Who are all these people able to have such 'choice' over what they eat? I find it laughable to take any sort of moral stance over diet...which, for me, has been the most contingent act, predicated almost entirely on a range of conditions out of my hands to change. Time, money, knowledge, the rest of the world...including dependents, access...have dictated my diet to be a mish-mash of what I can afford, can acquire for free, can cook...in the time I have available...and so, over a lifetime, I have embraced various 'ethical' positions (such as the laughable period of insane lurchers when I fondly imagined a diet based on 'wild meat'), have fallen prey to guilt (ensuring I shopped at the expensive wholefoods emporium...and as with many of these decisions, poverty has definitely been involved in the 'purity' of my stance...and I have always been a bit lacking in the willpower dept so once falling off the wagon, it was easy to wallow in the gutter. And although I have only been saved from ready-meals by greed and money, I had a Cannery Row moment when 2 of my children were still too young to complain...which consisted of strewing edibles onto a tarp on the floor...because who can spend hours arsing about when toast counts as cooking.However, the single biggest decider (for me, as the reluctant household cook) has been the picky choices, imaginary complaints from the hypochondriacs (several of them). I will, I admit, cook any number of sausages just to pander to the lowest common denominator. I am too exhausted to have any moral position at all and wish a hungry pill was available.
I find the weird foodie thing a bit...decadent and sort of narcissistic...while fully appreciating the politics of food. It's a fine balance, imo.
