, not the more social cow." (Pg. 86) Later, he adds, "No animal under domestication... leads the life it was designed to lead by nature. All of the changes that humans have managed to create, mainly through selective breeding, are not intended for the benefit of the animal. We benefit; the animals suffer the consequences." (Pg. 99)
He admits, "I call myself a vegan, but really ... I am 'veganish'---or an aspiring vegan or nearly vegan or mostly vegan... Because when I find that something has been made with butter or eggs, even though I would not knowingly order these products, I sometimes let it go. Perhaps I am polite to a host... or in some other situation in which it would strike others are rude to make a fuss. So all I do is shrug. But I would not under any circumstances let it pass and eat the meat.... I have a visceral reaction to meat, but not to butter or cheese or milk chocolate... it is hard to eat a chocolate chip cookie and think 'suffering'..." (Pg. 139-140)
He observes, "no serious scientist suggests that plants feel pain in anything resembling the degree that humans and animals do. They have no central nervous system... We may well be wrong, but so far no serious research has ever been done to suggest otherwise (in spite of the fanciful conclusions of books like 'Secret Life of Plants')... until such time, to compare plant suffering with the suffering of humans and animals seems morally irresponsible." (Pg. 146)
He adds, "I know what some of you are thinking... Vegan, huh? Then how come you need to create a meat look-alike, or a yogurt look-alike, or a cheese look-alike?... it is, I agree, just a tad odd that we make a Tofurkey, soy-based, to resemble the real bird, when what we want to get away from after all is the real bird. Why remind ourselves?... It will disappear, I predict, soon enough. I don't see the great harm." (Pg. 182)
He also addresses a difficult problem: "why so many of the very best scientific studies are unable to show any great advantage for a vegan diet over a vegetarian diet or even one that contains meat... researchers could not find the differences we expected. The problem is that a vegetarian or a vegan can be a junk food addict just as easily as a person who eats only at McDonald's... you can be just as unhealthy as a vegan as you can as somebody who eats meat and pays no attention to his or her health." (Pg. 188-189)
Masson's thought-provoking book deals with a great many issues, and will be of considerable interest to animal lovers, as well as vegetarians and vegans.
Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson (born 1941) is a former psychoanalyst, as well as a specialist in animal emotions; he has written many other books such as 'Dogs Never Lie About Love: Reflections on the Emotional World of Dogs,' 'When Elephants Weep: The Emotional Lives of Animals,' 'Against Therapy: Emotional Tyranny and the Myth of Psychological Healing,' etc.
He ponders, "There is something about cows I would like to understand. Chickens and pigs will gladly and easily become companion animals... This is rarely the case with cows. Why?... It baffles me, because if any animal should remain aloof, it is the cat, not the more social cow." (Pg. 86) Later, he adds, "No animal under domestication... leads the life it was designed to lead by nature. All of the changes that humans have managed to create, mainly through selective breeding, are not intended for the benefit of the animal. We benefit; the animals suffer the consequences." (Pg. 99)
He admits, "I call myself a vegan, but really ... I am 'veganish'---or an aspiring vegan or nearly vegan or mostly vegan... Because when I find that something has been made with butter or eggs, even though I would not knowingly order these products, I sometimes let it go. Perhaps I am polite to a host... or in some other situation in which it would strike others are rude to make a fuss. So all I do is shrug. But I would not under any circumstances let it pass and eat the meat.... I have a visceral reaction to meat, but not to butter or cheese or milk chocolate... it is hard to eat a chocolate chip cookie and think 'suffering'..." (Pg. 139-140)
He observes, "no serious scientist suggests that plants feel pain in anything resembling the degree that humans and animals do. They have no central nervous system... We may well be wrong, but so far no serious research has ever been done to suggest otherwise (in spite of the fanciful conclusions of books like 'Secret Life of Plants')... until such time, to compare plant suffering with the suffering of humans and animals seems morally irresponsible." (Pg. 146)
He adds, "I know what some of you are thinking... Vegan, huh? Then how come you need to create a meat look-alike, or a yogurt look-alike, or a cheese look-alike?... it is, I agree, just a tad odd that we make a Tofurkey, soy-based, to resemble the real bird, when what we want to get away from after all is the real bird. Why remind ourselves?... It will disappear, I predict, soon enough. I don't see the great harm." (Pg. 182)
He also addresses a difficult problem: "why so many of the very best scientific studies are unable to show any great advantage for a vegan diet over a vegetarian diet or even one that contains meat... researchers could not find the differences we expected. The problem is that a vegetarian or a vegan can be a junk food addict just as easily as a person who eats only at McDonald's... you can be just as unhealthy as a vegan as you can as somebody who eats meat and pays no attention to his or her health." (Pg. 188-189)
Masson's thought-provoking book deals with a great many issues, and will be of considerable interest to animal lovers, as well as vegetarians and vegans.
