Sunday, December 9, 2012

Essay 2


Stephanie Cruz

J. Hutchman

Lang 120-007

10 October 2012

Physical, Eudaemonic, and Spiritual Well-Being

            Epiphanies, sudden realizations, come to those who meditate on a belief which is questioned repeatedly. In many cases, the previous decision is then turned into a life choice which can grow and develop. Vegans and vegetarians choose to abstain from consuming animal products, and more often than not they have a genuine reason for doing so. Not only did they have an experience which was then brought up again in order to make the change; but when they did become a vegan or vegetarian they were also more knowledgeable about the choice they had made. In the article “‘What Pushed Me Over the Edge Was a Deer Hunter’: Being Vegan in North America,” Christopher A. Hirschler extrapolates these concepts and facts about vegans and vegetarians, suggesting that they have a personal devotion to learning about health factors, saving the animals, and connecting with other people who feel the same way they do. Hirschler’s article supports the vegan community in their reasoning for abstaining from animal byproducts and extrapolates their point of view of living in a world in which they are attempting to contribute to positive actions.

            Hirschler argues that the vegans and vegetarians desire to improve the world they live in,
regardless of the odds which are often against them. In his opening paragraph he writes, “Vegans tend to embrace the philosophy of ahimsa, a Sanskrit word representing a concept of dynamic harmlessness, which guides them not only to do the least harm, but to do the most good” (Hirschler 1). In one way, Hirschler is expanding on the idea of veganism being universal and cultural. Also, he clearly uses the word “philosophy” which demonstrates that the vegans and vegetarians are taking into consideration knowledge and understanding of their choices. The philosophy of ahimsa itself sums up everything that he vegans and vegetarians stand for. They do not want to contribute to the harm, but they also want to do everything they can to impact the world and turn it around.

 
            Since the vegans and vegetarians are not the norm in modern society, they must push their
argument further if they want to make a difference and go through life changing experiences in every
aspect of their identity.


 In the article Hirchschler writes, “Veganism as a dietary practice is rare among those living

in developed countries. In the United States about 1 percent of adults are vegan (Vegetarian

Journal, 2009), and 2 percent of youth between the ages of 8 and 18 are vegan (Stahler, 2010)

. A Vegan Research Panel (2003) survey of 1,249 vegans found the main reasons for becoming

vegan were ethical/moral (82 percent), dietary/health (14 percent), and spiritual/religious (2 percent).

 Distaste for nonhuman animal flesh or products and a preference for the taste of vegetarian foods

were also a factor (Larsson, Ronnlund, Johansson, & Dahlgren, 2003)” (1).

 

Hirschler uses the word “rare” to describe the practices, and undoubtedly the statistics are minor. Though the numbers are small, the vegans and vegetarians change their overall life and therefore make that much more of an impact by being part of the one or two percent. They change their ethics, and their diet, they may be conforming to a religion, or may display pure disgust for meat. In any of these cases, there is a great impact for each person who makes the lifestyle change.

            One of the major challenges the vegans and vegetarians must make is standing up against the
quota of society with a new personal way of life and having to defend why the change even occurred.


Hirschler explains the experiences which lead to veganism or vegetarianism by writing, “Some

  individuals, upon learning about cruelty, repressed that knowledge until some later event triggered

memories of the initial catalytic experience. Repression delayed becoming oriented. Following a catalytic

experience, those who did not repress became oriented. This meant they intended to learn more and/or

make a decision about becoming vegetarian or vegan. Learning involved discovering information about

animal cruelty and acquiring the necessary knowledge to transition to a vegan or vegetarian diet” (2).

 

The beliefs of each vegan or vegetarian, whether they are able to suppress the memory or not, still reflects who they are, and yet their entire life changes when they follow this decision. Hirschler greatly mentions the knowledge which immediately follows the choice, which adds more credibility to the thorough contemplation of the vegans and vegetarians, which is a sign of growth in it of itself.

           

            The most direct experience of judgement for the lifestyle change of a vegan or vegetarian comes from his or her own household. Naturally, the family has preconceived how the person is or lives and when they undergo a development stage, their families are more inclined to change him or her. For the vegan or vegetarian, this will be a more difficult challenge than random people questioning their choice because they know their family. The experience of one vegetarian is mentioned in the article when Hirschler writes, “Rob, 50, a social worker who adopted a vegetarian diet at 22, recalled sitting down for a chicken dinner as a child and thinking, ‘It’s a pile of bones. Oh my God—it’s like bones! Everybody is gnawing on bones!’ Although he felt an impulse to become vegetarian, he, like many others, did not receive thesupport of his family. He repressed his thoughts about meat, and this acted to delay the onset of change” (Hirschler 5). Even at the age of 22, Rob is still influenced by the experience of his past, but more importantly since he is on his own and is not dependent on his family for his lifestyle choices, he can fully devote himself to vegetarianism. Rob’s own struggle with the acceptance of both his family and the choice he wanted to make for himself extrapolates what vegans and vegetarians face all of the time. There may not always be defenses against the outside world, and since there is a defiance against the family, the identity of the person is also compromised since the family molds who the person is for the first part of their life.


