Not to get snippy here, but exactly whose point are you touting - yours, or the engineers behind this movement? (when you say the point of all this was to get the convesation started.)
Is this to what you are referring when you said it was previously stated that this thread's premise was built upon the foundation of simply a "talking point":
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by snowy
It isn't a normal occurrence for a lot of people in the United States, and I think that's one of the reasons for this campaign. I think the general purpose isn't necessarily to designate a certain day to be meatless for everyone, but rather to raise awareness of the consequences of meat consumption, especially meat consumption such as it is in the United States. I think designating a day like Monday with a catchy name like Meatless Monday encourages businesses to get on board more than individual people. Given the difficulty my SO sometimes has finding stuff to eat when we go out (not in our town, but elsewhere) I really welcome any effort to encourage restaurants to put more meatless options on their menus.
|
I doubt this whole 'meatless monday' thing was meant as just an ad awareness sort of thing, and it doesn't go as far as it should if we need to extract deeper meanings and intentions from the facade of this propaganda towards reducing personal meat consumption. It doesn't show good sense to propose one sort of thing as a "titular" for your cause, then have it mean something else altogether, buried deep within the subcontext.
I get it - there is a reason why we, as the consumers need not eat and participate in a dietary-stasis of shoveling meat into our faces on a daily basis; but, as has been previously voiced by a fair number of others here, in the way this was presented, it has failed considerably as a good way to "educate others on the harms of meat production/consumption/regulation and whatever else".
Even as you say, this might just be a small step towards a better tomorrow and better, healthier forms of meat for our personal enjoyment than what is currently available now, I still do not see how, conceivably, having a sparse coupling of groups reducing their intake and buyership of meat products helps the system in any way. Sure, they can easily supplement the proteins, vitamins and calories found in meat for something else, but is this the entire point (whether it be yours, or these meatless mondays guys)? I just really like to get to the root of solving whatever may wrong with things, (in this case, the way various livestock are converted into meats, sold, packaged and bought by the community) though it never really gets to the root of how to solve this: the actual production and distribution process. It's just a glaze-over "solution" if this actually reaches any good portion of our North American population to actually comply to this aim; it never gets anywhere or anything deeper than some huddled masses agreeing not to eat sandwiches or porterhouses every single second day of the week. What good is that?
And whatever you or others may think, trying to bombard consumers with this sort of 'skewed advertisement' for better living projects upon the viewing audience that they are, at least, in some part ignorant of how to take care of themselves, and do not properly know how to eat sensibly. Not all may see this so negatively, but again, as seen previously remarked here, it rubs certain people in a very wrong way at how this whole campaign portrays itself.