October 27, 2017
This book explores food. Mostly meat. Masson is a vegan and grew up a vegetarian. He states he has never really been fond of meat to begin with. About 95% of this book is about the mistreatment of the animals that we are eating. Masson explores the various discrepancies in animals from the wild to animals raised for consumption. He talks of the different diseases that mass fish farms carry. He also brings up the inhumane treatment of cows and pigs where they are bread to make offspring and slaughtered as soon as they can be.
This book does discuss some of the problems we humans can experience by eating meat. Masson discusses how his mother was a "health nut" so he has always loved salads. The last bit of the book is about his favorite meals and what all they consist of. He is a huge fan of most things tofu.
One point that he made worth noting, if we are trying to go plant-based, why do we make a tofurkey to look like a turkey. The whole point is to get away from the turkey. He emphasizes how we need to stop trying to make a tofu burger taste like a burger. We need to get off meat and be ok with it being different.
This book did not convince me to give up meat. I do however understand that our current practices of mass producing meat is problematic. I think that is part of human nature. We find a good thing and instead of enjoying a little of it every so often we overdo it. Instead of having a chicken and occasionally eating eggs and occasionally frying one up, we have to have lbs and lbs of meat daily.
This book does discuss some of the problems we humans can experience by eating meat. Masson discusses how his mother was a "health nut" so he has always loved salads. The last bit of the book is about his favorite meals and what all they consist of. He is a huge fan of most things tofu.
One point that he made worth noting, if we are trying to go plant-based, why do we make a tofurkey to look like a turkey. The whole point is to get away from the turkey. He emphasizes how we need to stop trying to make a tofu burger taste like a burger. We need to get off meat and be ok with it being different.
This book did not convince me to give up meat. I do however understand that our current practices of mass producing meat is problematic. I think that is part of human nature. We find a good thing and instead of enjoying a little of it every so often we overdo it. Instead of having a chicken and occasionally eating eggs and occasionally frying one up, we have to have lbs and lbs of meat daily.
September 18, 2022
I really wanted to like this more but the smugness of the author left a bad taste in my mouth, like a bad vegetarian meatloaf with the mouthfeel of a birkenstock. This truly does not help combat the stereotype that vegans are fundamentalists. The author says let me give you the facts and you decide, but of course anybody who continues to eat animals or their byproducts must be in a state of denial. Even freud makes a cameo in this ridiculous and haughty argument.
There's one chapter about the damning effects of the industrial meat complex on the environment that is quite compelling, but consists essentially of a laundry list of statistics and figures; erudite, yes; convincing, yes; dry as hell, yes. Then there's the chapter about how animals suffer which ironically is told in a rather mechanical manner- kind of like a slaughterhouse of horrors, one after another.. Finally, we are told how easy it is to eat awesome organic vegan food from a man who clearly does not lack for money and choice.
Here's my modest proposal- instead of giving up meat, why not just give up eating? That would solve pretty much everything- climate change, animal suffering, obesity and heart disease, and free us of the shackles of the immorality of enslaving sentient beings to daily satisfy our hungers. With all the genius out there, surely somebody can design a pill that contains all the required nutrients and a fullness stimulant. Swallow one pill in the morning and one at night, easy peasy. You're welcome.
There's one chapter about the damning effects of the industrial meat complex on the environment that is quite compelling, but consists essentially of a laundry list of statistics and figures; erudite, yes; convincing, yes; dry as hell, yes. Then there's the chapter about how animals suffer which ironically is told in a rather mechanical manner- kind of like a slaughterhouse of horrors, one after another.. Finally, we are told how easy it is to eat awesome organic vegan food from a man who clearly does not lack for money and choice.