            The explanation of the changes, developments, and epiphanies the vegans and vegetarians
experience serve to evoke thought in the audience. Within the work, Hirschler presents the audience as being people who are critical and unsympathetic towards vegetarians and vegans. In order to aid their understanding, he provides experiences of vegans and vegetarians, and does not base the article solely on facts. Hirschler illustrates the harsh reality for the vegans and vegetarians when he writes, “The vegans nterviewed had quickly understood that their diet was a source of conflict; learning how to present themselves and their developing ideas in a manner that fostered the development of enjoyable relationships was a challenge. In terms of social challenges, family members were the most frequently cited group (among friends, coworkers, significant others, and acquaintances) and presented the most intractable problems” (7). He wants the audience to know that vegans and vegetarians not only struggle with battles of their own morals, but they must worry about what their families will think about their decisions.  Hirschler can allow apathy to occur within his audience because they can appreciate having a conflict of keeping to their own beliefs, while still wanting to hold on to the people they love. As long as there is a new understanding among the readers, Hirschler’s goal is being accomplished. They do not have to become vegans or vegetarians, but they can at least lower their defenses against that lifestyle choice.
 

The hope and compassion which Hirschler attempts to establish within his audience is reflected through the motivation of his words. The underlying message in the writing is presented when Hirschler writes, “In their actions and the acts of other activists they saw the promise of a better future, yet their altered view of those who continue to use products derived from animals sometimes led to disappointment. They understood, however, that they had once consumed animal products and attempted to be understanding” (9). The bright ideology of the vegans and vegetarians are represented through words such as “promise” and “better”. Hirschler is using a encouraging voice and tone so the audience can repeatedly soak up the positivity that the vegans and vegetarians see for the future. For a brief moment, there is some doubt which Hirschler establishes when using “sometimes” within the sentence. There is no definite sound of defeat because immediately afterward, the positivity beams back in again. The overall argument of a new acceptance between meat eaters and vegans/vegetarians is universal because Hirschler uses the work “understanding” twice. The main message is understanding, and is salient so the audience cannot overlook the solution of the situation.

           

            As people, the vegans and vegetarians are the movement of the future, and the way in which
Hirschler presents the article he never allows his audience to forget it. He begins by explaining veganism and the general reasoning of the traumatic experience which vegans and vegetarians go through. Then Hirshcler explains why certain results came back the way they did and more importantly their overall significance in the article. In the opening statistic eighty-two percent of vegans had made the choice because of the ethics. One of the women described in the article was named Rose watched an animal rights video which emotionally connected with her (6).  Hirschler uses the statistics to support his credibility and yet right after he goes back into the experiences and interviews of the vegans and vegetarians. He never ceases to remind his audience that the vegan’s and vegetarian’s cause is not about the numbers but the actual impact they make. Also the audience s able to empathize when they hear horrific life stories; and through pathos there is an overall understanding which Hirschler wants to achieve on both sides of the argument.

 

The goals which Hirschler has established are very relevant and credible based upon the source of his publications and also the time in which he was writing. This particular work was published in the Society & Animals: Journal of Human-Animal Studies in 2011. Considering the fact that the topic is recent, there is an indication that there are vegans and vegetarians in the world, but that their mission to gain understanding also remains. The fight for acceptance is still there, but it comes from an individual who can be accounted for. Hirschler’s credibility is stable because he is being published in an actual journal about human and animal studies. He is not some random person writing in a family magazine or the newspaper, but someone who is published in an educational journal. The combination of his own understanding and relevance are enough to provide the audience with an assurance that Hirschler is a credible writer whose argument is also modern.

 

            Hirschler’s position presents the vegans and vegetarians in a neutral light, but with a cause. They are peacemakers who also want people to understand the impact of their choices. Every person can make a difference whether they stop eating meat, slow down, or are not so quick to convert a vegan or vegetarian back. There is no vicious demeanor on either side of the argument. Hirschler also makes an effort to have the audience recognize why vegans do make such a drastic lifestyle choice and that they still have work to do before, after, and during the decision. They create a solution in the present to improve the world and only want that ideology to continue throughout.

 


 

Work Cited

 

Hirschler, Christopher A. “ What Pushed Me Over The Edge Was A Deer Hunter’: Being Vegan In
 
North America.” Society & Animals: Journal Of Human-Animal Studies 19.2 (2011): 156-174.
 
PsycINFO. Web. 12 Oct. 2012.

 

No comments:

Post a Comment