The Pennsylvania State University the Graduate School College Of

Home , Family Guy (season 6), History of vegetarianism, McStroke, Order of the Golden Age, Sociology of food, The Meat Eaters

The Pennsylvania State University

The Graduate School

College of Agricultural Sciences

VEGETARIANISM IN A MEAT LANDSCAPE

A CASE STUDY OF VEGETARIANS IN LA PLATA, ARGENTINA

A Thesis in

Rural Sociology

Anne DeLessio-Parson

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Master of Science

August 2013

The thesis of Anne DeLessio-Parson was reviewed and approved* by the following:

Anouk Patel-Campillo Assistant Professor of Rural Sociology Thesis Advisor

C. Clare Hinrichs Professor of Rural Sociology Rural Sociology Graduate Program Coordinator

Carolyn Sachs Professor of Rural Sociology Head of Women’s Studies Department

*Signatures are on file in the Graduate School

ABSTRACT

Eating represents more than a biological function: it is an act influenced by markets, conditioned by individual beliefs and family traditions, and firmly embedded in social relations. Vegetarianism in the West is an area where these tensions come into play. It is frequently conceptualized as an individual-level decision driven by concerns for animal rights, personal health, the environment, world hunger, and spirituality. However, because meals are often shared experiences, vegetarianism decisively affects friendships and family relationships. Little is known about the social implications of such dietary change, particularly outside of advanced industrialized countries. Even less is known about vegetarianism in Argentina, where beef consumption has historically been the world’s highest and the culinary tradition of the asado (≈ barbecue) forms an integral part of the national identity.

This case study adopts a qualitative approach to examine vegetarianism as it is practiced in a meat-dominant cultural context of the Global South. In-depth interviews with 23 vegans and vegetarians in La Plata, Argentina, delved into their narratives of conversion and the ways their practices affect social relationships. Findings indicate that most participants cited animal welfare as their primary motivation and that they have faced reactions from meat-eaters ranging from adaption and accommodation to concern, bewilderment, resistance, or even hostility. An attitudinal typology of vegetarianism is developed, which serves to reveal striking gender differences in the ways that vegetarians re-position themselves in the meat landscape. Women generally exhibited attitudes consistent with active adaptation and tolerance; several embraced traditions such as the asado and cook meat for others, including non-vegetarian partners. In contrast, men generally rejected these traditions and, of those in committed partnerships, all were with other vegetarians. Examining gender differences in the reconciliation of personal beliefs and culturally-defined food traditions serves to highlight social barriers to dietary change.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables ...... vi List of Figures ...... vii Acknowledgments...... viii

Chapter 1. WHY STUDY VEGETARIANISM IN ARGENTINA? ...... 1 Introduction ...... 1 Meat Matters ...... 4 Beef and the Agro-Export Model ...... 4 Perón and Popularizing Meat ...... 6 Argentine Beef in Decline? ...... 8 A Brief History of Vegetarianism ...... 11 Vegetarians Appear in Argentina ...... 12 Research Questions ...... 14 Overview of Thesis ...... 14

Chapter 2. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK: FOOD, IDENTITY, AND VEGETARIANISM ...... 17 Food As Identity ...... 18 Meat and Masculinity ...... 21 Vegetarianism in the Literature ...... 24 Becoming Vegetarian ...... 26 Motivations ...... 26 Conversion in the English-Speaking World ...... 27 Traditional Religiosity ...... 29 Practicing Vegetarianism – What We Know ...... 30 Saving Face ...... 30 Relationships And Sexuality ...... 31 Conclusion ...... 32

Chapter 3. METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH, STUDY CONTEXT, AND DATA COLLECTION ...... 33 Why Qualitative? ...... 33 Vegetarianism in La Plata: A Case Study Approach ...... 34 Contributions from Grounded Theory ...... 36 Study Context: La Plata, Argentina ...... 37 Researcher Perspective ...... 39 Fieldwork ...... 42 Sampling ...... 44 Participants Overview ...... 45 Conclusion ...... 48

Chapter 4. BECOMING VEGETARIAN ...... 49 Meanings of Vegetarianism ...... 51 A Model of Conversion ...... 55 “Who I Was” ...... 58 Catalyst / Exposure to New Information ...... 61 Repression (and Return to Meat-Eating) ...... 63

Realization ...... 66 A Life-Long Commitment ...... 67 Lone Vegetarians: Sos Un Bicho Raro ...... 70 Conclusion on Becoming Vegetarian ...... 73

Chapter 5. PRACTICING VEGETARIANISM ...... 74 Reported Reactions ...... 75 Dismissal: “You’ve lost it” or “It won’t last” ...... 76 Concerns ...... 78 “What about your kids?” ...... 78 Jokes ...... 81 Defending the Decision ...... 83 Vegetarian Re-positioning in the Meat Landscape ...... 85 Rejection...... 88 Avoidance...... 92 Tolerance...... 93 Active Adaptation...... 96 Gender and Re-Positioning in the Meat Landscape ...... 98 Making Room on the Grill ...... 99 Conclusion ...... 101

Chapter 6. DISCUSSION ...... 103 Limitations ...... 105 Avenues for Future Research ...... 106 An Emerging Social Movement? ...... 107 Future Prospects Of Vegetarianism In Argentina ...... 108

Appendix A. Model Comparison with McDonald (2000) ...... 110

Appendix B. Interview Guide ...... 111

Appendix C. Snowball Sampling ...... 112

Appendix D. Additional Information on Participants ...... 113

Appendix E. Inner Conflict ...... 114

Appendix F. Participants in Committed Relationships ...... 117

Appendix G. Dating Preferences of Single Participants ...... 118

REFERENCES ...... 119

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3-1. Participant Overview ...... 47

Table 4-2. Stages in Becoming Vegetarian ...... 57

Table 5-1. An Attitudinal Typology of Vegetarians ...... 86

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2-1. Literature Map of Vegetarianism ...... 25

Figure 2-2. The Process of Learning to Become Vegan (McDonald 2000) ...... 28

Figure 4-1. A Model of Veg*n Conversion ...... 56

Figure 5-2. How Vegetarians Re-Position Themselves in the Meat Landscape ...... 87

vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I dedicate this thesis first and foremost to its participants, who so generously shared a part of their lives with me, and to other vegetarians across diverse meat landscapes. I would also like to extend this dedication to the non-vegetarians who have made them feel included by accommodating and adapting their own culinary practices.

My research has been advanced by professors in Rural Sociology and in Sociology, who have challenged me to become a better researcher and think more deeply about our social world. In particular, I thank my advisor, Anouk Patel-Campillo, for her support, encouragement, and willingness to talk through many ideas before the ones presented here finally emerged. I thank my committee members, Clare Hinrichs and Carolyn Sachs, for their insightful comments and feedback. I am also indebted to my colleagues and now dear friends – Danielle Rhubart, Hannah E. Furnas, Kathleen Wood, Katie Tavenner, Leslie Pillen, and Paige Castellanos – who have provided vital support, from academic insights to much-needed laughs, throughout this process.

I am incredibly grateful to my family and my friends in Milwaukee, Chicago, and Argentina. I thank my parents for their unconditional love and for instilling in me the desire to do research that furthers social justice, inclusion, and sustainability – I hope this thesis represents a small step towards building a career in accordance with these principles. I thank my mother for always supporting my vegetarianism, for her “red pen,” and for continued willingness to read drafts. I thank my father for early lessons on the ways we are all connected (e.g. for not killing spiders). I thank Jenny (who I happily get along with), for always being an amazing sister, and Kelley, for being an amazing friend; they never allow me to take myself too seriously. I thank Marcela and Mariela, who provided concrete feedback, contacts, and friendship when I was far from home. I also thank the many other Argentines who have welcomed me into their homes and made meat-free options for me, and especially the Sandoval family, who I now consider to be part of my own. Finally, I thank my life partner, Mauricio, who has spent hours upon hours listening to my ideas and offering insights, on everything from the interview guide to my positionality as a researcher. I am grateful to him for sharing his own transition to vegetarianism with me, which accompanied this research process and proved a source of inspiration. I am deeply appreciative of his love and extraordinary support, and so I also dedicate this thesis to him.

viii

CHAPTER ONE

WHY STUDY VEGETARIANISM IN ARGENTINA?

Dear Vegetarians: “Don't come to my country.” - Carlos Saúl Menem, President of Argentina, 1989-19991 INTRODUCTION

Patterns of food consumption have piqued the interest of sociologists in recent years (e.g. McIntosh 1996, Beardsworth and Keil 1997, Germov and Williams 2008). Such studies recognize that eating represents more than a biological function: it is an act influenced by markets, conditioned by individual beliefs and family traditions, and firmly embedded in social relations. Vegetarianism is an area where these tensions come into play. It is frequently conceptualized as an individual-level decision driven by concerns for animal rights, personal health, the environment, world hunger, and spirituality. However, to the extent that meals are shared experiences, vegetarianism decisively affects friendships and family relationships. This is particularly true in Argentina, where the culinary tradition of the asado2 is an important shared cultural practice. Meat-centered dishes are the norm, with the average Argentine consuming more than 60 kilos or 130 pounds at approximately 24 meals per month (IPCVA Statistics 2012, 2005).3 When an individual decides to opt out of the national diet, they encounter bewilderment, resistance, or even hostility (Beardsworth and Keil 1992, Roth 2005, Potts and White 2008). At the same time, family and friends adjust, accommodating vegetarians in meals or even adapting their own eating practices to include more plant-based foods (Amato and Partridge 1989: 180- 182). New friendships appear and social networks expand as people also seek out like-minded individuals to share recipes, learn more about nutrition, prepare meat- and dairy-free meals together, and engage in activism.

1 Ex-President Menem gave an interview to the trade publication, Western Beef Producer, and reportedly added: “Tell your readers, ‘Don't come to my country if they’re vegetarian.’” Rinella, Steven. “Me, Myself, and Ribeye.” 17 March 2009. Outside Online. www.outsideonline.com (accessed 15 June 2013). 2 Approximately translated as “barbecue,” the Argentine asado involves hours of preparation as different cuts and types of meat are cooked over a charcoal flame; beef is especially important. An asador, or the man (or woman – although this is relatively rare) who prepares the meat, is designated although in other cases, a handful of people (also traditionally men) play this role while women set the table and make salads. When the meat is brought to the table, someone will almost always declare, “¡Un aplauso para el asador!” (a round of applause for the asador!), as plates are passed around and wine is shared. For many families, asados are regularly held on the weekends, especially during warm weather, and/or to celebrate special occasions such as birthdays, weddings, baptisms, etc. 3 Compare to the average beef consumption per capita in the United States 61 pounds in 2012. “Average Annual Per Capita Consumption of Meat (Retail Weight).” Beef Industry Statistics. www.beefusa.org/beefindustrystatistics (accessed 15 June 2013).

Focusing on Western vegetarianism4 has both academic and social value. With regard to the first point, vegetarianism can, in some cases, be considered a social movement (Maurer 2002, Gregory 2007). Ethical vegetarianism is an “explicit food ideology” that stands in contrast to a more implicit and dominant meat culture (Twigg 1983) because it involves the rejection of the dominant national cuisine.5 It makes visible what is normally hidden and unquestioned (i.e. meat consumption). Research into vegetarian practices builds upon analyses of meat and masculinity, given the association of plant-based diets with femininity and patterns of oppression (Adams 2000) and the primary roles played by women in food provisioning (Allen and Sachs 2007). Inquiry into the impact of vegetarianism on social relationships also provides insights into the challenges associated with changing dietary practices and the ways that culinary cultures are adapted to new plant-centered eating norms. On a societal and global level, there is congruence of vegetarianism with alternative, more sustainable food systems (Morris and Kirwan 2006). Emerging economies such as China, with a traditionally plant-based diet, demand more animal protein for their growing middle class (Schroeder, Barkley, and Schroeder 1996, FAO 2006). Of all land surface area, an incredible 45 percent of land is used for livestock and associated feed production (Thornton, Herrero, and Ericksen 2011: 1). In the context of mounting concerns about climate change and water supplies, eating lower on the food chain (Lappé 1971) has emerged as a quintessential part of strategies in water conservation and climate change mitigation (Goodland 1997, Pimentel 2004).6

4 It is recognized that a diversity of vegetarian practices exist in the world. This thesis focuses on Western vegetarianism and thus excludes non-voluntary vegetarianism (those who do not eat meat because of economic constraints) and vegetarianism as it is practiced in non-Western countries such as India. It is recognized that information exchange and the internet have affected the development of vegetarianism worldwide, making it more difficult to disentangle practices within one country from global ideas about veganism and vegetarianism as well as other related alternative food movements (e.g. raw foodism). Some individuals within this study made references to religion, ideas and practices such as Hinduism/adhimsa, spirituality, and yoga. The influence and exchange of ideas between vegetarians and vegans across national borders merits further research, but this is beyond the scope of this project. Therefore, “vegetarianism” and “veganism” are used here to refer to those Western forms that are primarily practiced for health reasons and/or because of animal welfare. 5 Ethical vegetarianism is different from culinary traditions (e.g. Italian food in the United States) because it requires not eating meat by definition. Culinary traditions are based in what is typically eaten (e.g. pasta in Italian food), but vegetarianism offers no such parallel – there are no clear guidelines about what one should eat, only what should not be eaten. That said, the boundaries may be blurring in the U.S., as evidenced by Mark Bittman’s call in his book, VB6: Eat Vegan Before 6:00 (2013). From this perspective, veganism and vegetarianism are not absolutes, but dietary choices that can be made temporarily (e.g. ordering from the vegetarian menu). 6 For perspective on a global scale, consider the fact that grains used in livestock production in the U.S. alone would be enough to feed more than 2.5 times the U.S. population: 840 million plant-based vegetarians (Pimentel 2004: 326). This is just under the number of undernourished people in the world: 868 million in 2010-2012. Hunger Portal of the Food and Agriculture Organization. http://www.fao.org/hunger/en/ (accessed 18 June 2013).

The prevalence of vegetarianism is not known but is thought to be extremely low in Argentina, especially outside the cosmopolitan city of Buenos Aires. A 2005 study found that 91% of households consumed red meat at least 2 or more times per week, and that 100% of those surveyed had tried red meat at some point in their home (IPCVA 2005). Despite the importance of meat for the vast majority of Argentines, vegetarianism has grown in recent years, especially with the 2000 establishment of the Vegetarian Union of Argentina (Unión Vegetariana Argentina). In Buenos Aires, approximately 40 establishments advertise as catering to vegetarians and/or vegans. Yet in mid-size cities such as La Plata, located 45 minutes from the national capital, it is much more challenging to find meat-free options. Just one Argentine- owned vegan restaurant exists, although Asian immigrants have opened approximately six to-go ovo-lacto vegetarian establishments in the past five years.

This study explores the process of becoming vegetarian, how it is practiced, and the implications for social relationships in the meat-dominant culture of La Plata, Argentina, one of the most beef-centric countries in the world. A qualitative approach consisting of in-depth interviews with vegans (7 women, 4 men), vegetarians (5 women, 4 men) and pescatarians (3 women), contacted via snowball sampling, was adopted given the dearth of information about this phenomenon. This research was driven by three main objectives: to understand the process of conversion, to uncover the ways in which vegetarianism is practiced, and to identify the implications that practicing vegetarianism has for social relationships.

In order to frame these questions, I begin this introductory chapter with background on the study context that emphasizes the key role of beef in the historical and political development of Argentina. This analysis reveals contours of the meat landscape and the ways that social, political, and economic forces positioned beef and the asado at the heart of culinary identity – this process was not inevitable, although it was path-dependent. Adopting such a perspective makes it possible to better understand why many Argentines emphatically defend their access to affordable beef as part of their national identity. Moreover, understanding the beef-centric context is essential for studying the recent emergence of vegetarianism in Argentina, and in La Plata in particular, as it foreshadows some of the challenges faced by vegans and vegetarians today. Finally, I present my research questions and conclude this chapter with an overview of this thesis.

MEAT MATTERS

BEEF AND THE AGRO-EXPORT MODEL

The story of beef in Argentina can be traced to colonial days, with its importance deepening in the 19th century following the War of Independence (1810-1818) and fierce territorial disputes. Decades before independence, Adam Smith cited Buenos Aires as an example of “the unimproved wilds” (Smith 1909 [1776], I.11.16). The land-abundant and labor-scarce region, part of the Spanish empire, was brimming with cattle that had dramatically multiplied after being imported from the Old World. Meat was cheap and bread comparably expensive, in stark contrast to the situation in Europe (Smith 1909 [1776]: I.11.16). One century after The Wealth of Nations was published, in 1876, a pivotal invention – refrigerated shipping – then facilitated the creation of a beef-based relationship of dependency with Great Britain that would condition Argentina’s political and economic development.

In the 1880s, land-owning elite of the nascent democracy saw the opportunities that beef exports could bring. Congress abolished export restrictions and authorized subsidies for cattle production. Frozen beef exports to England rose rapidly to meet worker demand, partially because the shipping distance was shorter from Argentina to England than from Australia and New Zealand (Puiggrós 2006: 80-82). Masses of European migrants arrived to fill jobs in the capital-poor country and work in the internationalizing agricultural sector (Taylor 1994), while capital for the building of a train-based transportation network and the opening of packinghouses similarly came from across the Atlantic. The end result soon became clear: British control of the railways guaranteed profit to investors and channeled goods – especially wheat and meat – right to the ports to be shipped east. Argentina thus became “the first community, substantially dependent economically on Great Britain,” recognized as part of Britain’s vast “Informal Empire” (Ferns 1953: 63).

