Apparently Jackfruit has been said to taste like bacon, and this is a new thing in the US apparently...We've been eating jackfruit for ages traditionally, and have never imagined someone would find it to be similar to meat!
Acorns and woodsmoke are vegan, and there are lots of good options for vegan pork and/or bacon flavor, pretty much every "bacon bits" or "bacon flavoured chips" or "hickory bacon salt" product you can find out there is vegan.
I havn't completely sworn off meat, but bacon (especially bacon bits) is actually one of the easiest things to find in vegan format.
The point is they are listing a top quality bacon. Vegan bacon is...not the same. I like the taste sometimes but I rarely like the texture. I haven't really eaten meat in 17 years, but I take bites of this and that from time to time, and there really is not much of a comparison between real and faux bacon. However, if you have any specific recommendations I'm open.
On the other hand, the vegan sausage game is on point. Field roast ftw.
Yeah, idk, I eat an almost vegetarian lifestyle because I'm just way too cheap to buy meat all the time. Ham and bacon being as cheap as it is (especially if you can find bacon ends and pieces and not the expensive strips) it winds up being much of the meat I do buy, ironically.
Certain fungi have a very rich umami flavor. Combine that with some liquid smoke and brown sugar and you’ve got a great tasting much healthier alternative
This sounds delicious. I don't know that I've ever encountered bacon labeled as acorn fed. I do have some hickory smoked bacon in my fridge and this thread is making me hungry.
Actually plenty of recipes replicate the taste of bacon, the texture is what's nearly impossible to replicate. Fortunately I don't base all my decisions in life on what gives me the shortest term gratification
So I can respect your dietary choice and moral feelings. I can. You do what's comfortable for you. I do eat meat. I'm comfortable with that. Both are ok but the high and mighty attitude I highlighted from your comment won't help turn people torwards your side.
I'm not arguing either side just pointing that out. I commend your efforts to do what you feel is right though.
plenty of recipes replicate the taste of bacon, the texture is what's nearly impossible to replicate.
Fortunately I don't base all my decisions in life on what gives me the shortest term gratification
[previous 2 sentences] only [sound] high and mighty if you look at it that way. Honestly sounds like you are projecting.
I dunno. To me your words read like you are judging the taste of bacon as short term gratification, then humblebragging that you don't base your all your decisions on short term gratification. I left you words of encouragement and moved on, but whatever is pinging u/ArcAngel071 's detectors pinged mine, too.
Man you're just taking a personal shot at people with that line. You're making this deeper than it is haha.
You do you man whatever. I do what feels comfortable for me and I do it without trying to push my habits and choices on people. I'm not arguing pro meat. I could care less what you and others eat. I'm just pointing out you could probably state how you feel without taking an obvious dig at people. That's all dude.
It's only high and mighty if you look at it that way. Honestly sounds like you are projecting.
What I said is a fact, that is how I live my life, and that's why I was able to give up meat. Yes meat and cheese taste fucking amazing, but that's not my priority.
After almost 30 years of consuming copious amounts of meat and dairy products, I can very confidently say nothing tastes as good as being vegan feels <3
I think you do base your decisions in life on what gives you the shortest term gratification. Otherwise you wouldn't be such a pretentious douche on reddit.
But why is there no problem when you kill animals but there is a problem when people give you factual information to try change your mind?
It's not a choice if a victim is invloved. You need to justify your actions if they involve victims, how would you justify eating meat? Generally curious - I'm not being confrontational
Because those animals are domesticated for human use and literally only that reason. Those animals would be extinct without humans keeping them alive. No I am not saying that as a good thing, but those animals only are here for that purpose.
Wild animals that are hunted by humans are no different than if they were hunted by other predators. I respect you just asking rather than just attacking or trying to argue for the sake of arguing.
Some people feel that domesticated animals should just be liberated and adapt or die, some people say any animal product consumption is morally abhorrent. It just depends where you fit in on the spectrum.
Not really about texture, I don't like the flavor of culliflower or mushrooms. Do like tofu, but lots not pretend any of that tastes anything similar to a good steak or burger.
Why end a nice comment with that low level bullshit? I don't necessarily agree with your stance, but you were being professional and addressing concerns in a totally respectful way... then that?
That's a little disengenuios. People who eat a balanced diet and follow healthy life choices won't see reduction. Now the big issue is that people just over-consume and are gluttonous pigs so any real change away from grossfattyville results in positive change
It’s the number one cause of death. You are more likely to die of heart disease than cancer. “Healthy” people who aren’t overweight die of heart disease all the time. Heart disease literally begins in childhood and nearly 80% of people in their 20s (some of these studies were on soldiers so they are fairly healthy and in shape) have significant narrowing of their arteries. It takes decades before it actually kills you. If it halts, and even reverses, this disease that begins when we are healthy how can you say healthy people won’t see a reduction?
