Food politics

Jonski said:

I was wondering though, what sort of things won't people
eat, for political (not religoius) reasons.

Beans at lunch.

-sw

Jonski <[email hidden]>
:"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

I was wondering though, what sort of things won't people
eat, for political (not religoius) reasons.

Hot, spicy Mexican food before bed.

Michael

--
Deathbed statement...

"Codeine . . . bourbon." ~~Tallulah Bankhead, actress, d.
December 12, 1968

Jonski said:

I was wondering though, what sort of things won't people
eat, for political (not religoius) reasons. I'm not
interested in kosha or halal but more the kind of thing
like not eating foie gras.

Not me. If it stands still long enough I'll eat it, and
if it moves I'll hit it with a stick until it stops,
then eat it.

Except, for some reason, insects. The idea of eating insects
makes me shudder (I know I'm wrong here; honeyed locusts and
witchetty grubs are perfectly good, but I'm shuddering as I
type that!)

--
Tony

I know that asking for clearer definitions has become
something of a joke, but I'm going to do just that. From
your post below, I'm not sure if you're asking what foods
people avoid for political reasons or if you're asking
what's a political reason as opposed to a religious or
health one.

The more I think about this, the more I'm unsure of any of
my motives. I'm positive I avoid salmon for health reasons.
(It gives me a sore throat and makes me breathless.) I'm not
sure exactly why I avoid McDonalds. It doesn't make me feel
too great though I'm sure it wouldn't kill me if I were
starving, and I've been known to eat other foods that aren't
good for me. I don't care for the taste of the burgers
though the fries and shakes are less objectionable. I also
don't like the idea of the giant conglomerate on every
corner though that feeling is as vague as my other reasons.
Does that count as a political food avoidance?

--Lia

Jonski said:

Another poster on this newsgroup won't use lard/fat for
cooking, as it doesn't match their food politics. Fair
enough, I say.

I was wondering, though, what sort of things won't people
eat for political (not religious) reasons. I'm not
interested in kosher or halal but more the kind of thing
like not eating foie gras.

Obviously, there's the vegetarian (lacto-ovo additional) /
vegan thing, but what else is out there?

Does not eating McD's count as food politics? For reason
or just for taste?

Is not eating (say) dog, political, cultural or
something else?

Are vegetarians going to change the world? Meat is
murder, right?

Answers on the back of a postcard please...

Cheers Jon

PS No, I'm not trolling; I _am_ genuinely curious.

Jonski' who isn't trolling he says said:

I was wondering though, what sort of things won't people
eat, for political (not religoius) reasons. I'm not
interested in kosha or halal but more the kind of thing
like not eating foie gras.

Oh, cuz you mean, like, I hate the whimpy unAmerican French
so I won't eat their liverwurst? But you don't care WHY I
don't eat halal? Why for?

But I absolutely love blood pudding and boiled dinners since
Blair put everything on the line to back Uncle Sam n the
Iraq Conflict, right?

Of course, as with all things political, my terms are
subject to change without notice.

Quoted message said:

Are vegetarians going to change the world? Meat is
murder, right?

Certainly they will. No good can come of killing all those
vegetables!

Dog3 said:

Jonski <[email hidden]>
:"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

I was wondering though, what sort of things won't people
eat, for political (not religoius) reasons.

Hot, spicy Mexican food before bed.

Dude, you're missing out on a perfectly good dutch oven.

Can't think of a food I won't eat for political reasons,
hell ANY reason other than I don't care for sweets and
lactose intolerance . . .

and I finally worked up my courage to try the lactose-
intolerant relief pills. Woo-hah, corn chowder here I come.

Marc "lights, brains, anchovies, ACTION" Wolfe

Jonski said:

Another poster on this newsgroup won't use lard/fat for
cooking, as it doesn't match their food politics. Fair
enough, I say.

Rather like some freaking out if eating horse steak is
discussed. The border between politics and other preference
souorces is very uncertain. What's the origin of certain
preferences? Many would not be able to label their
preferences as political.

Quoted message said:

I was wondering though, what sort of things won't people
eat, for political (not religoius) reasons. I'm not
interested in kosha or halal but more the kind of thing
like not eating foie gras.

For me there are both foods I get when I can and foods I
avoid when I can, not just stuff I won't eat.

Quoted message said:

Does not eating McD's count as food politics? For reason
or just for taste?

Depends on why.

Quoted message said:

Is not eating (say) dog political, cultural or
something else?

Exactly. Like horse.

When I can I avoid beef from Brazil. It's an environmental
attempt. But I don't mind Argentinian beef. That nation has
grasslands not rain forests. I view eco-activism as
politically motivated, though others see it in other ways.

When I can I purchase Brazil nuts in preference to other
nuts. Brazil nuts are grown in a rainforest and are produced
by trees. Again it's an environmental attempt.