The meat-producing complex soon became one of the most industrialized systems in the world alongside Australia and the United States (Lee 2008: 38). Foreign capital dominated processing and distribution networks while facilitating the emergence of cattlemen as “the backbone of the country’s aristocracy” (Smith 1969: 36). The landed elite shaped political and economic development, establishing the still-powerful Argentine Rural Society in 1866 in the home of a wealthy landowner. Firm believers in free trade liberalism, along the principles that

Adam Smith had laid out in 1776, they strengthened connections with the international market based on a comparative advantage in grain and beef. An intellectual’s writings on the evolution of his country epitomize this attitude, as he claimed, “the ‘manifest destiny’ of Argentine [sic] depends for the present entirely upon the development of its commercial relations with the rest of the world. It must convert itself into the granary and the meat market of Europe” (Quesada 1911: 151).

Such a system, premised on the exportation of agricultural products and the importation of manufactured goods, initially brought wealth to the country and the political arrangements between overseas investors and local elite remained stable through World War I. The demographic transformation that accompanied an agriculturally-driven urbanization did produce some unease. From 1887 to 1912, the population of Buenos Aires tripled and crime increased sevenfold (Solberg 1969: 220). Infrastructure developments could not keep up with the pace of change and tenements sprang up. Concerns about the volatility of the situation multiplied when, in neighboring Chile, Valparaíso worker strikes against increased taxes on Argentine meat were violently repressed (Solberg 1969: 225). However, the presence of the largely European-born foreigners simultaneously served to culturally distinguish Argentina from its neighbors; the foreign-born were nearly 30 percent of the population by 1914 (INDEC 2001).

As the sheer number of poor and working-class individuals grew dramatically, relative wealth and an abundance of land facilitated some degree of class mobility. On the eve of World War I, the population of Buenos Aires had soared to 1.5 million and around one-fifth of the working poor had become part of an emerging middle class (Solberg 1969: 217-218). They were increasingly able to enjoy the abundance of meat, as 43 percent of production – or more than 430,000 tons – went to the domestic market in 1919 (Milanesio 2010: 84). Thus, just as it did in the United States and England, “beef functioned as a symbolic expression of the working-class aspiration for a better life” (Milanesio 2010: 83). What was a luxury good for many around the world became accessible for many upwardly-mobile Argentine workers.

The onset of the Great Depression, however, made the agro-exporting model untenable amidst growing political turmoil. Landed elite first attempted to deepen control over the state apparatus via a National Meat Board, but it quickly became known for prioritizing producer interests to the detriment of consumers and beef prices rose by 80 percent by 1945 (Smith 1969:

37-39). Co-opted by the landed elite, the State became “but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie” (Marx and Engels 1971 [1844]: 205). This bourgeoisie effectively extended across national borders to include wealthy investors on the other side of the Atlantic as well. The 1933 Roca-Runciman Agreement with Great Britain, for example, had dictated that a maximum of 15 percent of cattle for export be processed in national packinghouses and that profits in pounds sterling be spent in Britain (Milanesio 2010: 81). By institutionalizing such an arrangement, the state apparatus guaranteed a structure wherein a geographically divided but powerful elite came to be seen as exploiting Argentine workers. Workers could not always afford the food they helped manufacture, in violation of Fordist principles and portending instability.

PERÓN AND POPULARIZING MEAT

Packinghouse workers began to organize in the 1930s as a response to a system they deemed increasingly unjust, while a socialist movement gained ground. The influence of the latter was felt throughout Greater Buenos Aires, as Socialist-led attempts were made to legislate change in favor of the consumer by instituting municipal control over slaughterhouses and preventing cattlemen from raising prices. These policies were not entirely successful and politically, workers remained marginalized until the Federation of Labor Unions of the Meat Industry was formed in 1944. They demanded benefits such as minimum wage and half-pay for vacations (Smith 1969: 37-44). During this time, Juan Domingo Perón rose within the ranks of the government, expressing support for the workers. As head of the Department of Labor, until then insignificant, he pushed for changes from within the military government. When he was imprisoned in 1945, thousands came pouring out onto the streets of Buenos Aires to successfully demand his release; the packinghouse unions were essential in organizing the protest (Smith 1969: 46). Such support transferred into victory when presidential elections were held the following year.

One of the most controversial and beloved leaders in Argentine history, Perón indelibly fixed beef at the heart of the national diet. First, in 1947, Argentina bought the trains from an essentially bankrupt Britain, ending an era of mercantilist-like policies during which British- owned trains had charged exorbitant prices for internally-destined products in order to finance the transportation of exports to the ports (Milanesio 2010: 82). Second, the Argentine

6 government refused to fulfill some of the quotas of beef shipments to Britain and subsidized local production while expanding worker protections. By 1949, over 75 percent of production was sold domestically, compared to just 38 percent in 1924/28 (Azcuy Ameghino 2007: 79). Annual consumption of beef reached 228 pounds (103 kilos) per capita (Milanesio 2010: 84-85). Beef’s position at the center of the national diet was unparalleled in the world.7

The political support of packinghouse workers proved essential for Perón. Some have contended that the followers of this leader “had limited goals – more wages, cheaper beef” (Smith 1969: 48). The resultant transformation arguably had a much broader purpose, although beef undeniably played an important role. For, “by favoring internal consumers over external markets, Peronist beef politics created an empowering ideology of economic sovereignty” (Milanesio 2010: 76). In essence, the government “removed the landowning elite from control of the levers of power” (Smith 1969: 38). Peronism did not represent the revolution that Marx hoped the proletariat would bring about, but as unions gained political traction, the state became a site of negotiation and class conflict.

The decision to re-affirm national control over the cattle-processing industry also demonstrates a unique form of conspicuous consumption. Veblen explains individual consumption as conditioned by class, positing that “the members of each stratum accept as their ideal of decency the scheme of life in vogue in the next higher stratum, and bend their energies to live up to that ideal” (Veblen 1971: 243). Peronist beef policies may be considered a collective attempt to live up to an ideal, based on the widespread sentiment that the British were exploiting Argentine workers and unfairly enjoying the country’s beef. As Peronism re-defined the interests represented by the state, the beef industry became a focal point of contention and also a point of pride (Milanesio 2010: 85-86). Leadership discourse rejected an internationally stratified system that perpetuated their exploitation as leaders intentionally promoted worker consumption of beef as an expression of the country’s wealth and their successful policies.8

7 Compare this figure of beef consumption to110 pounds of total meat consumption in the United States in the 1950s. See “Peak Meat: U.S. Meat Consumption Falling,” by Janet Larsen, for U.S. trends from 1909 through the present. www.earth-policy.org/data_highlights/2012/highlights25 (accessed 15 June 2013). 8 Perón declared, “By raising the standard of living of the working class, we have allowed people to eat more and to acquire certain types of foods that were previously luxury items reserved for the rich” (quoted and translated by Milanesio 2010: 85-86).

National factors decisively influenced the ways that beef became part of the Argentine identity, but international context also mattered. In what Friedmann and McMichael conceptualize as a second food regime emerging after World War II, the state played a leading role as regulator/developer of the national economy (Friedmann and McMichael 1989). With the industrialization of production in the livestock sector, new regulations to prevent diseases were created on a global scale. But because Argentina did not take these steps, foot-and-mouth disease became a non-tariff barrier to trade that conditioned the industry’s development until the mid-1990s (Azcuy Ameghino 2007: 116-120). At the same time, since the middle of the 20th century, Argentine beef production had been characterized by a virtual absence of foreign capital (IPCVA 2008). The convergence of global and domestic factors thus meant that Argentina avoided relationships of food dependency in the meat sector. Beef consumption remained high in Argentina just as it rose in the Global North, where it was also “the symbolic centre of the post-war diet” (Friedmann and McMichael 1989: 106). Argentine beef production was effectively de-linked from the global economy and re-oriented toward the domestic market through the early 1990s.

ARGENTINE BEEF IN DECLINE?

“We are not turning vegetarian.” - Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, President of Argentina, 2007- present9

The previous section illustrates the beef-centric national diet from the country’s early history through the middle of the 20th century. Beef consumption peaked in 1956 (Romero, The New York Times 13 June 2013) and, particularly in the past two decades, has been affected by complex political and economic factors including political disputes, environmental constraints, and economic crisis. Recent developments presented in this section help to set the stage for the emergence of vegetarianism more recently, which will be presented in the following section.

In the 1980s, competing land uses affected the cattle industry just as political developments10 aimed to minimize the role of the state as an economic regulator. Argentina

9 Emphasis added. The context was as follows: SPIEGEL: “Argentina has only fallen behind when it comes to its most famous exports, steaks. Now even its small neighbor Uruguay exports more meat.” Fernández de Kirchner: “That is due to the dreadful drought in the past year, which meant that hundreds of thousands of cattle had to be culled. But now global market prices are so low it is more profitable for us to consume our meat at home. We are definitely not turning vegetarian.” (SPIEGEL 5 October 2010).

8 became the “Poster Child” of neoliberal reforms in the 1990s by tying its currency to the U.S. dollar as it implemented Washington Consensus-prescribed reforms. The National Meat Board that had helped maintain low prices since the era of Perón was dismantled in 1991 (Presidential Decree 2284/ 91). In the following decade, however, neoliberal policies proved unsustainable as proceeds from the sale of state assets dried up. This culminated in a run on the banks that converted the country into a “Basket Case” in 2001-2002 (Pastor and Wise 2001). The devaluation of the peso made beef producers more competitive internationally, but drought and government policies produced “strong stimuli to cultivate high-priced grain and oilseed crops, which have allowed less grazing land to be available for cattle” (Arelovich, Bravo, and Martínez 2011: 38). Beef exports rose, bringing up the historically low price of beef in domestic markets and creating inflationary pressures. More than one-third of households reported consuming less meat because it was more expensive (IPCVA 2005: 81). By 2011, the prices of most cuts were 4 to 6 times higher than in 2002. Per capita consumption, near 80 kilos in 1990, continued its decline and fell to 56.6 by 2011 (IPCVA 2012).

The political costs of runaway meat prices are high, particularly for the administration of President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner (2007-present) because of its roots in Peronism and broad-based, popular support, including union backing. In 2008, following severe drought and in the context of a growing world food crisis, the price of soy soared. The Argentine government reacted by raising export taxes in order to finance redistributive social programs (Fair Rzezak 2008). Such taxes might also have served to mitigate the unequal impact that higher prices could have on inflation, wealth distribution, and food prices, but the well-organized, wealthy agricultural sector rapidly organized strikes and road blockades to prevent implementation. In the end, policy uncertainty aggravated all sectors of production. Together with the effects of drought, this contributed to a 17% drop in cattle inventory from 2008 to April 2011 (Arelovich, Bravo, and Martínez 2011: 38). President Kirchner has defended the drop in beef consumption as temporary due to drought, quickly adding in an interview that, “We are not turning vegetarian” (SPIEGEL 5 October 2010).

Signs that the asado may be becoming less affordable have sparked politically-driven reactions. One relevant actor is the government-financed the Institute for the Promotion of

10 Political conditions and the transition to democracy are also relevant. During the 1976-1983 military dictatorship in Argentina, during which approximately 30,000 disappeared; food shortages were reported.

Argentine Beef (IPCVA), created in 2001 (Law 25.507). However, unlike the National Meat Board dismantled a decade earlier, the IPCVA dedicates many resources toward exports promotion, participating in international forums such as PRODEXPO 2010 in Russia and GULUFOOD 2010 in the United Arab Emirates, and organizing the XVIII World Meat Conference in Buenos Aires. More recently, in April 2011, several months before elections, the Argentine government launched a new program: Carne para todos, “Beef for everyone.” It consisted of 25-meter-long refrigerated semi-trucks doubling as butcher shops, opening their doors to sell meat at greatly reduced prices (La Nación 2011).

Such populist programs were not sufficient to reduce overall prices, so the government has adopted price controls and minimum slaughter weights as well. It has actively encouraged production through direct payments to producers for feed, infrastructure, sanitation and reproduction. In order to receive government subsidies for feedlot production, producers have had to show that the beef is destined for domestic markets (ONCCA 2012). Such policies have sparked the dramatic expansion of feedlot production, which was essentially non-existent two decades ago but rose to 1.6 million head in 2010, or 3.3% of total stock (Cuestas Acosta and Lotti 2011: 39). Another report estimated that nearly half of all cattle were finished in feedlot- type production in 2011, which is “an amazing figure” given the traditional reliance on pasture (Deblitz 2011: 2). The impact that this development may have on vegetarianism is not entirely clear yet, but Argentines take great pride in their grass-fed beef and the public does not seem aware of these changes.11 The realization that animals are processed in “concentration camps” has been an important catalyst for some to become vegetarian elsewhere (Amato and Partridge 1989: 35). Environmental degradation and health concerns have also been raised with feedlots. Although it is too soon to tell, as feedlots expand and Argentines learn more about them, more people could become more receptive – or less resistant – to veganism and vegetarianism.

11 During my five years of residence in La Plata, the Argentines I met were quick to explain that I needed to try Argentine beef because – unlike in the United States – the cows were raised on grass. The growing reliance on feedlots has received very little media attention and searches of the major media sources (Clarin, La Nación) returned no results on animal cruelty as related to the practice in Argentina. The only articles were explanations of feedlots as defined by the Argentine agency that promotes their use.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF VEGETARIANISM

Before turning to the emergence of vegetarianism in Argentina, it is helpful to briefly consider its main developments in Western civilization to provide context, draw points of comparison, and understand the ways that Argentine vegetarianism is connected to a global community of vegetarianism. Vegetarian philosophy can be traced back to antiquity and the writings of Pythagoras. His moral objection to meat consumption stemmed from religious beliefs in reincarnation and the transmigration of human souls: animals may possess human souls and meat should thus be excluded from the diet (Walters and Portmess 1999). Abstention from animal foods was also advocated by other ancient Western philosophers including Plato, who considered it part of a strategy for minimizing land usage in his imagined utopia (Fox 1999: 7). The growth of the Catholic Church, and the doctrine that God placed humans above the animal kingdom, then marginalized vegetarianism as its practice became part of several heretical Christian movements challenging the Church (Beardsworth and Keil 1997: 221). Although some monastic orders and Christian groups such as the Seventh-Day Adventists have since embraced vegetarianism (Amato and Partridge 1989: 18), the “Pythagorean diet” remained outside the mainstream for a millennium and a half in the Western world.

Ethical vegetarianism re-emerged at the end of the 19th century in response to the rise of the modern slaughterhouse, gaining ground as a social movement during the Victorian period in Britain. Accompanying the temperance movement, spiritualism, and feminism, a meat-free diet was seen as liberating women from the most unpleasant cooking responsibilities (Gregory 2007). The Vegetarian Society, established in 1847, continues to promote veganism and vegetarianism today as an educational charity based out of Britain. More than a century after it was founded, interest in vegetarianism resurged in the 1960s and 1970s. Francis Moore Lappé’s Diet for a Small Planet (1971) and Peter Singer’s Animal Liberation (1975) are two of the most well- known treatises in the English-speaking world that have advocated vegetarian and vegan practices based on environmental and ethical grounds.

Existing figures on the prevalence of vegetarianism vary. Within the United States, figures have indicated it is practiced by 3.2 to 5% of the population (Vegetarian Times 2008, Vegetarian Resource Group 2012, Gallup Poll 2012), although some of these same studies have found up to 22.8 million people are “vegetarian-inclined” (Vegetarian Times 2008). Elsewhere,

11 figures range from 1-2% in New Zealand, 1% of males and 6.5% of females in Ontario, and 4% overall in Canada, to 9% in the United Kingdom and Germany (Potts and White 2008, Menzies and Sheeshka 2012). A recent poll by the Target Group Index suggests the prevalence is 8% of the population of Brazil, Argentina’s neighbor (IBOPE 10 January 2012). Yet no comparable studies exist on its practice in Argentina, where one in five households reported consuming meat every day and only 1 percent were not considered regular meat consumers (less than once per week); 100% of those surveyed had tried red meat at some point in their home (IPCVA 2005: 47, 76). This would suggest only a tiny fraction of the population may be vegetarian.

VEGETARIANS APPEAR IN ARGENTINA

The political and economic development of Argentina speaks to the difficulties of practicing vegetarianism, much less veganism, in a meat-dominant culture. Rejecting meat involves confronting criticism, ill-founded health concerns, and even hostility – but an increasing number of Argentines are opting to do just that. A recent news report declared: “Argentina Falls From Its Throne as King of Beef” (Romero 2013) and within the past year, stories of veganism and vegetarianism have reached mainstream media in Argentina. Yet this movement is appearing decades after the vegetarian and vegan movements began in the English-speaking world. Individuals must grapple with the legacy and lore of the Argentine gaucho, the meat-centered tradition of the asado, and the centrality of beef in nearly all culinary traditions. Over 723 books on the “asado argentino” appear in Google Books, while the only books containing vegetariano and Argentina are almost all travel guides in English (Google search 16 June 2013).

