“Meatless meals and masculinity” is an article written by Mari Mycek, a doctoral candidate and teaching assistant in a sociology department, as a warning that vegan and vegetarian men have reclaimed their “previously-stigmatized consumption identity” to wield power over women by framing their lifestyle as a rational, rather than emotional, choice.
The dirty bastards!
You see, it is truth universally accepted (which doesn’t mean it is true) among women that white male vegans don’t even test positive for testosterone – a matter that reduces their attraction for, and power over, women.
Somehow, these frustrated white males have re-framed their love of lettuce as a rational thought-out deeply considered scientific choice done for the best of reasons, and this is deceiving women who only find out later that their first instincts were right on the money.
Though some scholars claim that eating meat causes “toxic masculinity,” Mycek came to a different conclusion based on interviews with 20 vegan men, asserting that they actually tend to “uphold gendered binaries of emotion/rationality and current ideas of middle-class, white masculinity.”
In other words, Mycek argues, white vegan men use their diet to bolster their image of masculinity “by explaining their choice to become vegan in ways that evoke logics of rationality, science, and reason; concepts that traditionally get coded as masculine.”
You might think that Ms Mycek needs to remove her head from her lower colon but you see Ms Mycek is a sociologist.
She was probably desperate to publish and knew which kinds of articles got a free pass in sociology journals these days. You don’t get a B.S or M.S in the social “sciences” for good reason, so it is doubtful she consulted a statistician. You usually need at least 100 subjects (or more) in each group to have any kind of statistical power at all in studies like this.
Mycek explains veganism is a symbol these horny but luckless men use as “a form of cultural capital and a symbolic resource, a way to align oneself with those who have the privilege of choice when it comes to food decisions.”
In plainer language – by trumpeting their veganism they are slyly informing their possible women victims that they are in that class that don’t have to go to Maccas, they have money as well as loving and caring for animals.
It seems all the guys who took part in the study cite scientific sounding environmental issues rather than feminine reasons like values or opinions. That’s what tricks the ladies into thinking the vegans are real men in spite of their strange love of raw turnips mixed with lucerne.
To illustrate this novel way to catch a chick, Mycek cites the story of how one of her interviewees, Hector, became vegetarian.
“There’s this book that made a lot of sense to me. It was written by this guy who is actually a molecular biologist. What he says makes a lot of sense,” Hector told Mycek. Mycek then explains to us that Hector’s comments are evidence of how men value science over emotion – and that fools the girls.
MM has a large proportion of clever women among its readers to judge from their comments but women and men are all frail and lower our guards when romance is in the air, and we run this story as a warning to them not to be taken in by these cunning white male vegans.
George Orwell had something to say on the uncanny nature of committed socialists:
“In addition to this there is the horrible–the really disquieting–prevalence of cranks wherever Socialists are gathered together.
One sometimes gets the impression that the mere words ‘Socialism’ and ‘Communism’ draw towards them with magnetic force every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, ‘Nature Cure’ quack, pacifist, and feminist in England.
One day this summer I was riding through Letchworth when the bus stopped and two dreadful-looking old men got on to it.
They were both about sixty, both very short, pink, and chubby, and both hatless. One of them was obscenely bald, the other had long grey hair bobbed in the Lloyd George style.
They were dressed in pistachio-coloured shirts and khaki shorts into which their huge bottoms were crammed so tightly that you could study every dimple. Their appearance created a mild stir of horror on top of the bus. The man next to me, a commercial traveller I should say, glanced at me, at them, and back again at me, and murmured ‘Socialists’, as who should say, ‘Red Indians’.
He was probably right–the I.L.P. were holding their summer school at Letchworth.
But the point is that to him, as an ordinary man, a crank meant a Socialist and a Socialist meant a crank.
Any Socialist, he probably felt, could be counted on to have something eccentric about him. And some such notion seems to exist even among Socialists themselves.
For instance, I have here a prospectus from another summer school which states its terms per week and then asks me to say ‘whether my diet is ordinary or vegetarian’. They take it for granted, you see, that it is necessary to ask this question. This kind of thing is by itself sufficient to alienate plenty of decent people. And their instinct is perfectly sound, for the food-crank is by definition a person willing to cut himself off from human society in hopes of adding five years on to the life of his carcase; that is, a person out of touch with common humanity.”