I avoid wheat, but it's for medical reasons not political
ones. Anything with wheat in it gives me bad indigestion. If
I call it an allergy folks think in terms of shellfish or
peanuts giving me a heart attack so I don't call it that. My
intolerance is milder than that. No matter the indigestion
if there is ever a famine I'll put up with indigestion
rather than starve.

I avoid dog because I was raised in a culture that keeps
dogs as pets, so eating a dog is icky to me. But I think
nothing of eating rabiit. I've known the occasional person
who's kept a rabbit as a pet but they are mostly wild
animals or food/fur animals. Realistically, I view my
refusal to eat dog as politically motivated if I expand what
"political" means widely enough.

I avoided McDonalds for years but I eventually lost
interest in doing that. I did it more for quality reasons
and when to smaller chains with better burgers. Is chosing
better fair a politically motivated decision? Shrug, on the
line depending on how you define politics. It was an
economic activism of sorts.

Far as I can tell said:

I was wondering though, what sort of things won't
people eat

I try hard to never eat fast food. Haven't been in a FF
joint for years except once while traveling and had no
choice but highway food, so I selected Somebody or others
chicken breast sandwich. Tasted like a hockey puck.

Try not doing fast food for several months, then bite
into a burger.

Plan on a very soon trip to the toilet. Blows right
through you.

Jonski <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Are vegetarians going to change the world? Meat is
murder, right?

Them cows, pigs, and chickens had it coming to them, alls
I'm sayin'.

Greg Zywicki

In article <[email hidden]>,

Jonski said:

Another poster on this newsgroup won't use lard/fat for
cooking, as it doesn't match their food politics. Fair
enough, I say.

I was wondering though, what sort of things won't people
eat, for political (not religoius) reasons. I'm not
interested in kosha or halal but more the kind of thing
like not eating foie gras.

Not eating dog, horse, or foie gras is a cultural/animal
rights issue. Not eating at McDonald's or Burger King is a
nutritional/food quality issue, at least for me. Not eating
Domino's pizza is my food politics issue, because the
founder/head honcho holds views and funds causes
diametrically opposed to my views and causes. One can argue
that the franchisee in my neighborhood may be a good Seattle
liberal, but a portion of those profits still go back into
the head honcho's pockets.

Cindy

--
C.J. Fuller

Delete the obvious to email me

Jonski said:

Another poster on this newsgroup won't use lard/fat for
cooking, as it doesn't match their food politics. Fair
enough, I say.

I was wondering though, what sort of things won't people
eat, for political (not religoius) reasons. I'm not
interested in kosha or halal but more the kind of thing
like not eating foie gras.

Obviously, there's the vegetarian (lacto-ovo additional) /
vegan thing, but what else is out there?

Does not eating McD's count as food politics? For reason
or just for taste?

Is not eating (say) dog political, cultural or
something else?

Are vegetarians going to change the world? Meat is
murder, right?

Answers on the back of a postcard please...

Cheers Jon

PS No, I'm not trolling, I _am_ genuinely curious.

I don't *not* eat anything for any political reasons
although I would prefer to have my animal foods raised and
slaughtered more humanely, but I'm not about to give them up
for the cause.

All my likes and dislikes are based purely on taste,
texture, looks, or just plain "sounds disgusting".

Kate
--
Kate Connally “If I were as old as I feel, I’d be dead
already.” Goldfish: “The wholesome snack that smiles back,
Until you bite their heads off.” What if the hokey pokey
really *is* what it's all about? "][email hidden]

Jonski said:

Another poster on this newsgroup won't use lard/fat for
cooking, as it doesn't match their food politics. Fair
enough, I say.

For years, I would not eat Domino's Pizza because of the
owner's politics. Then a few years ago, someone at work
ordered pizza for Domino's for us during a very busy period.
I tried one slice and realized an even better reason not to
eat Domino's pizza is because it tastes lousy.

Jonski <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Another poster on this newsgroup won't use lard/fat for
cooking, as it doesn't match their food politics. Fair
enough, I say.

I was wondering though, what sort of things won't people
eat, for political (not religoius) reasons. I'm not
interested in kosha or halal but more the kind of thing
like not eating foie gras.

Obviously, there's the vegetarian (lacto-ovo additional) /
vegan thing, but what else is out there?

Does not eating McD's count as food politics? For reason
or just for taste?

Is not eating (say) dog political, cultural or
something else?

Are vegetarians going to change the world? Meat is
murder, right?

Answers on the back of a postcard please...

Cheers Jon

PS No, I'm not trolling, I _am_ genuinely curious.