Tracing the emergence of vegetarianism in Argentina is therefore quite challenging, as its presence has only become pronounced within the past decade and a half. The nonprofit organization Argentine Vegetarian Union (Unión Vegetariana Argentina, or UVA) was founded in 2000 as part of the International Vegetarian Union. It began publishing El Vegetariano Vegano (The Vegan Vegetarian) magazine in 2001, declaring it to be the only magazine published exclusively in Spanish and dedicated to vegetarianism. It offers four issues per year with articles about the broader movement, famous figures, and recipes. As of June 2013, there were 26 books about vegetarianism and veganism, mainly translated to Spanish, available for sale via the UVA website (www.uva.org.ar). As points of comparison, the establishment of UVA was over a century and a half after the British Vegetarian Society (1847) and the American

Vegetarian Society (1850), and around half a century after the British Vegan Society (1944) and the American Vegan Society (1960).

There is no parallel vegan organization in Argentina. However, the website Vegan Action Argentina (Acción Vegana Argentina) went online in 2010 and their Facebook page, created a year earlier in May 2009, has nearly 6400 ‘likes’ as of June 15, 2013. In comparison, the Facebook page of the British Vegan Society has nearly twenty times the number of ‘likes,’ with almost 123,000, even though the population of England (53 million in 2011) is only 1.3 times that of Argentina (41 million in 2011). While growth has been limited, technology and social networking online may facilitate a catch-up of sorts as traces of a broader veganism activist movement appear to be rapidly gaining ground in Argentina.

With regards to vegetarian restaurants, the first in New York City is reported to be Vegetarian Restaurant No. 1; it was opened more than a century ago, in 1895 (Vegetarian Messenger (Manchester) 1895: 93). In stark contrast, the cosmopolitan city of Buenos Aires (Population 2.9 million; Argentine Census 2010) has seen a surge only in the past five years. BIO restaurant claims to be the first vegetarian restaurant in the city, opening its doors just one decade ago (www.biorestaurant.com.ar). An online restaurant directory in Argentina, Guía Óleo, now lists 41 vegetarian-friendly restaurants in Buenos Aires compared to 1287 parrillas, or steakhouses (Guía Óleo, accessed 15 June 2013). Turning to international comparisons, the Happy Cow directory of vegetarian, vegan, and vegetarian-friendly restaurants lists 45 establishments in greater Buenos Aires, compared to nearly twice as many (96) in Chicago, a city of comparable size. Chicago (Population 2.7; U.S. Census 2011) similarly has a long history of European immigration and the meat-packing industry, which was infamously exposed in Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle (1906). The first vegetarian restaurant is reported to have opened there in 1983 (The Chicago Diner, www.veggiediner.com), nearly two decades before BIO restaurant in Buenos Aires. Vegetarianism in Argentina is extremely young and it is still quite limited in terms of presence, even its largest city. Even so, the phenomenon appears to be growing quite rapidly.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Argentine food traditions appear to be changing, and the Argentine Vegetarian Union is expanding, but there has been no academic work done on the emergence of vegetarianism or veganism or the motivations that prompt people to stop eating meat. Even less is known about the ways that such divergent dietary practices may affect social relationships and the ways that vegetarians re-position themselves with respect to the meat-dominant culture. The following questions thus drive this research:

1) How does conversion to vegetarianism occur in La Plata, Argentina? 2) How is vegetarianism practiced and how does it relate to the dominant, meat-based culinary culture? 3) What are the implications of vegetarianism and veganism for social relationships, especially with regards to dating, friendships, family interactions, and the Argentine asado?

OVERVIEW OF THESIS

This thesis consists of six chapters, including this one. With this introductory chapter, I have intended to answer the question, “Why Study Vegetarianism in Argentina?” by presenting the political, economic, and social context that has indelibly placed beef at the heart of the Argentine culinary culture. Establishing the significance of beef is essential for this study, especially because it stands in contrast to the relative acceptance of vegetarianism in most areas of the United States today. It also reveals the social and political forces that have shaped the meat landscape in Argentina, showing that culinary traditions are malleable – which opens the door for influence by vegetarianism despite Argentina’s continuing love of beef. In chapter 2, I further situate this research within the literature on food, identity, and vegetarianism. Sociological research into vegetarianism has grown in the past two decades, but scant attention has been paid to much-needed theory-building. One exception has been McDonald’s model, “The Process of Learning to Become Vegan” (2000), which was used as a starting point for understanding conversion in this study. Findings from empirical studies were also used as points of comparison and to inform the analysis of interviews. Chapter 3 presents the methodological approach, the study context, my perspective as a researcher, and an overview of data collection.

Findings are presented in chapters 4 and 5. Chapter 4, “Becoming Vegetarian,” begins by analyzing the meanings of vegetarianism that were uncovered in this study. Evidence of ethical vegetarianism was found in the testimonies of virtually all participants. A model of conversion adapted from McDonald (2000) is presented, based on participant narratives of change, and extended to emphasize the importance of social context. This conceptualizes the process of becoming vegetarian as one that is usually initiated with a catalyst and exposure to new information. Feelings and/or knowledge may be repressed for some time before the person realizes that meat and/or dairy are not necessary, at which point the person either distances themselves from the meat landscape (and embraces veganism), opts for a personal-level decision that is integrated into meat-based traditions like the asado (adaptation), or falls somewhere between these extremes.

Chapter 5, “Practicing Vegetarianism,” further develops the second half of this model and consistent of two subsections. First, I analyze the reported reactions of meat-eaters as perceived by vegetarians. These reactions ranged from dismissal, concerns, and jokes; female participants reported sharp criticism, especially if they were mothers, although many believed that the initial reaction of family and friends was gradually giving away to more acceptance. Second, I identify the four primary ways that study participants re-positioned themselves within the meat landscape, adopting positions of rejection, tolerance, avoidance, or active adaptation. I present evidence that was used to construct these four categories and consider the ways that these positions help us to understand their interactions with family and friends. Special attention is paid to the two extremes. On the one hand, the men who rejected meat-dominant traditions reported conversion in their partners over time; none were in relationships with meat-eaters. On the other end of the spectrum, there were those who actively adapt food traditions, who were nearly all women. Several of these women had meat-eating partners and many expressed willingness to date non-vegetarians or cook meat for family and friends. These women may be key agents of culinary change via both strong and weak ties.

Finally, chapter 6 presents a discussion that brings together the main themes from this research. Given the limited amount of theory that exists within the field, the models of conversion and the typology describing the re-positioning of vegetarians within the meat landscape may offer starting points for future research – especially in places where vegetarianism is relatively new. I also consider the implications of this research and the finding

15 that women are the primary agents of active adaptation for culinary change with non-vegetarians. At the same time, men who reject these traditions seem to play a primary role in conversion within existing intimate relationships and friendship circles. I reflect upon avenues for future research, including the need to pay attention to an emerging social movement. I then conclude with a discussion of the future prospects of vegetarianism in Argentina. A greater understanding of vegetarianism and its influence on non-vegetarian eating habits and culinary traditions has many benefits: it may help to confront runaway consumerism by encouraging individuals to think more deeply about what is consumed, food-wise and beyond; and plant-based diets have great potential in strategies to confront the climate emergency we face in the world today.

CHAPTER TWO

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK:

FOOD, IDENTITY, AND VEGETARIANISM

In this chapter, I present a framework for studying the phenomenon of vegetarianism in La Plata, Argentina, that draws upon two main bodies of literature: the first relates to food and identity and the second covers specific social studies of vegetarianism. I begin by considering what French sociologist Claude Fischler’s (1980) has conceptualized as a lack of norms within the modern food system; vegetarianism may be interpreted as a response to this. I present literature on food and identity at two levels – the national or macro level, and then at the individual level. Macro- level perspectives illuminate the broader political, economic, and social forces that influence the development of national culinary identities. In the case of Argentina, as the previous chapter revealed, a confluence of events has placed the asado and beef consumption more generally at the heart of culinary practices today. After briefly reviewing important contributions related to national food identity, I turn to the ways that existing literature facilitates an examination of how food identities are forged from the perspective of the individual. More specifically, I consider literature that has delved into the connections between masculinity and meat, which serves to conceptualize vegetarianism as a rejection of the dominant (masculine) meat culture.

In the second section of this chapter, I consider some of the most important empirical findings on vegetarianism. Numerous studies have measured different aspects of vegetarianism and veganism, but limited attention has been paid to theory-building from a sociological perspective. One notable exception is McDonald’s model of learning to become vegan, which forms the basis for my approach to the process of conversion described in chapter four of this thesis (McDonald 2000). I will also consider the ways in which existing studies point to potential gender differences not only in the conversion process, but more importantly, in the ways that vegetarianism is practiced.

FOOD AS IDENTITY

Dis-moi ce que tu manges, je te dirai ce que tu es.

- Jean Anthelme Brillat-Savarin, 1825

The ubiquitous saying, “You are what you eat,” likely stems at least partially from the French gastronome Brillat-Savarin (1825). Yet as consumers are faced with a dizzying array of choices in supermarkets, it is increasingly hard to discern just who “you are” if “what you eat” is not always clear. Conceptualizing food as identity thus makes it possible to see two important connections to this study in La Plata. First, vegetarianism represents a clear set of norms about what not to eat; as such, those who adopt vegetarian diets are usually seen as much more limited in their diets. Yet if vegetarianism is instead viewed as a response to a lack of clear culinary norms in modern society (as a result of an overwhelming number of options and conflicting medical advice about what should be eaten for good health), it becomes possible to see that this type of dietary change involves seeking out guidance. This is an important point, as gathering information about vegetarianism was identified as an essential step to take in the meat-dominant culture context of La Plata, Argentina; if an individual does not seek such information, her or his level of exposure to plant-based diets is extremely limited. The model of conversion presented in chapter four further reveals this dynamic. Secondly, as noted earlier, connections between food and national identity on the one hand, and food and gender identity on the other, further serve to frame this case study as they underscore the ways that beef was central to the pre- vegetarian identities of the participants in La Plata.

As a starting point, Fischler’s work explores the connections between “Food, self, and identity” (1988). He distinguishes two dimensions of human-food relationships: one relates the nutritional value to cultural importance, while the other connects the individual to the collective. In other words, there are connections between culture and nutrition (traditional diets were generally balanced while restricted by the natural environment), and between the individual and the collective. Early humans faced what Rozin has identified as the omnivore’s paradox: unknown foods potentially pose a danger to health but, because of an innate need for dietary variety, humans also desire to try new foods (Rozin cited in Fischler 1980: 945-946). This produced tension and wasted energy as each person decided what may be safe and what may be dangerous, so people began to share and receive food knowledge constructed from collective

18 experiences over generations. In other words, individual impulses to improve nutrition and try new foods were preserved by the group – the collective – as a body of knowledge about what to eat, and what should be avoided. Socially-constructed knowledge of nutrition was then passed down within families and communities, thereby reliving the individual anxiety that the omnivore’s paradox would otherwise cause.

In contrast to the pre-modern past, the overwhelming amount of choice available on supermarket shelves in industrialized societies has actually served to “increase the anxiety of the paradox instead of regulating it” (Fischler 1980: 945). Building on the classical work of Émile Durkheim, who considered anomie as a lack of norms, Fischler cultivates a concept he calls “gastro-anomie” (Fischler 1980: 948). Just as industrialization and concomitant urbanization erode those ties that unite individuals in a community, the act of food selection has become increasingly individualistic. Extending gastro-anomie specifically to meat consumption, the consequences would arguably appear even more dramatic. The final product bears little resemblance to anything in the animal kingdom and the packaging effectively hides the system that produces it. The industrial system of slaughterhouses has “redefined human attitudes to nature” by making meat “a foregone conclusion rather than an unpredictable and costly rarity” (Lee 2008: 3). The shelves of today’s supermarkets overflow with processed meat-based products, making it easy for consumers to add an assortment of affordable animal protein to their diets without thinking twice about what they are consuming. Even in the ‘fresh’ meats section, the cuts are neatly displayed, often behind glass cases, to avoid offending modern-day sensibilities. Any consumer with enough buying power may incorporate additional meat into their diet without imagining the details of the butchering process itself. Collective knowledge about how meat fits into a balanced diet has been lost, as individuals shopping in a supermarket are disconnected from the butchering process. Collective ideas of nutrition have similarly been lost.

Vegetarianism thus emerges as a clear set of prescriptions about what should and what should not be consumed. Twigg contends that it offers “an articulate body of ideas related to meat” (Twigg 1983: 29). It is thus a response to the ‘gastro-anomie’ described by Fischler. Practicing vegetarians do not have many options when shopping at supermarkets in La Plata – their choices are severely curtailed. This would originally appear as a limiting factor that prevents people from making the conversion to vegetarianism. However, vegetarians are likely

19 to have much less anxiety than meat-eaters when it comes to shopping, at least in La Plata, because they have responded to the ‘gastro-anomie’ by deciding to adopt clear rules about what should and should not be consumed. Fewer options sometimes results in less anxiety and/or stress for vegetarians in this context.

Yet just as becoming vegetarian facilitates the reduction of anxiety surrounding the “omnivore’s paradox,” it also generates conflict as – especially in Argentina – it represents the antithesis of the dominant culinary culture centered around beef. As chapter 1 revealed, political, economic, and social forces at multiple levels coalesced to position beef at the heart of national identity; it became a symbol of worker privilege to the world and a point of pride just as populism brought more people into the political system. Rising beef consumption was symbolic of the country’s desire to develop independently, without the constraints of British capital and investors. Political and economic development has influenced cultural meanings of beef consumption as, over time, it came to be seen as an essential part of being Argentine.

Food regime analysis, mentioned in the background analysis on beef in Argentina in chapter one, highlights the ways in which national and local diets are affected by industrialization, international trade, the distribution of power among states, and more recently, the concentration of capital and land by corporate actors (Friedmann and McMichael 1989). However, as Hinrichs points out, the global-local binary may actually be a false one as the term “local” encompasses diverse meanings and practices (Hinrichs 2003). A global-local, or macro- micro, lens of analysis, however, can help us understand what happens within specific countries and the ways that these dynamics shape culinary culture. For example, Jane Dixon explores the political, economic, and social forces that have made chicken meat affordable and widespread in Australia. She considers factors such as the changing role of women in the household and the demands of the marketplace that have come together to position chicken at the center of the Australian dinner table (Dixon 2002). Argentina’s love affair with beef developed in a similar fashion. And, while many of the factors that enabled Argentines to eat cheap, grass-fed beef for decades are changing, culinary traditions are path-dependent: once a certain food has been associated with a certain identity (e.g. beef and Argentina), that connection is likely to remain for generations. Beef consumption in Argentina is thus seen as key to good nutrition and overall health. Challenging these assumptions about nutrition thus involves confronting dominant culinary identity, not just evaluating nutrition from a more objective scientific standpoint.

Although knowledge of nutrition is built via the scientific endeavor, it is also socially and culturally embedded and therefore differs across communities.

Simmel’s “Sociology of the Meal” makes it possible to further develop this line of thought and emphasizes the socially and culturally-embedded nature of eating. He notes that the act of sitting down at a table together cuts across class differences, as he contends, “Persons who in no way share any special interest can gather together at the common meal – in this possibility, associated with the primitiveness and hence universal nature of material interest, there lies the immeasurable sociological significance of the meal” (Simmel 1997: 130). He conceptualizes eating as a shared practice that is possible because it is the lowest common denominator, something that high-status individuals can share with low-status individuals. Because meat was popularized in Argentina mid-20th century and was central to the Argentine national identity, the asado became – and continues to be – something that brings together people despite social class differences. Popular culture makes continuous reference to and reflects images of an idealized asado that cuts across class differences; cookbooks abound with recipes and stories surrounding the tradition (Tobin 2002, Zycherman 2008). Vegetarianism can thus be understood as something that denies or confronts the asado tradition, setting individuals apart. Meat-eaters may viscerally react to the rejection of meat as it signifies a rupture in shared eating practices, especially in the Argentine context.

MEAT AND MASCULINITY

Social norms regarding food tastes and behaviors also intersect with gender roles in society, especially with regards to meat consumption. Adams observes that “people with power have always eaten meat” and that “a mythology permeates all classes that meat is a masculine food and meat eating a male activity” (Adams 2004: 249). She notes that “meat” is defined by the American Heritage Dictionary as “the essence or principal part of something,” whereas “vegetable” comes to represent “a person who leads a monotonous, passive, or merely physical existence” (Adams 2000: 46-47). Men and meat are seen as strong and of central importance, whereas vegetables are food of the weak. Eating meat is thus a central part of masculinity just as it is more highly valued, even in the language that is used to describe these practices. Even more directly relevant to vegetarianism, Adams highlights the ways that sexual violence against women and animal treatment overlap via the “absent referent.” Terms and metaphors make

21 reference and tap into meanings that are associated with violence against both women and animals (Adams 2000: 54-56).

Challenges to meat-eating by vegan activists leverage the associations between violence towards women and animals just as they may use sexual images to promote veganism. PETA ads have featured many famous figures, including a bikini-clad Pamela Anderson covered with markings akin to the cow charts showing cuts of beef and titled, “All Animals Have the Same Parts” (PETA 2010). Few such ads have been prominent in Argentina until recently, when a PETA ad featured Lydia Guevara, the grand-daughter of the Argentine revolutionary leader Ernesto “Che.” Launched in Buenos Aires, it suggested that readers “join the vegetarian revolution,” although it received limited coverage in the major La Plata and Buenos Aires newspapers (El Día, Clarín, La Nación).

