Discrimination and bias in the vegan ideal

Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 7 (1):19-28 (1994)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The vegan ideal is entailed by arguments for ethical veganism based on traditional moral theory (rights and/or utilitarianism) extended to animals. The most ideal lifestyle would abjure the use of animals or their products for food since animals suffer and have rights not to be killed. The ideal is discriminatory because the arguments presuppose a male physiological norm that gives a privileged position to adult, middle-class males living in industrialized countries. Women, children, the aged, and others have substantially different nutritional requirements and would bear a greater burden on vegetarian and vegan diets with respect to health and economic risks, than do these males. The poor and many persons in Third World nations live in circumstances that make the obligatory adoption of such diets, where they are not already a matter of sheer necessity, even more risky.Traditional moral theorists (such as Evelyn Pluhar and Gary Varner whose essays appear in this issue) argue that those who are at risk would beexcused from a duty to attain the virtue associated with ethical vegan lifestyles. The routine excuse of nearly everyone in the world besides adult, middle-class males in industrialized countries suggests bias in the perspective from which traditional arguments for animal rights and (utilitarian) animal welfare are formulated.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 89,654

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Food fight! Davis versus Regan on the ethics of eating beef.Andy Lamey - 2007 - Journal of Social Philosophy 38 (2):331–348.
Rejoinder to Kathryn paxton George.Gary E. Varner - 1994 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 7 (1):83-86.
Vegan diets for women, infants, and children.Ann Reed Mangels & Suzanne Havala - 1994 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 7 (1):111-122.
Use and abuse revisited: Response to Pluhar and Varner. [REVIEW]Kathryn Paxton George - 1994 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 7 (1):41-76.
The use and abuse of scientific studies.Kathryn Paxton George - 1992 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 5 (2):217-233.
So animal a human ..., Or the moral relevance of being an omnivore.Kathryn Paxton George - 1990 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 3 (2):172-186.
In defense of the vegan ideal: Rhetoric and bias in the nutrition literature. [REVIEW]Gary Varner - 1994 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 7 (1):29-40.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
333 (#53,243)

6 months
10 (#133,559)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Animal Liberation.Peter Singer (ed.) - 1977 - Avon Books.
The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan - 2023 - University of California Press.
The case for animal rights.Tom Regan - 2009 - In Steven M. Cahn (ed.), Noûs. Oxford University Press. pp. 425-434.
Animal Liberation.Bill Puka & Peter Singer - 1977 - Philosophical Review 86 (4):557.

View all 13 references / Add more references