If I had a PETA member invade my home and scream at me about
the virtues of vegetarianism, I would not be thinking "What
a wonderful person who cares so much about animals!" I'd be
thinking "Get out of my living room, you shrieking freak!"
SOme of PETA'S aims are admirable, but I agree with Ralph
Nader on certain points too, and I STILL want to conk him
over the head. I think my reasons for not eating certain
foods is more cultural than political. I refuse to eat any
creature commonly kept as a household pet, as I have had
wonderful cats and dogs all my life, and I'm not about to
eat horses, either. But I'm no vegetarian. Pigs are also
intelligent, appealing creatures but I love porkchops, ham,
sausages and roast pork. I do not have a vegetarian soul,
and tofu does nothing for me. I will eat it say as part of a
Chinese or a Japanese meal well mixed with other things, but
I do not buy it for meals I cook for myself at home.
Insects... Ych!! The idea of eating insects appalls me.
Enjoy your Cicada linguine or chocolate dipped grasshoppers,
but please don't invite me to dinner! Speaking of chocolate,
some of the things about chocolate production give me pause
from a humanitarian point of view, but I still cannot live
without the stuff entirely. I'd rather eat a small quantity
of really GOOD chocolate than a large amont of bad
chocolate, but I've gotta have at least a little bit in some
form at least once a week. I don't eat Domino's pizza both
because I disagree with the political view of the head
cheese, and because of the way they treat their employees.
But mostly, I don't eat it because I try to stay away from
pizza in general.

However, I'm writing this from the perspective of an
American citizen who has never lived more than half an hour
from a grocery store where I can buy pretty much whatever I
want and need, budget allowing. I've never known real hunger--
quite the reverse. Had I grown up in a barrio or a poor
village anywhere in the world, I'd probably be much more broad-
minded about possible food sources.

Soo....After this long-winded discourse, I have to say
politics don't really affect my eating habits, but culture
definitely does.

Melissa

Jonski said:

I was wondering though, what sort of things won't people
eat, for political (not religoius) reasons. I'm not
interested in kosha or halal but more the kind of thing
like not eating foie gras.

I am not going to eat any food which recipe is kept by the
manufacturer in secret.

It is a political reason: I care about the freedom to share
recipes, to make changes in them, to make others improve
the process. If the manufacturer is keeping the recipe in
secret he prevents creativity of other people. He makes
more people working only like machines reproducing his
dish. Humans deserve to be given freedom of creativity. He
prevents his workers sharing knowledge with his friends, as
he probably had them sign an NDA. So he is forcing them to
be less friendly. And finally he stops scientific progress
of mankind.

Unfortunately I do not have too much knowledge which food
is produced by manufacturers having a secret-recipe
policy. Examples are welcome. Cocacola is one thing I
don't drink for this reason (and another reason being that
water with sugar is so much cheaper while having the same
substantial value).

--
Miernik _________________________
xmpp:[email hidden] ___________________/__ tel:
+48888299997 __/ "][email hidden]
miernik.ctnet.plmiernik.ctnet.plOpen ↗

MrAoD said:

and I finally worked up my courage to try the lactose-
intolerant relief pills. Woo-hah, corn chowder here I
come.

Do they work well? I bought them once, they were rather
expensive and you had to take like eight of them or
something. Just curious.

nancy

Greg Zywicki said:

Jonski <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Are vegetarians going to change the world? Meat is
murder, right?

Them cows, pigs, and chickens had it coming to them, alls
I'm sayin'.

You were clearly provoked.

--

-Jeff B. yeff at erols dot com

Cindy Fuller said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Jonski said:

Another poster on this newsgroup won't use lard/fat for
cooking, as it doesn't match their food politics. Fair
enough, I say.

I was wondering though, what sort of things won't people
eat, for political (not religoius) reasons. I'm not
interested in kosha or halal but more the kind of thing
like not eating foie gras.

Not eating dog, horse, or foie gras is a cultural/animal
rights issue. Not eating at McDonald's or Burger King is a
nutritional/food quality issue, at least for me. Not
eating Domino's pizza is my food politics issue, because
the founder/head honcho holds views and funds causes
diametrically opposed to my views and causes. One can
argue that the franchisee in my neighborhood may be a good
Seattle liberal, but a portion of those profits still go
back into the head honcho's pockets.

Cindy

And all your friends who are holding stock in the company.
Like taking money out of their packet, isn't it?

jim

"Tony Walton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Except, for some reason, insects. The idea of eating
insects makes me shudder (I know I'm wrong here; honeyed
locusts and witchetty grubs are perfectly good, but I'm
shuddering as I type that!)

Mopane worms aren't insects, though:

lodges.safari.co.zamopane worms gallery.htmlOpen ↗

;-)

Cindy Fuller wrote:

Not eating Domino's pizza is my food politics

Quoted message said:

issue because the founder/head honcho holds views and
funds causes diametrically opposed to my views and causes.
One can argue that the franchisee in my neighborhood may
be a good Seattle liberal, but a portion of those profits
still go back into the head honcho's pockets.

There's a good explanation of how this is not true at:

snopes.comdomino.aspOpen ↗

Quoting the last paragraph:

"Whatever one might think of Tom Monaghan's selection of
social causes, and no matter how one views the question of
direct versus indirect underwriting of them via pizza
monies, it's all moot now. These days none of the revenues
that flow into Domino's reach this controversial man, so no
portion of what a customer pays for a medium pepperoni-and-
cheese funds the causes he supports."

--Lia