Delving further into the gendered dimensions of vegetarianism, research has explored the ways in which vegetarianism is associated with femininity (Twigg 1983) so that the rejection of meat can be perceived as challenging traditional masculinities. Vegetarian eco-feminism, “feminism’s third generation,” views animals as objects of oppression and ultimately links speciesism12 to sexism and racism (Gaard 2002). Interestingly, a nationally-representative survey of U.S. residents asking about perspectives on vegetarianism, regardless of their own dietary practices, found that blacks and women were more likely to believe vegetarianism could prevent animal cruelty and benefit the environment (Kalof, Dietz, Stern, and Guagnano 1999). These results lend credence to the notion that those most affected by the legacies of institutionalized racism and sexism are more likely to recognize vegetarianism as a practice that represents an ethical objection to speciesism.

Adams has contended that men who decide not to eat meat thus “repudiate their masculine privileges” (Adams 2004: 258). Some studies have found that vegan and vegetarian men face questions about their masculinity “as a direct consequence of hegemonic masculine norm enforcement” (Nath 2011). Within the context of the Australian barbecue and other social settings, “the decision to refuse meat can be greeted with suspicion and unease. It is sometimes

12 Speciesism, or human supremacism, includes assigning different values, rights, or special consideration to individuals solely on the basis of their species membership (Merriam-Webster Dictionary). In other words, animals should not be treated differently from humans. Within the vegan philosophy, speciesism is seen as the third pillar of oppression alongside racism and sexism.

22 also perceived as a controversial and provocative act” (Nath 2011: 270). In this study, some men responded by bringing tofu ‘steaks’ and veggie burgers to these shared social practices. Faced with opposition in society, vegan and vegetarian men may seek to re-assert their masculinity by re-defining culinary traditions as they participate in social gatherings. Such evidence suggests that male vegetarians may face more questioning of their sexuality.

Limited research has uncovered gender differences in the ways that family and friends are reported to react. In his qualitative studies of college-age vegetarians in the United States, Merriman found that male vegetarians reported that others were neutral or even supportive of the decision. In contrast, women were questioned about their ability to manage their own decisions – especially by male friends and family members (Merriman 2010). Merriman suggests that this may be connected to findings that the vegetarian diet has an attached stigma as a sign of eating disorders or efforts to control weight (Worsley and Skrzypiec 1997, Gilbody, Kirk, and Hill 1999). It is not entirely clear, however, why women would be questioned more than men in their decision to become vegetarian. This study cannot fully respond to this as, like Merriman, it relies on the reports of vegetarians only (and not the meat-eaters in their lives). Such findings nonetheless point to the need to delve deeper into possible gender differences in the ways that family and friends respond to the decision to become vegetarian.

Gender differences may also be expected in vegetarian attitudes towards meat-eaters given the differing roles that men and women have traditionally played within the household. Allen and Sachs bring some of the gendered dimensions of food chains to light, contending that, “Regardless of culture, class, or ethnicity, the majority of women cook and serve food for their families – a cultural universal of care and sustenance” (Allen and Sachs 2007: 9). Even as women have entered the labor force, they continue to carry a disproportionate share of the food- provisioning responsibilities within the household. The centrality of women in food provisioning traditionally, and the newness of vegetarianism in La Plata, would suggest that it is possible that women feel more pressures to cook meat for others, even as they practice vegetarianism in their own lives.

VEGETARIANISM IN THE LITERATURE

A myriad of studies have approached vegetarianism from historical (Leneman 1997; Walters and Portmess 1999; Gregory 2007), anthropological (Sutton 1997), religious (Hamilton 2000, Dyczewska 2008), philosophical (Fox 1999, Regan 2004), and feminist (Adams 2000, Gaard 2002) traditions. From a sociological perspective, vegetarianism has been conceptualized as a social movement in its own right (Maurer 2002) as well as a practice linked to the animal rights movement (Einwohner 1999). A number of studies have also begun to examine the ways in which the transition to and practice of vegetarianism and veganism affects social relationships, from family interactions and the household to friendships and dating (Amato and Partridge 1989, Beardsworth and Keil 1991, Beardsworth and Keil 1992, Roth 2005, Potts and White 2008). Connections between existing studies are mapped out in Figure 2-1 (page 25). Such research, however, has focused exclusively on the English-speaking countries of the Global North.

The only known academic study with mention of vegetarianism in Argentina is a qualitative examination of twenty individuals who practice Ayurveda in metropolitan Buenos Aires; the focus is on their interactions with the health-care system (Freidin et al. 2012). No statistics currently exist on the prevalence of vegetarianism and veganism in La Plata, Argentina, or in the country as a whole. Yet, as shown in chapter one, Argentina offers a particularly fascinating case study because (1) it has some of the highest historical levels of beef consumption with meat playing an integral role in culinary practices, (2) production practices (i.e. a shift to feedlots) are undergoing substantial change in line with the deepening of the neoliberal food regime, and (3) overall consumption is still extremely high but appears to be gradually declining.

Empirical findings from these existing studies, carried out primarily in the English- speaking world, still provide potential points of comparison and insight into patterns of vegetarianism in Argentina. It should also be noted that culturally, Argentina has a history as a diverse nation of immigrants and that the country continues to have connections to many European countries. Therefore, even though existing studies have not been done in Argentina or even South America context, some of the same books, documentaries, and online resources that prompt conversion to vegetarianism in the United States are also accessible by vegetarians in Argentina.13 These findings were used to inform the creation of the initial interview guide and the analysis of interviews, as they helped highlight areas in need of greater conceptual development as well. Although most studies to date consider both conversion and the ways that vegetarianism is practiced to a certain extent, I begin by considering what is known about “becoming vegetarian” and models of conversion. I then turn to “practicing vegetarianism” to understand what is already known about the social implications of conversion. Very limited theoretical development has been done about how to understand conversion to vegetarianism as a socially-conditioned process, despite the increasing frequency with which it is occurring and the ways that ethical (environmental or animal rights-based) vegetarianism is spreading outside of the English-speaking world.

BECOMING VEGETARIAN

MOTIVATIONS

Most studies of vegetarianism include consideration for the reasons why people decide to eliminate meat from their diets to begin with (Amato and Partridge 1989, Beardsworth and Keil 1991). Research into the ways that children view meat-eating show that those who decide to stop eating meat indicate that the connections they make between animals and the food on their plates lead to the decision (Hussar and Harris 2010). This is consistent with one pattern of vegetarianism among adults: those who are single-issue vegetarians (those who emphasize one

13 This was not necessarily anticipated prior to carrying out research. However, as questions asked about where they learned of veganism and vegetarianism, it became clear that the participants in this project were connected to many of the same resources as vegans and vegetarians in the English-speaking world because several of them spoke English as a second language (or could at least navigate it), and regularly watched U.S. shows and documentaries. The documentary Earthlings, narrated by U.S. actor Joaquin Phoenix, had been seen by several participants (and directly prompted three to become vegan). Other cultural references in interviews included Lisa Simpson as a vegetarian in The Simpsons and the “McStroke” episode of Family Guy.

26 motivation) generally report animal suffering and/or animal rights as their primary and sole motivation (Amato and Partridge 1989). Although the study by Amato and Partridge cannot be considered representative of all vegetarians, as they elicited participation via vegetarian organizations, their findings nonetheless indicate the importance of animal rights, a motivation cited by two-thirds of respondents. Health concerns were important only one-third of the time, while less than one in five mentioned spiritual or religious factors in their conversion process (Amato and Partridge 1989: 34). Other reasons cited in more recent polls include world hunger and the environment; motivations thus range from health-related, political, economic, cultural, and aesthetic (Vegetarian Resource Group). Such a diversity of motivations, however, likely stems from acceptance of vegetarianism as a healthy alternative in much of the English-speaking world. In Argentina, in contrast, eating meat is still seen as an essential for overall health.14

15 CONVERSION IN THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING WORLD

The decision-making process that leads people to become vegetarian is still theoretically underdeveloped. Studying conversion, however, has great value from a sociological perspective as well as from a societal perspective, given the current context of a global climate emergency and endemic obesity. More than two decades ago, Beardsworth and Keil (1991) pointed out that:

Vegetarians are, in effect, converts. That is, the great majority have not been socialised into vegetarianism from childhood, but have subjected society’s customary food practices to critical inspection and have subsequently set out to modify their own eating behaviour, sometimes in a very radical fashion. Such individuals can, therefore, provide valuable insights into the mechanisms of dietary change and nutritional choice (Beardsworth and Keil 1991: 39).

Understanding why individuals change their diet is especially important in developing countries, where projections show rising meat consumption into the foreseeable future (FAO 2006, Schroeder, Barkley, and Schroeder 1996). Yet little attention has been paid to theory creation

14 The Argentina Society of Nutrition recognizes that Argentines may be eating more than what is necessary, but they still conclude their report on meat with: “According to the Healthy Eating Pyramid: a moderate portion of meat should form part of our diet every day, which may vary within the same food group, trying to include progressively more fish or seafood, which can be replaced by legumes once or twice a week.” (Original: “El que nos propone la Pirámide de la Alimentación Correcta: todos los días debería formar parte de nuestra comida una moderada porción de carne, variando entre las diferentes opciones dentro del mismo grupo de alimentos. Tratando de incluir progresivamente pescado o mariscos, lo mismo que reemplazar la carne por legumbres una o dos veces por semana.”). Sociedad Argentina de Nutrición. http://sanutricion.org.ar/charlas_carnes.pdf (accessed 13 July 2013). 15 This refers to advanced industrialized countries where vegetarianism has a relatively long tradition (England, the United States, Canada) as well as Australia and New Zealand, where most of the sociological work on vegetarianism has been carried out.

27 with regards to conversion to vegetarianism. Patterns were found by Amato and Partridge in the transition phase, as respondents cited specific experiences such as books, films, operations, classroom biology dissections, witnessing animal killings, and involvement in animal rights organizations (Amato and Partridge (1989). This list of motivations is only a starting point for understanding the entire process surrounding the conversion itself.

Important contributions have been made by Beardsworth and Keil (1992) and McDonald (2000). In their qualitative study of 76 vegetarians, Beardsworth and Keil set forth the notion of a ‘vegetarian career’ (1991). Some individuals convert to veganism or vegetarianism abruptly (Beardsworth and Keil 1992), but many embark upon a ‘career’ often triggered by specific experiences or events that involves moving along a scale towards increasing exclusion of animal products (Beardsworth and Keil 1991). The notion of a career, however, suggests that conversion is a unidirectional process and does not fully account for transitions away from vegetarianism nor the ways that context conditions this process. It is thus inadequate when it comes to studying vegetarianism from a sociological perspective. What an individual eats (or does not eat) can certainly affects his or her interactions with others, but it is their attitude toward non-vegetarians and vegans that is most likely to shape the ways that vegetarianism influences subsequent social interactions.

McDonald does not fully explore vegan attitudes, but she has developed a model for understanding the process of becoming vegan (not vegetarian) after finding a lack of models within existing literature. Although she studies veganism in a different setting (the United States), I use her model as a starting point to better understand the conversion to vegetarianism in the Argentina context. In order to develop this model, she began from a phenomenological perspective and used purposive sampling to identify and interview 12 committed vegans. Participant testimonies were then used to collectively tell the story of becoming vegan and then develop the following psychological schema:

Individuals begin from a notion of who they were, or their own identity, usually in relation to animals and food culture in general. In McDonald’s study, for example, most considered themselves to be ‘animal lovers’ who then had catalytic experiences that led them to question the ways that their behaviors affected animals. After these moments, several went through periods of repression before something prompted them to become ‘oriented’ and enter into a process of decision-making driven by what they learned. This then led participants to adjust their own worldview, thus causing them to redefine who they were and deepening their commitment to veganism.

Hirschler has extended McDonald’s model with a study of 32 vegans in North America by highlighting the pushback that many vegans experienced as a result of their conversion process. He conceptualizes the decision as one that rejects the dominant ideology of ‘carnism,’ defined by Joy (2002) as “the anthropocentric assumption that the killing of other animals for the human palate is ethical and legitimate” (cited in Hirschler 2011: 167-168). His findings underscore the need for a model of conversion that explicitly recognizes the cultural context in which change takes place. The current study in La Plata, Argentina thus builds upon this research by extending this model based on the findings presented in chapter four to effectively consider social and cultural context when studying conversion to vegetarianism and ethically- driven dietary change. For more details on the stages in McDonald’s model, see Appendix A.

TRADITIONAL RELIGIOSITY

One additional thread running through research on conversion and vegetarianism considers religiosity and spirituality. As noted above, ethical vegetarianism began in Pythagoras’ thinking as a practice linked to religious beliefs in transmigration (Walters and Portmess 1999: 11). Mohandas Gandhi, leader in peaceful civil disobedience, drew parallels in his political action to belief in the moral choice of vegetarianism as a nonviolent alternative (Gandhi 1999 [1931]: 141). Certain religious and spiritual practices, such as some followers of the Seventh-day Adventist Church and the Hare Krishna faith, practice forms of vegetarianism as part of their adherence to the teachings of these traditions. Sociological work on vegans and vegetarians has found this influence on some individuals (Nath 2010). Yet in response to those who conceptualize vegetarianism as a ‘quasi-religious’ practice, Hamilton (2000) contends that the essentially non-religious nature of ethical eating should be recognized.

It is perhaps not surprising, then, the reported lack of traditional religiosity among vegans and vegetarians in Anglo-Saxon societies today. A matched-pair study (with vegetarians matched by age and sex) by Freeland-Graves, Greninger, and Young (1986) found that only one quarter of vegetarians were traditionally religious compared to 59% of non-vegetarians (cited in Beardsworth and Keil 1997). In her examination of vegetarianism as a social movement, Maurer reported that 90% of vegetarians were not religious (2002). The extent to which vegetarianism may be (dis)connected to religiosity has thus been initially explored within the Anglo-Saxon context and connections with other cultures. However, it is not known how these dynamics may play out in a predominantly Catholic country such as Argentina, where approximately three- quarters of the population is nominally Roman Catholic, although 12% identify as atheist or agnostic (ARDA n.d.).

PRACTICING VEGETARIANISM – WHAT WE KNOW

Reactions of family and friends can produce conflict over shared meals, with family members dismissing the change as a passing phase or trying to ‘tempt’ vegetarians with eating meat (Roth 2005). Yet support from family and friends generally grows over time. In one study, two-thirds of vegetarians reported a negative reaction at the moment of dietary change, but only one-quarter reported continued opposition from family (Amato and Partridge 1989: 180). This process of adaption and accommodation within families deserves additional attention, given the ways that diet is inextricably linked to overall health and vegetarianism often (although not always) involves bringing more healthful eating practices to the family table. It is expected that these dynamics will be much more extreme in Argentina, given the beef-centric context that was described in the previous chapter. This study aimed to begin to fill this void, as the interviews brought to light participant observations of dietary and attitudinal changes they have observed in family and friends. If social conflict is not more intense than that documented in these stories, it is possible that vegetarians in Argentina are more accommodating or accepting of meat-eating.

SAVING FACE

Vegetarians and vegans report that they encounter attitudes that range from stereotypes and misinformation (Greenebaum 2012) to bewilderment, resistance, and hostility (Beardsworth and Keil 1992, Roth 2005, Potts and White 2008). As a result, vegetarians often seek to avoid

30 confrontation by adopting ‘face-saving’ strategies. Greenebaum has found that these strategies include the avoidance of confrontational situations, the decision to explain to others only at what are deemed appropriate times, and a focus on the health benefits of avoiding animal-based foods. Many vegetarians decide to lead by example rather than proselytize to others (Greenebaum 2012). Very little is known about the patterning of attitudes of vegetarians, however, and then extent to which these may vary across gender. This study will thus explore the ways that Argentine vegetarians interact with family and friends, asking questions about their attitudes towards others and interactions at meat-based traditions such as the asado.

RELATIONSHIPS AND SEXUALITY

Research has also demonstrated the importance of vegetarianism in dating and marriage. Many vegans and vegetarians express reluctance or refuse to date meat-eaters (Amato and Partridge 1989; Potts and White 2008). Rates of vegetarianism consistently reveal a higher number of women than men, which creates an imbalance in the dating pool although both groups have reported difficulties in finding suitable partners at similar rates (Amato and Partridge 1989: 206). The extent to which individuals seek out partners with compatible diets varies enormously, with some wives willing to cook meat for their husbands, which can be associated with more problems in the marriage (Amato and Partridge 1989: 213-214).

Others have expressed deep-seated feelings against dating meat-eaters. “Vegan sexuality” emerged as a theme in qualitative research on vegans and vegetarians in New Zealand to capture the extent to which sexuality is intertwined with meat- and dairy-free eating practices (Potts and Parry 2010). However, an examination of online reactions to the study on vegan sexuality revealed strong and negative reactions to the term, which ranged from criticism to hostility and even violent cannibalistic fantasies involving vegan sexual partners (Potts and Parry 2010). Given the hostile reaction in New Zealand, it is possible that vegan and vegetarian Argentines may minimize their preferences or, because the vast majority of people eat meat, they may accept partners who eat meat simply because they cannot find suitable partners who do not. Dating preferences and relationship partners are thus explored in this study.

CONCLUSION

In sum, existing studies of vegetarianism shed light on its gendered implications, religiousness and spirituality, sexuality and dating, and social interactions with family and friends. As the literature review has revealed, the focus has exclusively been on the advanced industrialized country context. Little is known about this emerging phenomenon in countries of the Global South where the expanding middle class and growth of communications technologies simultaneously produce greater purchasing power for animal protein while increasing the amount of information on vegetarianism that is available to consumers. Even so, empirical findings provide essential points of comparison and potential insight into the ways in which people become vegetarian and the impact of this decision on social relationships.

