I can understand the vegetarian, but not the vegan.
Here's one of those sentences that I often hear around, just yesterday, while I was in the drugstore, I heard two people talking about a different diet than theirs, with a speech futile enough not to come to any sensible conclusion.
Same thing happens about vegetarians:
I don't understand them.
I assume that everyone is free to think what like more and if they don't understand something it's their problem not fault of the one who conceived it.
Personally I understand them both, who like the vegetarian has decided to abandon meat for health reasons or because they believes it's better to avoid it for different reasons. Those who, like vegans, leave the animal world alone to avoid their exploitation in all its forms.
I am neither one nor the other, but I envy them for their choices. It has crossed my mind several times that I don't eat meat anymore, I have been eating only white meat for a long time and with an average of twice a year I eat red meat.
By that I don't mean that what I'm doing is right or wrong for my health, but with regard to the health of animals, often mistreated and forced to live in precarious conditions, I'm pretty sure that what I'm doing is wrong.
We live in an era where you could easily replace meat, eating something else, but our tradition is so instilled in our minds that it's really hard to change habits. I'm referring, of course, to the "developed" countries that have so many alternatives at their disposal.
I'm jealous of those who have made a decision, from my point of view, so radical. In doing so, they do not feed cruelty to animals, which are innocent and unaware creatures.
I have to admit that I also understand who eats them, the taste they have can sometimes is sublime, so much depends on a person's cultural background, level of education received and life experiences.
Some people on the contrary manage to make me smile, they don't eat meat but fish, as if that wasn't meat too. But here we are moving towards a completely different speech, which is only ignorance's fault.
Another thing I've never understood is why some species are considered acceptable by some societies to eat while others don't.
I don't feel like condemning any of them, often the war between these two different currents of thought arises, which seems to me to be very exaggerated, the extremes are often negative and very rarely lead to constructive solutions.
You instead? What do you think? What are the pros and cons of these two forms of thought in your opinion? Do you take one side rather than another, or do you prefer to remain impartial?