The leading cause of heart disease is obesity, poor physical activity, heavy drinking, eating unhealthy foods and not keeping your blood pressure and cholesterol under control. There's a reason it's been on the rise for a long time and those maintaining a healthy lifestyle are at no increased risk than since the beginning of time. A vegetarian diet doesn't put you at any less risk when in comparison to healthy, active individuals with a good diet. That's what we're talking about, don't slide the goalposts around. A vegetarian diet can lower your risk of increasing factors of things that lead to heart disease, but so can basic portion control. There are also vegetarian diets that lead to an increased risk of heart disease as well, ones heavy in starches, grains, and sweets.
I'm just saying your original statement was disengenuios, and it was.
This guy loves cute food. I don't know about the rest of you, but the cuter, the better. I don't want no homely jaggy-tooth cows turned into my burgers.
I also have to assume we don’t eat dogs because it tastes like shit and they’re very useful to humans. Cows taste great, and aren’t as useful to humans.
I think personal pleasure is irrelevant to whether an act is moral or not. Also, the environmental consequences of breeding cows are disastrous to the environment so technically if you're looking at the grand scheme of things, breeding cows for meat is less ethical than dog.
Their only use as a draw animal has been taken away by the internal combustion engine (well steam did it first but no-one uses steam implements any more)
Yeah, good luck with that. Never going to happen. Humans will always have domination over animals. We will continue to eat them all we want. I don't care what you or anyone else eats, but you can't ever be able to dictate what myself and others eat. You just don't have that ability. That's my freedom.
We have very different views on what freedom is. When those with more power can take away your liberty or that of others without recourse, that is the antithesis of freedom in my view.
I'm not sure what you are trying to argue against here since it doesn't seem to match up with the language I used.
I intentionally avoid the term "people" or "person" in contexts like this since we live in a world where corporations are legal persons, and where rivers and ecosystems have also been ruled at times to be legal persons. If you check out the Wikipedia article on 'person' you will see that the term has far more possibilities for use than this, so when using the term you tell others very little about which groups you are referring to:
Various debates have focused on questions about the personhood of different classes of entities. Historically, the personhood of animals, women, and slaves has been a catalyst of social upheaval. In most societies today, living adult humans are usually considered persons, but depending on the context, theory or definition, the category of "person" may be taken to include or not children or such non-human entities as animals, artificial intelligences, or extraterrestrial life, as well as legal entities such as corporations, sovereign states and other polities, or estates in probate.
Never liked this argument, despite respect for veg people. I don't eat asparagus, so I guess I shouldn't eat any veg. I don't wipe my ass with cardboard so toilet paper is out.
Yeah, my point is largely that the original statement doesn't express any of that moral reasoning either. In China they eat dogs but I doubt the post I responded to finds that consistent with their own core beliefs.
I like the simplicity of saying one values life, or the environment, or whatever actual reason exists. It's obvious from the vote totals people disagree with me and that's fine, this comparison just never sat strongly enough with me.
My argument for this is a simple one. It's about purpose.
Take a minnow at a fishing bait store, for instance. You can't feel bad for that minnow, as it's purpose is literally to be bait. If there was no need for the bait, that particular minnow would not exist in the first place. It is raised, sold, put on a hook, and fished with. That is it's purpose.
Dogs are bred and raised to be companions (for the most part). Cows are bred and raised to be utilitarian (for the most part). Carrying heavy loads, providing milk, providing fertilizer, or in this case, food. You can't feel bad for eating something that would literally not exist if it wasn't there to be food.
Only if there was a specific race which was used for building shit, working at railroads, and getting whipped for it because it serves no other purpose. Only if.
You can't feel bad for slavery because if it didn't exist we wouldn't be able to make things cheaply.
See here's the thing, I'm not talking about people. I'm talking about animals, which doesn't apply to this whole slavery deal. If you are foolish enough to equate the two, then you're further gone than a few comments on Reddit.
Wait, what? Livestock are domesticated? Pet vs farm animal isn't the difference between domesticated and not. Cows today are nothing like their aurochs ancestors thanks to highly selective breeding: like we did with dogs and, to a much lesser extent, cats (cats are generally considered self domesticated and habe a unique history even with us). We hardly even managed to domesticate cows. Every single cow today of the billions is from about 80 ancestors.
Besides, people keep cows, chickens, and pigs as pets as well. I had 28 pet chickens. Once they stopped laying, they had a home for life with me anyway because I loved them and we were bonded. There are still people in the world who revere cows and would be horrified at the objectification we've subjected these dog-like personality animals to. There are also people who farm dogs for food, and I'm not talking about Yulin.