A sociological perspective makes it possible to see that the decision to become vegetarian is conditioned by the context in which one lives. It is particularly challenging to take this step in Argentina, especially when friends and family are all meat-eaters and the asado is an important shared eating practice. McDonald’s (2000) model is used as a starting point for understanding this process. The individual-level commitment to vegetarianism will also affect social interactions, although all vegetarians are not likely to experience social conflict in the same ways. An important part of understanding social interaction thus involves delving into the attitudes that vegetarians and vegans hold towards meat-centered cultural traditions (e.g. the asado) and meat-eaters. Understanding the processes by which food tastes are politically and socially constructed makes it possible to see that the rejection of the national diet – vegetarianism or veganism – involves much more than saying, “No, thank you.” Individuals adopting alternative diets not only confront their own memories attached to food traditions, but must also confront social norms that directly conflict with their new dietary practices.

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH, STUDY CONTEXT, AND DATA COLLECTION

In this chapter, I begin by presenting the reasons why this project required a qualitative approach that was primarily exploratory in nature with a small sample size (n=23). This group of individuals constitute a case study of an extreme outlier: vegetarianism in La Plata, within the beef-centric context of Argentina. My approach was also informed by social network analysis, which underscores the need to pay attention to the ways that relationships between actors influence behavior. After considering these points, I note that grounded theory further contributes to the methodological approach. I relied primarily on an inductive logic in the search for patterns that provided the basis for initial theory-building, both with regards to the process of conversion and the ways that vegetarians position themselves with respect to the meat-dominant culture. I then present more information on the study context and discuss my perspective and positionality as a researcher. Finally, I provide an overview of fieldwork and my sampling strategy before concluding with a summary of study participants.

WHY QUALITATIVE?

A qualitative approach may be adopted for many reasons but it is particularly important when studying under-researched areas, hard-to-find populations, and when interested in the how of a process (rather than its prevalence, for example). Qualitative research is needed here because: 1) very little is known about vegetarianism in Argentina; 2) the organizational presence of vegetarianism is very young (the Unión Vegetariana Argentina, headquartered in Buenos Aires, was founded in 2000; the vegan activist group in La Plata began their activities in March 2012); and, as a related point, 3) vegetarians in La Plata are difficult to find. A quantitative approach simply would not have been feasible for several reasons, one of which is that fact that it was difficult to identify vegetarians in the first place.

Qualitative approaches also have the potential to contribute to the development of theories. Comprehensive theory-building is an ambitious endeavor, but the initial results presented here are nonetheless meant to contribute to theories of dietary change and the subsequent impact on social relationships. This project thus begins by focusing on a substantively important case – a group of vegetarians in La Plata, Argentina – with a “causes-of-

33 effects” approach, aiming to identify causes that seem necessary and/or sufficient (Mahoney and Goertz 2006: 229) for conversion to vegetarianism. I also examine patterns in the social implications of practicing vegetarianism in the La Plata context. Just as the “worlds of families are not linear and additive, and context matters profoundly” in family-centered research (Weisner 2012: 2), understanding the experience of vegans and vegetarians initially requires a more qualitative approach. This is especially true in Argentina, where the contrast between vegan/vegetarian eating and the dominant meat culture is particularly stark; these experiences cannot be fully captured in a questionnaire or reduced to statistics on meat consumption.

In sum, a qualitative approach was most desirable for answering my research questions. Closed-ended questions or a survey would not have been able to capture the dynamics of conversion process or the impact on social relationships. Moreover, given the dearth of information on this subject in the Argentine context, open-ended questions were indispensable as this research was also exploratory. Exploratory studies are driven by “a need to study a group or population, identify variables that cannot be easily measured, or hear silenced voices” (Creswell 2013: 48). My interview guide had some structure but because many questions were open- ended, I was able to delve into areas and themes that I did not anticipate prior to the start of my fieldwork. This project also gives voice to vegetarians. They may not be marginalized in a traditional sense, especially if vegetarianism is conceptualized as a choice that requires some degree of affluence (i.e. the ability to buy meat – this excludes non-voluntary vegetarianism). Yet existing literature has suggested that some meat-eaters express unease or suspiciousness of vegetarianism, which can lead practicing vegetarians to feel uncomfortable or unable to fully express their beliefs about meat-eating (Nath 2011). Therefore, given the essential role that beef plays in the Argentine identity, those who opt out of the culinary culture are unlikely to have their voices heard when it comes to dietary decisions and food choices.16

VEGETARIANISM IN LA PLATA: A CASE STUDY APPROACH

A variant of a case study approach was used for this project, with the case being geographically bounded as it encompasses vegetarianism in La Plata, Argentina. Vegetarians exist in places around the world today but Argentina offers a particularly fascinating case study because it is

16 The fact that everyone I contacted agreed to be interviewed without compensation – and that many expressed excitement about this project – further supports this idea.

“extreme” or “atypical” (Creswell 2013: 148). As emphasized in chapters 1 and 2 of this thesis, beef is inextricably linked to what defines Argentina as a country to visit and what defines Argentines: they have been among the highest consumers of beef in the world since at least mid- 20th century. Vegetarianism represents the antithesis of dominant culinary practices in this setting. In such a setting where we would not expect the practice to emerge, it has – and it appears to be growing rapidly over the past decade.

Case studies have sometimes been critiqued as inadequate for theory generation and inappropriate for generalization. Yet as noted by Flyvberg:

Social science has not succeeded in producing general, context-independent theory and has thus in the final instance nothing else to offer than concrete, context-dependent knowledge. And the case study is especially well suited to produce this knowledge. (Flyvbjerg 2006: 6)

Context is key for understanding both the conversion to vegetarianism and the ways in which it is practiced. Quantitative surveys of vegetarians worldwide cannot capture this context; they fail to fully consider the unique aspects of culture that condition the ways that vegetarianism develops in a given community. Therefore, in order to understand the process of conversion to vegetarianism, its characteristics in Argentina, and its impact on social relationships, a qualitative case study approach is used.

This qualitative approach is informed by the theoretical underpinnings of social network analysis, which has great potential applied to the study of dietary change and vegetarianism in particular. Before turning to its relevance for this research, it is helpful to consider how a network approach could enhance our knowledge of vegetarianism more broadly. The roots of such a paradigm can be found in classical sociological writings. Simmel, for example, wrote of Conflict and the Web of Group Affiliations (1964). A perspective informed by social network analysis recognizes the multiple social networks that each actor belongs to as well as the relations that connect people to one another (Prell 2011). In larger studies where network boundaries can be identified, it becomes possible to evaluate behavioral changes as a result of social ties; the more vegetarian and vegan friends a person has, the more likely he or she may be to convert or deepen their commitment. Just as obesity seems to spread via social ties (Christakis and Fowler 2007) and adolescent drinking patterns are associated with the weak ties of partners (Kreager and Haynie 2011), vegetarianism diffusion may occur within networks.

Information-sharing and social pressures may prompt people to become vegetarian or even to move towards veganism. Networks may also play a role with the appearance of more nodes (i.e. more vegetarians), or they may become more cohesive, with an increasing density of ties within groups. The principle of homophily suggests that people seek out like people, so vegetarians and vegans make actively look to make new friends who share their worldview and accompanying dietary practices.

My study is more limited in scope, as a social network analysis of vegetarianism would require clear boundaries and complete information on each person within the network. Even if it were possible to obtain such information, resources and time constraints would have precluded interviews with every individual. More importantly perhaps, more information is needed about the processes and social implications of vegetarianism in the La Plata context before a network survey could take place. However, the conceptual framework is enriched by a network approach because it underscores the degree to which vegetarians are connected to both other vegetarians and meat-eaters. It also enables the differentiation of ‘strong’ versus ‘weak’ ties (Granovetter 1973). Weak ties have been recognized as important sources of new information. In the vegetarian context, these weak ties may provide catalysts for change among those who already lean towards vegetarianism, such as those individuals who were animal lovers or have a general distaste of meat. Strong ties, however, were hypothesized to matter more with regards to information diffusion among close friends and within intimate relationships. Because a social networks approach requires attention be paid to relationships, my interviews delved into the ways that vegetarians felt their friends and family influenced their initial decision and continuing commitment. Snowball sampling involves using both strong and weak ties of participants to identify participants, a point which will be further considered in the later section on sampling.

CONTRIBUTIONS FROM GROUNDED THEORY

This case study is primarily exploratory and relies on an inductive logic while the overall conceptual framework guiding the research rests loosely on grounded theory (Glaser and Strauss 1967). An attempt was made to collect data without making assumptions about what vegetarianism would look like or how it would be practiced in Argentina (e.g. the interview guide was edited by meat-eaters). Theory-building was not necessarily the aim when the project began but, as the lack of theoretical development within the literature became clear and notable

36 patterns emerged when analyzing the data, more effort was made to use elements of grounded theory to develop conceptual models of conversion and to capture the different ways that vegetarians subsequently re-position themselves with respect to the dominant meat culture. In grounded theory, “the inquirer generates a general explanation (a theory) of a process, an action, or an interaction shaped by the views of a large number of participants” (Creswell 2013). Although some scholars contend a large sample size is necessary, according to Creswell, the number of participants needed may range from 20 to 30. This project includes 23 vegetarians, meeting this requirement.

Combining elements of grounded theory with a case study approach raises issues about generalizability. Yet Flyvberg notes that “One can often generalize on the basis of a single case, and the case study may be central to scientific development via generalization as supplement or alternative to other methods” (Flyvbjerg 2006: 12). The results of this study cannot be taken as representative of all vegetarians in general or even in La Plata, Argentina, but the processes that were uncovered nonetheless provide an analytical framework for future studies of vegetarianism.

STUDY CONTEXT: LA PLATA, ARGENTINA

The city of La Plata was selected for this case study because of researcher familiarity with the context and the desire to carry out a project outside of Buenos Aires. This is important because Buenos Aires is a cosmopolitan center with neighborhoods that are heavily influenced by tourists from English-speaking countries, such as England and the United States, who may import knowledge of vegetarianism as well as the demand for vegetarian dishes. In contrast, La Plata is populated primarily by Argentines. It is located approximately 45 miles south/southeast of Buenos Aires, with a population of 740,000 and a metropolitan area approaching 900,000 (Argentina Census 2010). This fast-growing provincial capital is home to three main universities, including the National University of La Plata with nearly 109,000 students enrolled,17 which explains its reputation as a college town while also a place of political importance.

17 It should be noted that university education is tuition-free in Argentina at public universities, which attracts many students – especially from other Latin American countries. In addition, the complicated credit system translates into 6-8 years before graduation for many students, who generally work during this time as well.

There are no known estimates of vegetarianism in Argentina overall, much less in La Plata. With regards to anecdotal evidence, in nearly five years of almost continuous residence in La Plata, I worked for a nonprofit that had approximately 25 partner organizations and 30 host families I regularly visited; I taught English at two Institutes, two different businesses, and in my home; I took classes at the cultural center and at the local university; I worked carrying out surveys with a government-funded program – I spoke with Argentines in many social settings. One of the first questions that a foreigner is asked in Argentina is: “So, have you tried el asado? In hundreds of interactions across various social settings, people have known that I am a vegetarian. In virtually every situation, people were curious but in only a handful – perhaps five or six times – can I recall someone saying, “Oh, my sister has a friend who tried to be vegetarian for a few months,” or “I have a friend back in my town who is vegetarian.” Before embarking on this project, I had not personally met a single vegan or vegetarian from Argentina.

A consideration of shopping venues is also revealing. In major supermarkets, only one of the major brands of crackers does not use beef fat and nearly every brand of affordable alfajores – the dulce de leche cookies that the country is known for – contains beef fat. 18 Many types of bread, especially in the marginalized neighborhoods on the outskirts of town, and about one-half to two-thirds of pastry shop items normally are made with beef fat. When actively seeking out vegetarian or vegan options in early 2007, only one small restaurant existed, which reportedly opened in 2006. There were also two all-natural stores, which are small, family-run establishments, and many dried goods stores that sell grains, nuts, and other such items (these are not necessarily vegetarian, however, but considered places for buying many staples at cheaper prices than supermarkets).

The decision to select La Plata as the study site was made after finding out there was a vegan restaurant operating within the city center. Initial research online suggested that the project would be possible because a vegetarian Facebook group existed within La Plata, which was created early in 2012 (approximately five months before fieldwork took place). In June 2012, a vegetarian La Plata group, created only months earlier, had nearly 200 members. By June 2013, over 500 members belonged to the group (Facebook last accessed 15 June 2013).

18 Granix, associated with the Iglesia Adventista del Séptimo Día (Seventh-day Adventist Church), does not use beef fat but many vegans note that it uses genetically-modified cereals and are against buying their products for this reason.

RESEARCHER PERSPECTIVE

Before turning to fieldwork and sampling, I reflect upon my positionality and the ways in which it my own identity, as a researcher and a vegetarian in particular, may have shaped this research. Much sociological research, perhaps in an effort to avoid appearing biased or subjective, pays limited attention to “the assumptions, motivations, narratives, and relations which are part of the researcher’s backstage” (McCorkel and Myers 2003: 200). Yet feminist standpoint theorists challenge the positivistic assumption that a single universal truth exists, which leads to the conclusion that researcher positionality should not and cannot be ignored. Partial knowledge is produced from diverse standpoints and, by acknowledging that our own knowledge is not complete, it becomes possible to better consider the standpoints of others (Collins 2000: 270). We may strive towards as much objectivity as possible, but “scientific research and products of that research – as all endeavors in our social world – are forms of social organization” (McCorkel and Myers 2003: 201). Therefore, in this section, I consider the ways in which my identity as a vegetarian, a foreigner, and a woman affected my insider/outsider status and the process of knowledge production.

I have been a practicing vegetarian for twenty years. Until I began this project, I rarely reflected upon my own reasons for not eating meat: it was part of who I was, but I rarely discussed or debates the merits of my decision with friends or family – especially after moving to Argentina. I lived in La Plata for nearly five years, fully immersed in the culture as I lived and worked primarily with Argentines. I began as part of a nonprofit organization connected to a network of local nonprofit organizations and host families, which required regular travel across the city and attendance at many social and cultural events. This included asados at a rate of 3 to 8 per month, which were held for birthdays, anniversaries, holidays, and to celebrate other special occasions. I then taught English at the British Institute, where I was the only non- Argentine teacher. I kept a journal during most of this time and I estimate that I was the only foreigner at approximately two-thirds of the asados I attended. While I did not meet any other vegetarians or vegans from Argentina, I confronted reactions that ranged from curiosity and surprise to hostility and aggression. I also met my partner, a meat-eater from La Plata, and his large extended family; no one within his family had had contact with vegetarianism before meeting me. I usually tried to hide my vegetarianism, avoiding conversations about why I choose not to eat meat and eating before going to family events – I often felt almost ashamed, as

39 many Argentines seemed hurt when I refused the food they were offering me or uncomfortable enjoying the food on their own plates if I was not eating something as well.

Therefore, as a vegetarian in Argentina, I am intimately aware of the emotions wrapped up in not eating meat: the jokes, critique, constant questioning, feelings of exclusion, and uncomfortable situations. I have also been deeply touched by the ways in which many people came to accept my decision and accommodate me at shared meals by preparing meat-free options. Some have also expressed a desire to eat less meat themselves. Five months after completing interviews for this research, I had a particularly relevant experience on New Year’s Eve, 2012 to 2013. My partner’s grandmother called me to say that she wanted a ‘vegetarian menu’ for the night; I was deeply touched – surprised but thrilled to help prepare the food for everyone. We held our own version of the asado, with an assortment of vegetables and cheese along with several hearty salads; meat took a back-stage role. My partner of nearly six years has also come to embrace vegetarianism, right around the time I began working on this project.

Indeed, it is only as the contours of this project took shaped that my own commitment to vegetarianism was re-affirmed. I began to feel a more profound emotional attachment to my decision, which undoubtedly affected my research here. However, as Nancy Naples points out, “emotions can form an important basis for understanding and analysis” (Naples 2003: 63). As a researcher, my own experiences deepened the empathy I felt for participants. On one hand, I understand the commitment to the vegan philosophy. Yet on the other hand, while living in Argentina I felt the social pressures to accommodate meat-eaters for the first time: I baked ham- topped pizza in my own home and thought about trying the asado.19 Most Argentines at some point expressed curiosity about my motivations, and my own responses ranged from, “I don’t like the taste much,” to “Because of the environmental impact” – during my interviews, I realized that participants in my survey similarly offer different answers depending on the social context. Refusing meat in Argentina has the potential to deeply offend.

Studying vegetarianism as a vegetarian thus required me to develop better reflective practices as a researcher. Reflective practices may be “implemented at different levels, ranging

19 I would have liked to try the asado as so many Argentines urged me to do, but was never able to overcome the feelings of repulsion that meat produces for me. Looking back on my first years spent in Argentina, I also see the stark contrast between the ways that I accepted meat-eating there but had never similarly accepted it in the United States.

40 from remaining sensitive to the perspectives of others and how we interact with them to a deeper recognition of the power dynamics that infuse ethnographic encounters” (Naples 2003: 41). This research cannot be considered a full ethnography, which requires intent: the researcher enters a community with the explicit goal of gaining inside access and studying a defined phenomenon or process. An ethnographic lens, however, serves to underscore the ways that the participants in this study form part of a “culture-sharing group” (Creswell 2013: 275). It also prompted me to think about how I would present myself to participants, as I strived to gain “inside” access but also retain my “outsider” status as a researcher.