Here's my modest proposal- instead of giving up meat, why not just give up eating? That would solve pretty much everything- climate change, animal suffering, obesity and heart disease, and free us of the shackles of the immorality of enslaving sentient beings to daily satisfy our hungers. With all the genius out there, surely somebody can design a pill that contains all the required nutrients and a fullness stimulant. Swallow one pill in the morning and one at night, easy peasy. You're welcome.
November 16, 2018
Authors lack of logic and cherry picking of studies makes this hard read. If the book is intended for already established vegans then fine, but in no way it can help people thinking about changing their eating habits and food choices.
Only more or less valuable part is descriptions of commercial growing methods and some mentioning of meaningful alternatives, but even then it is applicable to California and similar places.
Ideas, like "eat locally and seasonally" sounds wonderful in Australia, but I would like some insights on permaculture and seasonal veggies in my country, where winter has actual snow and growing season is about 4 months a year.
And what about hunting? I can already hear authors rant about that, but when you exterminate all natural predators of, say, deer for human safety reasons and then deer populations are left unchecked, then there will be no forest regrowths, destroyed gardens and alike. Just come to Northern or Eastern Europe and look at this problem.
Not recommended at all.
Only more or less valuable part is descriptions of commercial growing methods and some mentioning of meaningful alternatives, but even then it is applicable to California and similar places.
Ideas, like "eat locally and seasonally" sounds wonderful in Australia, but I would like some insights on permaculture and seasonal veggies in my country, where winter has actual snow and growing season is about 4 months a year.
And what about hunting? I can already hear authors rant about that, but when you exterminate all natural predators of, say, deer for human safety reasons and then deer populations are left unchecked, then there will be no forest regrowths, destroyed gardens and alike. Just come to Northern or Eastern Europe and look at this problem.
Not recommended at all.
July 18, 2018
It is a nice condensed collection of arguments in favor of veganism. There wasn't almost anything I hadn't heard before, but the chapter about denial was very good and eye opener, and overall a very nice read.
Being a vegetarian for over 5 years and adopting veganism everynow and then, a lot of the topics in this book felt like old news and not super exciting, but considering the still high demand for animal products in our society, and the moral and ecological implications it has, it is plain to see that this message needs to get to more people.
I am becoming more vegan than vegetarian, and I tend to read this books not so much for the information, but for motivation to make more of an effort to reduce my impact in animal suffering, and this book, has plenty of that.
Being a vegetarian for over 5 years and adopting veganism everynow and then, a lot of the topics in this book felt like old news and not super exciting, but considering the still high demand for animal products in our society, and the moral and ecological implications it has, it is plain to see that this message needs to get to more people.
I am becoming more vegan than vegetarian, and I tend to read this books not so much for the information, but for motivation to make more of an effort to reduce my impact in animal suffering, and this book, has plenty of that.
April 1, 2021
I found this book so intriguing and well articulated. It makes some really thought provoking points across the many facets of what eating meat means for our own health as well as the health of the environment and the animals we consume. This is achieved without getting too wordy or statistic heavy so it remains accessible throughout.
It is rather short book(with 45 pages of references and 30 of recommended further reading), supported with well researched evidence that sets out to make you aware of what you are consuming and how it affects the planet and its inhabitants. The convincing argument for adopting a vegetarian/vegan diet or at the very least eating A LOT less meat is merely an unavoidable by-product of that knowledge.
It is rather short book(with 45 pages of references and 30 of recommended further reading), supported with well researched evidence that sets out to make you aware of what you are consuming and how it affects the planet and its inhabitants. The convincing argument for adopting a vegetarian/vegan diet or at the very least eating A LOT less meat is merely an unavoidable by-product of that knowledge.
August 2, 2020
I have just recently finished about six months of a vegan experiment and have added animal flesh back into my diet. I probably should have read the book either before the plant based experiment or during it. I didn’t get the grand health benefits that most experience (like my husband) on the plant based diet but reading this book on the morality of eating animals has got me thinking. The author does this in a pretty objective way and interjects his opinions clearly making the distinction clear. I appreciated that he did that. It always surprises me to read about the amount of pollution associated with raising animals for food.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 139 reviews