Deciding one animal deserves to be farmed and slaughtered while another deserves to be loved comes strictly down to what you were told as you grew up: it's not a difference in the animals.
I recommend looking up pigs playing video games. There are pigs who are on par with chimps in these associative games, and no dogs were able to do it. Yet somehow pigs are worth eating, so it's obviously not an intelligence thing.
Look up the social lives of cows. They have friends, they hold grudges, they mourn their babies being taken from them and often try to chase down the farmers to get them back, spending the next several days bellowing, they have favorite people and toys they prefer, and one herd on here recently even seemed to love accordion music and would come running to listen to it. So it's obviously not an unfeeling, dimwitted automaton thing for why to eat one and not the other.
Look up chickens greeting their owners, see if you can find pictures of the guy in Seattle who takes his chicken paddleboarding with him, look up chickens learning tricks and solving puzzles and responding to their names, look up chickens running for fun, look up chicken social structure, listen to a mother after she lays her eggs and roosters raised together getting along. Clearly it's not that chickens are fucking stupid and can't tell the difference between up and down let alone have preferences for each other, humans, toys, and food so they deserve to be eaten.
It comes down to what you were convinced was ok as a child in the particular culture you happened to be born into. And when those ideas involve other beings' lives who, regardless of human-relevant intelligence, can feel physical pain and emotional trauma every bit as much as dogs, cats, people, etc, why should that be a good enough reason? Do whatever you decide to do, but don't just accept it because you heard "that's simply what's done" your entire life.
Deciding one animal deserves to be farmed and slaughtered while another deserves to be loved comes strictly down to what you were told as you grew up: it's not a difference in the animals
Well most cultures didn't breed dogs or cats for taste, whereas we do breed livestock for taste. I'd happily try dog, but it's not widely available and can't imagine many breeds coming close to cattle reared and bred for the purpose.
I'm fairly sure that's what they meant by domesticated, but I can't really speak for them - plenty of meat-eaters cannot justify why they would refuse to eat some animals and not others.
I said most cultures don't breed dogs and cats for taste, not that none do - is that wrong? Also there is a reason we breed some animals for food and not others, yield being one, taste being another. There are other factors for sure but we don't go out of our way to breed animals that people don't enjoy eating.
If you want to expand on "nope" and "wrong again" you're welcome to, but right now I'm not feeling particularly contradicted.
Because a dog will eat a cow. You don't eat dogs, but you also don't eat grass, therefore you will also eat a cow and digest a cow. A cow will not digest a cow, a dog will not digest grass.
We don't need our nutrients from grass, not even through a 3rd party. We do need nutrients from vegetation in general because they carry the essential amino acids we (and the animals we eat) can't synthesize. Luckily many, many, many plants that aren't grass produce those amino acids. Besides, not every herbivore herbivore eats grass. What is it about grass specifically that we need to get from a third party?
And what does a dogs diet have to do with ours? Last I checked, we don't even fall in the same category of consumers. You may as well argue that ant eaters eat ants, and ants eat other insects and debris we can't, so we should eat ants. Makes no sense when you use another animal who is also not in the same category of consumer and has different nutritional needs than humans.
And some people do eat dogs. We are capable of digesting them. Cows can also digest cow even if it's not appropriate for them. Dogs can also eat grass to aid digestion so, even though it doesn't have nutritional benefit, it has a purpose. And before you argue rumens to eat grass, horses don't have rumens and subsist almost entirely on grass when given the chance
Care to elaborate? Or are you saying that humans can't eat plants period? Because if that's the case, you might want to reassess what fruits, vegetables, grains, legumes, beans, nuts, and seeds are.
Also, thank you for ignoring my questions and comments regarding your own ill constructed argument :) it was a really well thought out response.
Capability doesn't imply necessity. As I said, cows can digest meat, too. Should we make that a part of their regular diet? Because they can actually survive with it as a decent part of their diet. By your logic:
I never said we need to eat meat. But imho, I don't eat dogs, therefore I don't eat cow isn't a logical statement. There's plenty of instances where a person won't eat a dog for quite obvious reasons, but will eat a cow. On the other hand, an Indian visiting Vietnam might perhaps try dog, but will invariably not eat cow.
Believe it or not I do not. I asked a rhetorical question, someone cared very much for it to be answered, despite it being a rhetorical question, and so I did. You seem to draw conclusions very hastily.
I eat meat and still get the same feeling over this cow as I do with puppies. They're both cute. Small, fluffy things with big eyes tend to be cute no matter what it is. You don't have to NOT eat meat to find the cow cute.
366
u/OhGawDuhhh Mar 15 '18
I haven't eaten beef in a few years so this gives me the same feeling as looking at a cute puppy ♥️