Prior to carrying out interviews, I decided I would simply present myself as a researcher studying vegetarianism. I did not state that I was a vegetarian because I did not want the focus in our interviews to shift to my own experiences and beliefs on the subject. I also had concerns about presenting myself as a vegetarian from the United States: a place where the “mainstreaming of vegetarianism” has taken place (Guptill, Copelton, and Lucal 2013: 11). Vegetarians in Argentina were likely to be aware of this, and could have assumed that I had greater knowledge; the fact that I have been a vegetarian for so long (20 years) also could have made them feel like their shorter time commitments somehow mattered less. As the project unfolded, the dilemma became clear: when my vegetarianism was not known from the start, participants often provided statistics promoting it and several almost seemed like they were trying to convert me. In contrast, when I was asked about my vegetarianism early in the interview, participants rarely talked about health benefits and focused more on social relations (which is what I asked them to do). Yet it is also possible that knowing I was a vegetarian for so long, they may not have felt as comfortable talking about their love of meat when younger or in as much depth. Because I was also a vegetarian, they sometimes seemed to assume I would understand their situations without much explanation. I tried to overcome both of these extremes by probing into their own experiences, trying to maintain more neutral facial expressions throughout and asking them for clarification if they offered a response that referenced my own vegetarianism.

I thus attempted to use my status as an insider and an outsider differently throughout each interview. These two positions are often presented as a single choice, where a researcher should opt for one or the other. Yet in fact, these are “ever-shifting and permeable social locations” (Naples 2003: 65). Because I was a foreigner – an “outsider” – participants likely felt more

41 compelled to explain the tradition of the asado, at much greater depth than they would if I had been from Argentina. At the same time, my vegetarianism granted me “insider” status so they did not need to explain all of the details of their practices (e.g. where they obtain vitamin B12). Instead, the interviews were able to focus more on the reactions at conversion and the impact that vegetarianism has on social relationships, which is what I was most interested in. Insider familiarity with the meat-dominant culture, however, also had its drawbacks: during interviews, I sometimes struggled to maintain enough distance and avoid influencing their responses. For example, when participants shared stories of attending asados, I sometimes felt – but resisted – the urge to share my own. Many times, after I finished asking questions, participants would then ask me about my experiences and we continued talking after the recording device was turned off.

Upon analyzing the data, I became more aware of the ways that being a woman may have affected the dynamics of these interviews. This is particularly true with regards to those questions that explored how vegetarianism affected intimate partnerships and dating preferences. I found it easier to probe into the feelings and experiences of female respondents, likely because I have had similar experiences. With male participants, I had a more difficult time developing follow-up questions because I did not expect to find that they almost all reported conversion in their female partners after they started dating. With regards to the subject of how vegetarianism fits with sexual attraction, women may have felt more open and comfortable discussing their feelings than men, who may have provided more information had they been interviewed by a male researcher.

FIELDWORK

Informed by a case study approach, network analysis, grounded theory, and my insider perspective as well as my position as an outside researcher, fieldwork consisted of 23 interviews with vegetarians, vegans, and pescatarians in La Plata, Argentina, from July to August 2012.20 The question guide was reviewed and edited by three meat-eating, college-educated Argentines with experience carrying out and analyzing interviews (two have backgrounds in sociology as

20 I also supplemented these interviews with observations, in the form of visits to the vegan restaurant, health food stores, participation in a vegan cooking workshop, and by following posts and activity on Facebook groups (of which I form part). Information from these observations and interactions served to inform my data collection process and my analysis, as it enabled me to quickly understand the references made by participants (to restaurants, health food stores, common terms, etc.) during our interviews.

42 well). Their comments allowed me to improve the quality of my questions, as they identified places where the questions could be potentially leading and/or confusing for participants.

Interviews took place in five settings. Usually a neutral place (café with many tea options) was proposed, which is where 5 interviews were held, but the majority held in participant’s home or in their workplace upon invitation by the participant. Interviews ranged in length from 17 to 80 minutes, with the average interview lasting about 45 minutes. Nearly 18 hours of data were collected and transcribed; excerpts were then analyzed and translation to English occurred as a final step to preserve meanings and best capture the themes. A daily journal with field notes was kept during this month, with entries for each interview and notes on the process of coordinating the interview itself. The interview guide is included in Appendix B.

I personally recorded, transcribed, and coded these interviews. Pseudonyms were used to protect the confidentiality of participants. My experience living in Argentina and fluency in Spanish allowed me to better understand nuance, slang, cultural references, and intonation. A native Argentine reader also verified the transcriptions to ensure the accurate representation of what was said. Coding of these transcriptions was done in Dedoose, a cross-platform application that facilitates the integration of multiple types of data. Excerpts were then identified; the initial translation process took place after the first draft of this thesis was written (in English). Original quotations in Spanish are provided in footnotes for cross-checking and to ensure greater accuracy in the results section.

This study presents the themes that emerged in interviews with practicing vegetarians and vegans in La Plata, Argentina. An initial round of coding of open-ended interviews, with questions adapted during the process, enabled a collection of key themes into broader concepts and categories. Inductive logic was utilized as a first round of open coding was done. I then returned to the literature on vegetarianism and used more deductive logic as I compared the themes that were emerging in my interviews with existing literature. An iterative cycle involved examining the data and connecting findings to theories on vegetarianism and its potential impact on social relationships in the Argentine context. In line with the exploratory nature of this stage and its ethnographic lens, additional insight was gleaned from an analysis of Facebook postings within the group Vegetarianos La Plata and the blog Veganos La Plata. As the basis for

43 processes began to become clear, conceptual models were drawn and re-adjusted and additional layers of coding were done.

SAMPLING

Existing studies of vegetarianism often rely exclusively on snowball sampling to gather data from self-identified vegetarians and vegans. Usually qualitative, these studies aim to learn more about the process of conversion, health and nutritional attitudes, and other perceptions and beliefs (Beardsworth and Keil 1991; Merriman 2010). An alternative but indirect approach is to measure meat consumption, as the analysis of several representative surveys have done, and determine which factors predict very low or no meat consumption (e.g. Gossard and York 2003). These studies shed light on individual-level processes but do not capture the social relationships that affect, and are affected by, dietary choices. Moreover, even if it were feasible to use random sampling of individual vegetarians, data collection would likely violate the assumption of independence and could introduce bias into any statistical analysis that does not consider the relationships between vegetarians themselves. Many vegans only date other vegans (Potts and Parry 2010) and, given the social nature of eating, it is reasonable to assume that the type and strength of ties affect vegetarian attitudes and practices.

Given the dearth of information about the current prevalence of vegetarianism and veganism in La Plata, snowball sampling was used to identify individuals who identify as pescatarian, vegetarian, or vegan. Several ‘meat-avoiders’ were also contacted, but they are excluded from the present study given the desire to focus on those who fully reject meat as part of their diet within the context of a meat-dominant culture. In addition to being the most feasible option, snowball sampling allowed me to quickly build rapport with study participants. I was especially able to create these connections by starting with personal and professional contacts. Nearly all of these individuals invited me to their home for our interview, which seemed to make them feel at ease. In all, there were three main points of entry (mapped out in Appendix C), which led to the inclusion of 3 pescatarians, 9 ovo-lacto vegetarians, and 11 vegans21 in this study. In order to extend the sample, contacts of other vegetarians were requested at the end of each interview.

21 Five of these individuals identified as transitioning towards veganism, as some consume honey or dairy products on occasion although these individuals generally avoid leather and animal-tested products.

First, personal and professional contacts that had been formed during nearly five years of residence in La Plata led to 13 one-on-one interviews along three chains of contact. Approximately eighty individuals were asked if they knew of any currently practicing vegetarians or vegans in La Plata. From this initial outreach, one pescatarian was identified. A medical doctor, she was formerly an English student who had decided to become a pescatarian three months earlier. She did not have any close friends or family, but knew of two vegetarians who are also employed at the main public hospital where she works. These two individuals were interviewed, although they did not have any additional contacts within the city of La Plata. No one else was able to identify any vegetarians or vegans, but a former co-worker agreed to ask her extended network of personal and professional contacts, which produced two additional chains of contact. Two sisters were interviewed as the result of one contact. The other contact led to 8 interviews (2 vegans and 6 ovo-lacto vegetarians), connected via friendship and dating ties.

Second, email and Facebook were used to reach out to vegetarian and vegan group members as well as those who have vegan food microenterprises. Three microenterprise vegan owners, one couple (interviewed jointly) and one individual, were interviewed along with two vegan group members. Referrals from these three individuals led to many more vegans, although only two were interviewed due to time constraints.

Finally, in-person contact was made with those working at the sole vegan restaurant and the primary health food store (with a vegan orientation) in La Plata. Three interviews are included in this study, as time constraints again limited the amount of follow-up with referrals that could be done. More informal conversations with at a vegan cooking workshop, just one day before fieldwork was completed, found that many of the same issues and themes came up in their studies of conversion and relationships with family and friends.

PARTICIPANTS OVERVIEW

An overview of participants can be found in Table 3-1 (page 47). The twenty-three individuals in this study include vegans (7 female, 4 male), ovo-lacto vegetarians (5 female, 4 male), and pescatarians (3 female). They ranged in age from 21 to 55 years old. More than 80% are under the age of 35 and all vegans were aged 30 or younger. Approximately two-thirds of participants were women, which is relatively consistent with empirical patterns from other countries;

45 approximately 70% of vegetarians in the United States are thought to be women (Maurer 2002: 11). All were currently living or working in La Plata, Argentina, and more than four in five were born and raised in the city; others were from elsewhere in Argentina and had come to the city to work and/or study.

Figures show that for the province of Buenos Aires as a whole, nearly 6% of the adult population ages 20 to 59 hold university degrees (Argentine Census 2010). In stark contrast, half of those interviewed held university degrees and the remaining were currently students or had taken at least some courses of higher education. This is consistent with previous empirical work that has found that vegetarians are more likely to be middle class (Maurer 2002: 8). At the same time, it should be noted that La Plata is a college town: as noted earlier (page 37), the enrolled student body at the principal (free) public university is 109,000, or around one-ninth of the city’s metropolitan area population. Occupations ranged from medical doctor, pharmacist, attorney, and computer specialist to restaurant worker, store owner, entrepreneur, student, and temporarily unemployed.

Length of vegetarianism ranged from 20 years (the first 15 was red meat avoidance only) to 3 months; the average length was 3.2 years and the median was 1.5 years for all participants. For the 11 vegans, the average length was just 1 year. Nearly half of those interviewed (11 of 23) were ‘lone vegetarians’ at first, in that they did not know any friends, family members, or close work/school acquaintances who were vegetarians when they decided to convert. Several themes, such as religiosity and the use of leather, emerged from these interviews so data is incomplete for participants on these items. When asked about their motivations and whether religion played a role, 9 of the participants responded that they were atheist. Time and space limitations precluded a full exploration of this theme, but it is noted that the lack of traditional religiosity is consistent with existing studies of vegetarianism (Freeland-Graves, Greninger, and Young 1986, Maurer 2002). Questions about animal rights activism, for example, were not asked explicitly in the first few interviews. See Appendix D for additional information on study participants and interviews.

Table 3-1. Participant Overview relationship lone* name sex age Profession parent? veg*n status status vegetarian? Alejandro M 31 IT / computers cohabit no vegetarian, 4 yrs. no

Andrés M 31 Attorney partnered no vegetarian, 4 yrs. yes recent graduate, works Agustina F 26 cohabit no vegetarian, 4.5 yrs. no at restaurant Clara F 23 music student single no vegan, 8 mo. yes doctor, medical pescatarian, 5 yrs. Claudia F 37 single no yes resident (no red meat, 15 yrs.) vegan, 4 yrs. Cristián M 30 public employee single no yes (vegetarian, 6 yrs.) Daniela F 25 fashion designer partnered no vegetarian, 1.5 yrs. no vegan, 2 yrs. Diego M 26 IT / web-based work single no yes (vegetarian, 3 yrs.) cook / part owner, Emilia F 44 cohabit yes pescatarian, 8 mo. no vegan restaurant

Ezequiel M 28 Digipunturist single no vegan, 1.5 yrs. no

Florencia F 55 medical doctor cohabit yes pescatarian, 3 mo. yes student, Gaston M 22 cohabit no vegan, 2 yrs. no microenterprise Juana F 30 Unemployed single yes vegan, 3 mo. yes student, Laura F 21 cohabit no vegan, 1 yr. no microenterprise Lucas M 21 cook, vegan restaurant single no vegetarian, 3 mo. no

Lucia F 31 Attorney cohabit yes vegetarian, 1 yr. no vegan, 1.5 yrs. Maia F 25 Pharmacist cohabit no yes (vegetarian, 3.5 yrs.)

Mariana F 28 natural foods store partnered yes vegan, 5 mo. yes

Matías M 25 student, bartender partnered no vegetarian, 3 yrs. no

Noelia F 29 musical therapist partnered no vegetarian, 7 mo. no

vegan, 10 mo. Raquel F 30 Microenterprise single yes yes (vegetarian, 1 yr.) vegan, 6 mo. Soledad F 21 Student partnered no yes (vegetarian, 1 yr.) Sonia F 38 medical doctor single no vegetarian, 1 yr. No * “Lone” vegetarians are those who did not have any close contact (friends, family, or close school/work acquaintances) upon conversion. This category will be developed in chapter four.

CONCLUSION

In this chapter, I have presented my approach, which is qualitative and exploratory due to the nature of my research questions. The small group of participants interviewed together represent a case study, as it is their combined experiences that provide insight into how vegetarianism emerges and how it is practiced in La Plata, Argentina. I have also pointed to contributions from grounded theory, the use of an inductive logic in data collection and analysis, and the ways that a social network approach serves to highlight the need to pay attention to connections between participants. This is also consistent with the snowball sampling strategy, which allowed me to interview sets of friends and partners to obtain multiple perspectives on the same subjects and, in some cases, events. In addition to an overview of my approach and the data collection itself, I have also reflected upon the ways in which my positionality as a researcher may have influenced this project. Finally, I offered a short summary of study participants. The next two chapters present the main findings of my research.

CHAPTER FOUR

BECOMING VEGETARIAN

This chapter analyzes the process of becoming vegetarian within the meat landscape of La Plata, Argentina. It consists of four sections. First, I begin by analyzing participant meanings of vegetarianism and their primary motivations for conversion. As noted in chapter 2, previous research has found multiple and overlapping reasons for becoming vegetarian or vegan. Studies that rely on snowball or convenience sampling may have an over-representation of ethical adherents because individuals who feel strongly about their reasons for dietary change may be more likely to give interviews or make contacts with other vegetarians and vegans (which may increase the chances that they are included in studies that use non-random samples). Given that virtually all participants mentioned animal rights as at least part of their rationale for being vegetarian, it might appear that ethical vegetarians were over-represented in this research. However, it should be recalled that the Argentine medical establishment and society in general believe beef to be necessary for a healthy diet22; this was conveyed by two medical doctors (both pescatarians) interviewed for this study. A third well-established doctor who eats meat confirmed this as well. While it is not possible to evaluate the extent of health-only vegetarians in La Plata, Argentina, it seems unlikely that there are many – especially given the dearth of options available at supermarkets and the vast majority of stores and restaurants.

Second, after considering participant meanings of vegetarianism and the predominance of ethical motivations in my sample, I present a model of conversion adapted from McDonald’s “Processing of Learning to Become Vegan” (2000), as anticipated in chapter 2 of this thesis (see Appendix A). Like Hirschler (2011), I used this model as a starting point for identifying stages in the conversion process, although I adjust these stages and collapse categories to be consistent with evidence from my interviews. I also explicitly address the importance of social context. McDonald’s model begins with “Who I was;” which she defines as “the background and experiences that made the participa [sic] who they were prior to the learning experience” (McDonald 2000: 6). I find that in the La Plata context, pre-vegetarian identity is intimately tied to meat-centered traditions and childhood memories. Many participants then experienced

22 See, for example, the Argentina Society of Nutrition’s recommendation that a “moderate” serving of meat be eaten every day. Sociedad Argentina de Nutrición. http://sanutricion.org.ar/charlas_carnes.pdf (accessed 13 July 2013).

49 catalysts and/or exposure to new information, which initiated their transition to vegetarianism. Several participants – mainly women – then entered the stage of repression, often as a result of social or family pressures. One-fourth of the women in the sample recalled earlier periods of repression that occurred after realization; they attempted vegetarianism when younger but were frustrated by family and/or the larger social context. The final stage is thus “realization” of the implications of eating meat, which leads to the decision to go vegetarian or vegan and necessitates a re-negotiation of their position within the meat landscape. I discuss evidence from the interviews that illustrate the dynamics of each of these stages within this model of conversion, drawing attention to gender differences within stages and across the conversion process more broadly.

Third, I conclude my analysis of the conversion process by discussing the extent to which these decisions truly represent “conversion” – just how permanent do vegetarians believe them to be? None of the participants reported eating meat and most had very little desire to taste it again; they found meat more and more repulsive the longer they were vegetarian. I therefore examine their long-term plans to understand their level of commitment; by this definition, those who plan to remain vegetarians for life (nearly all participants in this study) are committed to the lifestyle. Several were in the process of becoming more deeply committed, as they expressed desire to move towards a vegan worldview that may involve reducing dairy and/or egg consumption, buying from local or organic sources, excluding leather and wool, and/or actively seeking out products – including medications when possible – that are not tested on animals.

Fourth, I consider a surprising pattern seemingly unique to this study: nearly half of the participants became vegetarians without close contact with any other vegetarians (defined as family, friends, or close work/school acquaintances). Existing empirical work on vegetarianism has not found such patterns of solitary conversion. In fact, one study in the English-speaking world found that nearly two-thirds of individuals said their decision was directly influenced by another vegetarian (Maurer 2002: 6). In order to capture this phenomenon in my study context, I consider these individuals to be “lone vegetarians.” That is, upon conversion, they reported deeper feelings of social isolation and, in several narratives of female participants, this isolation caused them to start eating meat again. Special attention is paid to lone vegetarianism because it conveys the difficulties in implementing dietary change, even when it is part of a personal goal, to the extent that it conflicts with what are seen as “normal” eating practices in mainstream

50 society. Although nearly all participants reported that over time, they acquired new vegetarian friends or conversion occurred within existing friendship and/or intimate relationships, many continue to feel like un bicho raro23 across a variety of social settings. Finally, I conclude this chapter with final thoughts on the multiple meanings of vegetarianism, the usefulness of this adapted model of the conversion process for understanding dietary change, and the depth of commitment within a setting where vegetarianism is marginalized and poorly understood.

MEANINGS OF VEGETARIANISM

“Vegetarian (succinctly): is the term that encompasses everyone who exclude all types of meat from their diets” (Unión Vegetariana Argentina).24 When participants in this study were asked what vegetarianism means to them, several offered short answers consistent with this most basic definition, although they often made reference to the avoidance of animal death and/or eating more vegetables as well. Andrés, a 31-year-old attorney, replied, “Not killing anyone. Not eating anyone.”25 His partner, Daniela, a 25-year-old fashion designer, stated that “Being vegetarian is just that – not eating meat. Eating vegetables.”26 Gaston, a vegan increasingly interested in trophology,27 was similarly straightforward although he brought in language that more directly acknowledged the connection to live animals: “In my view, vegetarianism is the dietary custom or diet that is only based in the suppression of animal cadavers.”28 Vegetarianism is thus defined by what is excluded from the diet.

Compared to these narrow definitions of vegetarianism, around three-quarters of participants offered explanations that were wrapped up in the meanings they give to vegetarianism and veganism. Their responses revealed the predominance of ethical vegetarianism in this sample (versus health or religious motivations, for example). References to animal rights, animal suffering, and/or animal cruelty were made by all participants at least once

23 “A strange bug,” literally translated; this exact expression came up in six interviews and it captures the idea of “otherness;” it is usually translated as “weirdo,” “strange person,” “strange bird,” “outsider,” or “alien;” See, for example, the Interglot discussion boards (www.interglot.com, accessed 27 June 2013) or Spanish Dictionary (www.spanishdict.com, accessed 27 June 2013). 24 VEGETARIANO (a secas): es el término que engloba a todas las personas que en sus dietas no incluyen carnes de ningún tipo. www.uva.com.ar The website provides an overview of different types of vegetarians, e.g. lacto-ovo. 25 “No, no matar a nadie. No comerse nadie.” 26 “Ser vegetariano es eso - no comer carne. Comer vegetales.” 27 The study of ideal food combinations. 28 GASTON: Para mí el vegetarianismo es, digamos, la costumbre de dieta o la dieta que se basa en solamente la supresión de cadáveres animales. Y punto.

51 in each interview. Nearly 80% (18 participants) cited such concerns as a primary reason for becoming vegetarian or vegan, and a full two-thirds of these individuals stated that this was the reason (and the only reason) for eliminating meat from their diet. In comparison, only 5 participants considered health to be a primary motivating factor. Differences in conceptualizations of vegetarianism versus veganism were relatively clear-cut, as most vegans believed vegetarianism to be a stage of transition towards veganism. However, some vegetarians in this study did not have plans to eliminate all animal-derived products in the future. Both vegans and vegetarians expressed several of the same arguments about using animals for human consumption and, as noted above, concerns about animal welfare were often reported.

Sonia explained the animal rights perspective as a desire to “do no harm” because it is simply “not necessary”:

SONIA: I don’t want to kill animals. I came to realize: I don’t need to, to eat, and it saddens me to think that animal killings are done only for that reason – for clothing, for food – it’s not necessary. I don’t want to hurt anything that is part of my environment.29

For others, eating meat is more than just “not necessary,” there also exists a strong moral imperative because, in the words of Soledad, a 21-year-old who is going vegan, “We all have the same right to life.”30 Indeed, several were quick to point out that the decision to avoid meat was not driven by health reasons. Daniela, for example, clarified that it was only after becoming vegetarian did she realize there were health benefits, stating “I later found out it was beneficial in other ways, that it was much healthier. I was excited about that, too, but that is parallel. I didn’t do it because of that – to lead a healthier life, no.”31

This attempt to distinguish ethical vegetarianism from other motivations was a way that participants elevated their decision to a higher level, above and beyond concern for personal health. From this position, other vegetarians are seen as less legitimate. Alejandro, who had become vegetarian after his friend, Andrés, stated that “a true vegetarian is vegetarian for moral reasons.”32 For him, other reasons are “secondary” and those who are motivated by other

29 SONIA: No quiero matar animales [...] No lo necesito, para comer, me dan mucha lástima que haya una matanza animal que sea solamente para eso, para vestirse, para comer - no hace falta. No quiero lastimar a nada que tenga que ver con mi medioambiente.” 30 SOLEDAD: Todos tenemos el mismo derecho a vivir. 31 DANIELA: Me enteré que también era beneficioso en otro sentido. Digamos, que era mucho más saludable. también me copó eso. Pero bueno, eso es paralelo. No es que lo hice por eso. Tener una vida más sana, no. 32 ALEJANDRO: El verdadero vegetariano es por una razón moral.

52 factors, such as health, are “lite” vegetarians33 who would eat meat if it were sustainable or free of hormones and antibiotics. His attitude and the concomitant boundary-drawing process are consistent with findings from a study of Finnish vegans. Whereas raw foodists in Finland viewed meat-eating as an act to be avoided because of how meat made them feel physically, vegans reported allegiance to higher ethical principles and boundaries that were reinforced by strong moral condemnations of meat-eating within their own community (i.e. other vegans) (Arppe, Mäkelä, and Väänänen 2011: 290).

Indeed, the findings of Arppe, Mäkelä, and Väänänen (2011) were further validated by Diego and Gaston, who both indicated they were leaning towards raw foodism. They reinforced the boundary that Alejandro had drawn between ethical and health-motivated vegetarianism, but from the opposite side. Diego, who began as a vegetarian five years earlier for health reasons, noted that his basis for veganism was expanding to include some consideration of animal rights. However, his desire to maintain an ethical lifestyle was tempered by his life philosophy in favor of certain principles rather than against existing practices:

DIEGO: I started getting into the whole issue of awareness, everything about animal cruelty. But from another point of view. I clash with those vegans – the traditional vegan [...] My philosophy is: if you are against something, you shouldn’t always be anti- this or anti-that; you should support the opposite. So I don’t really go to those protests against animal cruelty. If I were to go to something, it would be to support a cause, like an ecological reserve. But anti- no, I don’t believe in that.34

Diego therefore distanced himself from the ethical purism exhibited by Alejandro. Such divisions reveal that meanings of vegetarianism vary from one individual to the next – even within romantic relationships. For, when Alejandro contended that “true” vegetarianism is motivated exclusive by the moral imperative, his partner, Lucia, politely interrupted our conversation from the kitchen (where she was preparing maté) to express her disagreement. For her, it is the outcome – that a person does not eat meat – that matters most. Multiple and overlapping motivations are acceptable and commonplace:

33 ALEJANDRO: Vegetariano livianamente. 34 DIEGO: Me empecé a meter con todo el tema de - lo que es la consciencia, todo lo que es el maltrato animal. Pero de otra punta de vista. Yo por ahí choco mucho con los que son veganos, el tradicional vegano, que [...] por la filosofía que tengo yo...si vos estas en contra de algo, no tenés que ir en contra de - tenés que ir en favor del opuesto. Entonces como que no me da eso de ir a marchas en contra de la violencia animal. Sí, iría si hacen algo a favor de una reserva ecológica. Pero 'en contra de' - me parece que no.

LUCIA: The truth is I’ve never really asked myself what [vegetarianism] means in a few words because I think it’s connected to a lot of things. It’s not one-sided. And, let’s see – I don’t think it is just not eating meat. It has to do with an act of love and respect that one can analyze, rationally, if wanted. There are people who make this decision in a more premeditated way, they get informed, they evaluate, they analyze the health risks, and so they may be more rational when they decide. In my case, it’s much more emotional [...] It’s not just about what you eat, but – I think – yes, it goes further than that, it has to do with an attitude towards life.35

As Lucia’s response shows, the reasons to stop eating meat are intertwined with an expansive view of the meanings she attributes to vegetarianism. Her response contrasts with the rational argument provided by Sonia (eating meat is “not necessary”) and Alejandro’s emphasis on a moral imperative. Lucia further expressed an emotional component to her decision, distinguishing her process from the “premeditated,” logic-derived decisions of others, including her partner, Alejandro.

Indeed, the vast majority of participants defined vegetarianism more extensively, conceiving of it as a different lifestyle and/or life philosophy that entails respect for animals and greater awareness of where food comes from. When asked about what vegetarianism means to them, these individuals usually took some time before responding, pausing to clarify or think through what they were saying and sometimes expressing uncertainty:

EMILIA: They say that by changing your diet you can improve your health a lot and prevent a ton of illnesses. So, well, I don’t think vegetarianism is just a dietary change, but a life philosophy. Commitment with nature, with everything organic, with taking care of the planet, you know? Always trying to consume fewer chemical products, that sort of thing.36

NOELIA: Maybe it is being more aware – part of....being a bit more sensitive, more aware, with respect to everything.37

35 LUCIA: No sé, la verdad es que nunca me pregunté en pocas palabas que significa porque creo que está relacionado a un montón de cosas. No es una única faceta. Y a ver, creo que no es solamente no comer carne. Que tiene que ver por ahí que es un acto de amor y respeto que uno lo puede analizar racionalmente si quiere. Hay personas que toman esta decisión de manera por ahí más premeditada, se informan más, se evalúan, analizan los riesgos para la salud y por ahí son más racionales a la hora de tomar la decisión. En mi caso, soy bastante más emocional [...] No tiene que ver solo con la alimentación, que si no - creo que - sí, pero con poco más allá, pero si con una actitud de vida. 36 EMILIA: Dicen que cambiando la alimentación, podés mejorar un montón - tu salud - y prevenir un montón de enfermedades. Eh, y bueno, no creo que el vegetarianismo sea nada más que un cambio de alimentación sino también una filosofía de vida. Compromiso con la naturaleza, con todo lo orgánico, que cuidar la tierra, ¿no? Tratar de consumir cada vez menos productos químicos, todo eso. 37 NOELIA: Y quizás sea ser más consciente – parte de la...de ser un poco más sensible, y más consciente, ante todo.

MATÍAS: I think it is a personal life decision, you could say. More than anything, it is respecting a right, which more than anything lets you be at peace with yourself. Not that it is done because of a guilty....or yes, because of a guilty conscience, yes. But more than anything, it’s so you can be at peace with a way of thinking and follow a way of thinking.38

This shows that to the extent that vegetarianism is more than a dietary decision, it is an opportunity for an individual to reconcile the way that they live with a belief system that involves greater respect for others, thus enabling the person to feel more at peace with their own actions. For many vegans, vegetarianism is a phase of transition towards veganism, as Raquel stated, “In my opinion, vegetarianism is the transition.”39

Meanings of vegetarianism are thus diverse, but the question remains: How do people become vegetarians in the first place?

A MODEL OF CONVERSION

The research carried out for this project was based on inductive reasoning, as it was exploratory in nature and driven by a desire to understand how vegetarianism is emerging in one of the most beef-centric countries in the world. As such, I did not seek to confirm a specific model when starting my fieldwork. Furthermore, because I became a vegetarian two decades ago and have little memory of what prompted my own conversion, I attempted to maintain as much of an open mind as possible during my interviews, although I sought out more empirical findings from existing literature for comparison post-fieldwork. It soon became clear, however, that the process of becoming vegetarian exhibited some of the same patterns as McDonald identified in her model of “The Process of Learning to Become Vegan” (2000). Her model centers around the individual-level process of learning to adopt veganism. I expand upon her psychological schema, extending it to include the cultural context and re-conceptualizing processes as they unfolded within the lives of study participants. Most prominently, my model recognizes the constraints of the dominant meat-culture as shaping the individual-level processes of becoming vegetarian or vegan (veg*n).40 It is also extended into a model of adaptation and

38 MATÍAS: Para mí es una decisión personal de vida, se podría decir. Más que nada respetar un derecho, es, más que nada es por estar tranquilo con uno mismo. Porque no es que uno lo hace por cargo, si - por cargo de consciencia, sí. Pero más que nada, es para vayas tranquilo con uno mismo con un pensamiento y seguir una línea de pensamiento. 39 RAQUEL: El vegetarianismo para mí es la transición. 40 The term “veg*n” is sometimes used as shorthand to represent both vegetarians and vegans.

55 accommodation, “Practicing Vegetarianism,” which is developed in chapter five. This is conceptualized as follows:

Similar to the findings of McDonald (2000), understanding the process of becoming vegetarian begins with individual narratives of who they were growing up in the meat-dominant culture. As shown above, the cultural context shapes the decision-making process. For example, the importance of meat in childhood forms an essential part of “Who I Was,” and generally provides a stark contrast to the decision to become vegetarian. It should be noted that movement between stages does not occur unidirectionally for most participants. Green arrows represent the most direct transitions to veganism, whereas red arrows signal more tumultuous moments that generally produce greater inner turmoil and social conflict or even a return to meat-eating.

For those who embark upon vegetarianism or veganism as a personal decision, movement outside of the culture does not occur and, as indicated by the blue arrow, tension with the meat- dominant culture is very limited. These individuals generally continue to attend traditional events such as asados and may prepare meat for others, including non-vegetarian partners, children, family, and friends. In contrast, others make a decision that effectively involves stepping outside of the meat-dominant culture. It is reinforced by information and resources about vegetarianism and veganism but, for these individuals, it becomes increasingly difficult to

56 engage in meat-centered traditions such as the asado, or even to share the family table with non- vegetarians when meat is being served. Evidence and the social consequences of these four positions – rejection, avoidance, tolerance, and adaptation – will be more fully developed in chapter five. The focus here will now turn to each stage within this process of conversion, as described below in Table 4-2.

Table 4-2. Stages in Becoming Vegetarian*

Perception of self, prior to becoming vegetarian or vegan, “Who I was” including attitudes towards animals and towards meat- centered traditions

catalyst / exposure to Experiences that challenged “Who I was,” including new information exposure to new information (which may or may not have been intentional)

repression Repression of knowledge, by individual or driven by family / social pressures

(Those who have previously become vegetarian return to (return to meat-eating) meat-eating and repression, where knowledge and/or feelings that meat-eating generates are suppressed)

Realization that vegetarian or vegan lifestyle is possible, realization sparks decision to re-position self with respect to meat- dominant culture (by adapting, tolerating, avoiding, or rejecting entirely and replacing with vegan worldview)

*Adapted from McDonald (2000).

Each of these stages will now be addressed in turn. Whereas McDonald’s work primarily conceptualized these stages from an individual perspective, I make an effort to combine this with a more explicit recognition of the social context that conditions the conversion process. In addition, after examining participant narratives of conversion, gender differences emerged as well, suggesting that women may face more back-and-forth movement between these stages whereas men appear to have more unidirectional stories of conversion.

“WHO I WAS”

The Pre-Vegetarian Identity and Childhood Memories of Meat

LUCIA: We come from a serious meat-eating culture, with the asado, you know? There is a longstanding ritual related to meat in this society. Lighting the fire for the asadito, sharing with others, playing cards, everything – the majority of meals, yes? They are based in meat, sausages. And my family, more than anything else, well really – both my mom and my dad, would cook, and we would share dinner together, but every meal was meat with [something else].41

SOLEDAD: I always loved the asado. I mean, I always loved it. There was, first, the issue with animals because I would imagine cows, since I was little, I would think about it – but I never arrived at a decision. I don’t know, I didn’t think about being vegetarian. I think there is also the reality of living with your family, and that everyone cooks meat, because every day we would eat meat.42

MATÍAS: Before – really, it’s funny (ironic). Because here in my house, like in the rest of Argentina, meat is – is a thing, every day meat is eaten. That is, midday, in the afternoon, at night, even breakfast could include meat. I mean, my parents are part of that traditional culture, with the culture of meat, meat, and they come home bringing you bags of everything – chicken, beef – and they just fill the refrigerator.43

MAIA: For example, my mom would cook meat and I would, too, but what I really loved was when my older brother and sister would go dancing on the weekends, and I would stay at home with my mom, and we would normally eat meat and I liked it – I loved it.44

CLARA: Ever since I was little, I had a sort of – adoration for animals. To the extreme.45

When asked about the process of becoming vegetarian or vegan, the majority of participants in this study began by drawing contrasts with their own upbringing and childhood. Three participants noted that a deep love of animals early in childhood affected their attitudes towards meat-eating from a young age, like Clara, but this was atypical. In general, becoming vegetarian

41 LUCIA: Nosotros venimos de una cultura muy carnívora, del asado, ¿entendés? Hay un rito en relación a la carne muy fuerte en esta sociedad. Prender el fuego para el asadito, compartir, jugar a las cartas, todo – la mayoría de las comidas, ¿Sí? Son a base de carne, o de embutidos. Y mi familia, sobre todo – bueno, los dos, tanto mi mamá como mi papá, cocinaban, compartíamos el momento de la cena juntos pero siempre la opción era carne con – [algo]. 42 SOLEDAD: A mí siempre me encantó el asado. O sea, siempre me encantó. Fue más, primero, una - una cuestión por los animales por imaginarme la vaca, desde chiquitita, que lo pensaba pero nunca llegaba a la decisión - no pensaba ser vegetariana, no sé. También, creo que el hecho de vivir con tu familia, y que todo el mundo cocine carne, porque todos los días comíamos carne. 43 MATÍAS: Antes – en realidad, es gracioso. Porque acá en mi casa, como en el resto también de la Argentina, la carne es – es una cosa, todos los días se comía carne. O sea, al mediodía, tarde, noche, hasta que el desayuno tenia carne. O sea mis viejos, la cultura, encima de chapada a la antigua, tienen la cultura de carne, carne, y te caen con bolsas de todo, pollo, tira de asado, y te llenan la heladera. 44 MAIA: Por ejemplo mi mamá me hacía carne y yo me hacía, pero yo que a mí me encantaba si me quedaba con mi mamá sola, que mis hermanos se iban a bailar, porque eran más grandes los fines de semana, y ahí sí, comíamos carne normalmente y a mí me gustaba, me encantaba. 45 CLARA: Siempre de chiquita tuve como una - adoración por los animales. Al extremo.

58 was something that did not even cross their minds, as shown by Soledad’s reflection. The importance of meat-centered rituals, and the asado in particular, came across as central for understanding who these participants were when growing up. Only four participants stated that they never liked the taste very much, and even these women (Florencia, Claudia, Noelia, and Clara) said they usually made exceptions for asados.

Most participants I interviewed explicitly recognized the unique centrality of beef within the Argentine context, and several women acknowledged feeling deeply connected to meat-based traditions like the asado. Lucia had an especially deep fondness for the meat-centered traditions because they were connected to warm childhood memories and close family relationships. Her comments epitomize this attitude, as she strongly identifies with these traditions as part of “our culture” – part of her own identity. This finding anticipates the ways that Lucia continues to embrace traditions like the asado, even as a vegetarian. One-third of participants had similar narratives, reporting that they ate meat every day when growing up and still feel drawn to it in passing – usually attracted to the smells or the idea of gathering together with friends, although they all said they felt repulsed by the meat once it was right in front of them.

Deep connections to the meat-dominant culture do not suddenly snap for these participants. Several, like Lucia, used to play the role of the asador (despite being a woman) and “loved” asado (Soledad) or eating meat in general (Agustina, Maia, Juana). For Daniela, this connection to the past even translates into dreams of eating meat: “Sometimes I dream about eating meat....asado. Because I was a serious meat-eater. Really. I mean, I ate asado and my favorite food was asado – a lot of meat.”46 Recalling memories of preparing meat together with family members affected her friend, 25-year-old Maia, even more deeply. She had a very close relationship with her mother, who was very worried about Maia’s decision to become vegetarian and took her to see a nutritionist. Right around that time, her mother passed away. For Maia, describing her process of becoming vegan was attached to memories of her mother; her grief was tangible at several points in our interview.

Because I did not seek to confirm McDonald’s model at the outset, my primary question simply asked participants to explain the process of becoming vegetarian or vegan. I followed

46 DANIELA: A veces sueño que como carne….tipo asado. Porque yo era carnívora, mal. Muy. O sea, comía asado, mi comida favorita era asado. Mucha carne.

59 their lead, rather than guiding them with questions about their childhood or asking about the importance of meat in Argentina. What was said – the ways in which many participants began this narrative by establishing their relationship to meat during childhood and into young adulthood – confirmed the centrality of beef in the La Plata context. What was not said, however, was also interesting. Several male participants responded to this question without any reference to the Argentine context; they only mentioned beef as important when they discussed challenges they faced. For example, Andrés and Alejandro, close friends, both began their narratives at the point that they began to read about vegetarianism, emphasizing the moral imperative of being vegetarian (rather than exploring the why behind this process or presenting a clear pre-vegetarian identity). They did not make reference to past family events or connections with the meat-based culture, and, as will be seen in chapter five, these individuals also rejected traditions such as the asado after becoming vegetarian.

Matías (cited above), their friend, was an exception in this study. But it is interesting to note that when he mentioned meat in his childhood, he simultaneously distanced himself from the practice of eating meat – he attributed the “meat culture” to the culture of his parents (rather than his own). He explained that his parents are part of a more traditional culture, which included stocking the house refrigerator with meat; he seemed to find his own vegetarianism almost comical in contrast to his parents’ eating habits. Although the ways that these differences emerged in study participants cannot be re-constructed, patterns of difference by gender appeared as interviews were coded. The small sample size precludes generalization of this findings to broader populations, but gender differences within this group were nonetheless quite notable. Female participants were nuanced and cognizant of connectedness to meat-based traditions, like the asado; nearly all began their story of “Who I Was” with reference to their childhood connection to meat. The male participants, on the other hand, did not make such clear distinctions between their pre-vegetarian identities and current identities as vegetarians. Nearly all focused on their decision, presenting it as a morally-superior choice, without reflecting upon their own memories of meat.

CATALYST / EXPOSURE TO NEW INFORMATION

Experiences and Knowledge that Challenge “Who I Was”

FLORENCIA: What was the catalyst? I don’t know. I just decided not to eat meat anymore.47

ANDRÉS: Well, I started reading things and the philosophy, in one way or another, the recognition of animal rights – I started to accept it, to understand, reading Schopenhauer [...] he’s a German philosopher who is the greatest defender of animal rights that I’ve seen. And he’s – he’s really pessimistic. He has a very, very deterministic philosophy – all of that. And then there are books by Plutarch, Pythagoras. I’d started to read all that and then, well, today there are lots of – there are movements, NGOs, everything, you know?48

MATÍAS: There are about ten of us in the group, and we get together on the weekends and we always debate a lot about everything – religion, politics, economics – we talk a lot and we argue a lot. So in the middle of these discussions this subject comes up, and the lines were clearly drawn, with some defending it [meat-eating] – because they felt attacked. So we ended up arguing.49

RAQUEL: It took me a whole afternoon to watch it [the documentary Earthlings], of crying and crying because, well, there is always the issue of lies. My family would say, “No, but the cows are free, they are killed humanely.” And about milk, too, “No, but if they don’t milk the cows, they’ll die.” They would say those things, like everybody says to you.50

Participants were asked about the moment that they decided to become vegetarian or vegan, but most had difficulty coming up with exact dates or even experiences. This was especially the case for the three participants with more circuitous stories of conversion. Clara, Lucia, and Juana all reported that they first attempted vegetarianism in their adolescence. Lucia and Juana struggled to remember exactly what had influenced their early attempts. In contrast, Clara, age 23, recalled the first time she had ever heard of vegetarianism: from her elementary school teacher, at age 12, which immediately prompted her to declare herself vegetarian. In her case,

47 FLORENCIA: ¿Qué lo disparó? No lo sé. Decidí no comer más carne. 48 ANDRES: Eh, es como que de a poco uno va leyendo cosas, y yo la filosofía de alguna manera – reconocimiento de los derechos animales – la empecé a aceptar, a entender, leyendo a Schopenhauer [...] es filósofo alemán que es, el más mayor defensor de lo que he visto con el tema de los derechos animales. Y es – es muy pesimista. Tiene una filosofía muy, muy determinismo – todo. Y de ahí, también están los libros de Plutarco, Pitágoras. Como empecé a leer todo eso y después bueno, hoy en día hay muchas más – hay movimientos, las ONGs, todo viste? 49 MATÍAS: Nosotros somos un grupo más o menos de 10, que nos juntamos los fines de semana y somos mucho de debatir de todo – de religión, política, economía, hablamos mucho de todo y discutimos mucho. Entonces en medio de las discusiones llegó el tema, nuevo, que se veía muy marcado lo que era una parte, defendiendo obviamente – porque aparte como se sentían atacados. Entonces se armaban discusiones. 50 RAQUEL: Me llevó toda una tarde verla [el documental Earthlings] y llorar y llorar porque bueno, siempre están con el tema de la mentira. Mi familia, “No, pero las vacas están libres, las matan de manera piadosa.” De la leche también, decían, “No, si no le sacan la leche a las vacas se mueren.” Decían cosas que a uno le dicen.

61 this indicates evidence of the importance of weak ties, which “provide people with access to information and resources beyond those available in their own social circle” (Granovetter 1983: 209). If she had not met that teacher, Clara would not have known that vegetarianism was an option as she had not heard of it before that moment.

Most participants had a combination of multiple catalysts and/or exposure to new information. For one-third of the participants, vegetarianism was a consequence of larger life changes: Soledad, Agustina, and Laura moved to La Plata to begin college, Juana (her fourth time) moved back to Argentina from Mexico, Noelia began yoga, Clara (her second time) took a class on “The Art of Living,” Gaston had a serious health issue, Raquel ended a long-term partnership, Lucas took a course on permaculture, Emilia quit her job as a dental assistant and decided to invest in her cousin’s vegan restaurant, where she starting working full-time. Through these changes, individuals were exposed to more ideas and people.

Prolonged exposure to other vegetarians was also considered a catalytic experience as it also prompted the exchange of information between friends and via partnerships. Andrés, a vegetarian attorney who had been reading about animal rights, decided to stop eating meat the “Day of the Animal,” nearly five years before our interview. His decision became a hot point of contention among his closest friends (as described above). Andrés began providing books by Pythagoras and other philosophers to Alejandro, who decided to become vegetarian less than a year after Andrés. Meeting Alejandro was, in turn, a catalyst for Lucia, who soon embarked on her second attempt at vegetarianism. Andrés and Alejandro then influenced Matías, a third friend within their close circle. Andrés also influenced his partner, Daniela, by convincing her to watch the documentary film, Earthlings. This documentary film also played a role as catalyst for Cristián and Raquel, who were both vegetarian when they saw it, and immediately decided to go vegan. Ezequiel similarly decided to try veganism after watching a Brazilian documentary; he had been introduced to the philosophy by Cristián several months earlier, after they met at an event in Buenos Aires.

For the vast majority of participants, the internet played a key role in connecting them to resources about how to become vegetarian. Websites and YouTube videos were frequently cited along with the Facebook group on vegetarianism and posting shared by friends. Books mattered as well. Andrés, who did not offer much in terms of his attitudes pre-conversion, began his

62 narrative of vegetarianism by describing his reading of Schopenhauer. Claudia, who had become interested 20 years ago, began by reading about macrobiotic diets, while Lucia became interested in Buddhism and compassion nearly fifteen years earlier – which prompted her first attempt. Clara, in one of the more interesting twists, began investigating alternative eating practices and came across a book that advocated the Paleolithic diet. She briefly attempted the meat-heavy diet, but then transitioned directly to veganism, as she realized it was simply not consistent with her love of animals. The essential role of the internet, and the ways in which it enabled participants to seek out information, raises even more questions about the spread of vegetarianism in Argentina and the extent to which its growth may hinge on the ability to access information that originates outside of the county.

As this section reveals, specific experiences and exposure to new information were important steps away from who they were before becoming vegetarian. No major gender differences were noted across this stage in terms of reported catalytic experiences although it did seem that men were more likely to report carefully researching the logical arguments for vegetarianism. A few participant stories involving documentaries were consistent with empirical work pointing to the role of specific catalysts (e.g. witnessing animal killings, Amato and Partridge 1989). However, whereas McDonald (2000) found that many people could clearly recall the moment that they felt a change begin in their perspective, participants in this study usually struggled to recall specific moments and dates. They were most likely to conceptualize their own conversion as a lengthy process. This suggests that in the La Plata context, transitioning towards vegetarianism may be more protracted than it is in countries with much more permissible contexts, such as the United States and England. Moreover, while most men and several women transitioned almost immediately to the stage of realization and the decision to become vegan or vegetarian, others entered a period of repression first.

REPRESSION (AND RETURN TO MEAT-EATING)

Suppressing Feelings of Guilt and Social Pressures to Eat Meat

CRISTIÁN: It was terrible. Terrible – until I was 16 or 17 years old I denied it. I mean, it wasn’t that I didn’t eat meat. I would say I didn’t feel like it or – the discrimination or level of contrast was at the point where, it was like being homosexual. Twenty years ago, a homosexual couldn’t say that he was homosexual [...] I didn’t say I was vegetarian because they would laugh at me, asking me questions that I couldn’t answer when I was

12 years old. And I would respond with what I really felt but they would make me feel confused, all mixed up – turning things upside down.51

RAQUEL: It’s something that I’ve had since I was little, the habit of questioning – I felt guilty eating meat. But, well, I would tell my parents or my grandma, and they would tell me, “No, it has to be this way – that’s why animals exist,” and they always put obstacles in my way.52

EZEQUIEL: At first I – there were a lot of months where I was in complete denial [...] Denial about the idea of veganism – I saw it as something extreme.53

JUANA: It was my dad’s birthday and he said to me, “You’ll eat meat for my birthday.” And I plucked up the courage and I said, “No – yes – for my dad, I’ll eat meat.” My poor dad, who wanted me to eat. From then, from the moment I ate that meat, I wasn’t vegetarian anymore.54

SOLEDAD: I went back to my town and my dad was making asado and I ate, feeling guilty, but it was like I wanted to eat a little piece because the smell drew me in, and I ate a tiny piece. And then, I was nauseous for two days straight – from the guilt I felt.55

Several participants glossed over this stage in their conversion process, which may indicate faster pathways to vegetarianism or a desire to forget earlier periods of guilt during which they still consumed meat. Most participants, however, began to realize the implications of eating meat gradually but initially repressed their feelings. A few participants like Cristián and Raquel traced this repression back to their childhood. Cristián felt that he had to hide his desire to avoid meat and Raquel’s family constantly reminded her that animals exist to be eaten – something commonly expressed by meat-eaters. As Ezequiel’s attitude reveals, this stage in the conversion process is retrospectively viewed as a period of denial.

51 CRISTIÁN: Fue terrible. Fue terrible hasta los 16, 17 años – lo desmentí. O sea, no era que no comía carne. Decía yo que no tenía ganas o...era tal el nivel de discriminación o nivel de contraste que ya llegó a un punto que – era lo mismo que definirse como homosexual. Un homosexual hace 20 años no decía que era homosexual [...] No decía que era vegetariano porque se reían de mí, me hacían cuestiones que yo con 12 años no sabía responder, y era difícil. Yo respondía lo que realmente quería responder pero me retrucaban de otro lado, me retrucaban de otro lado, me daba vuelta. 52 RAQUEL: Es algo que llevo desde chica, cuestionarme – me sentía como culpable comiendo carne. Pero bueno, siempre lo decía a mis papas o a mi abuela y me decían, “No, tiene que ser así, los animales son para eso,” y como que siempre me ponían trabas. 53 EZEQUIEL: Al principio yo – fueron muchísimos meses que estaba totalmente negado. [...] Negado con la idea del veganismo – lo veía como algo extremo. 54 JUANA: Mi papá cumplió años y mi papá me dijo, “Vas a comer asadito para mi cumpleaños.” Y me hice de tripas corazón y dije, no, sí - por mi papá voy a comer a carne…Pobre mi papá que quiere que coma yo, y ahí, a partir de que comí ese asado ya no volví a ser más vegetariana.” 55 SOLEDAD: Volví a mi ciudad, y mi papá estaba haciendo asado, y yo como que con culpa pero como que quería comer un cachito porque el olor me llamaba, y comí un pedacito así [shows small size with hands]. Y eso, estuve con nauseas dos días seguidos. De la culpa que sentía.

Sometimes the move into the repression stage occurred after initial efforts were made to become vegetarian; these moves resulted from perceived family and social pressures. Juana felt compelled to eat meat again as a favor to her father, to satisfy a birthday wish. She had one of the most back-and-forth stories of conversion, remarking that this was her fourth attempt – proudly and assuredly declaring that she would “defeat”56 meat-eating this time around. Soledad and Clara were similarly pushed into the stage of repression after initial efforts to stop eating meat. It is interesting to note that both Soledad and Juana felt the need to eat meat again because their fathers were making it. The dynamics might be similar to Merriman’s finding that, in the United States context, female vegetarians were most likely to have their choices questioned by male family members (Merriman 2010). Although Clara did not feel such strong pressure from her family, she was overwhelmed by the broader social environment and also developed issues with eating disorders. Clara attributed her return to meat-eating and repression to her feelings of isolation. She had become vegetarian after hearing that her elementary school teacher was trying it for a year (as a “pact with God”), but then, Clara stated, “I ended up without any vegetarians in my life, so I think that’s why I started eating meat again, because I couldn’t stand it. I didn’t have any – any support.”57 These stories illustrate that without a network of support, moving out of the stage of repression can be extremely challenging, especially if first attempted in adolescence.

In some instances, continued repression of certain aspects of life continued alongside the practice of vegetarianism. Andrés, an attorney, commented on his frustration with big businesses. He wanted to invest in Wall Street companies, but had trouble finding ones that would be consistent with his principles against animal testing and cruelty. For others, the continued turmoil and tension was much more tangible and present in day-to-day life. Sonia, a medical doctor, had decided to become vegetarian a year ago. She found herself increasingly conflicted, however, given her direct involvement in animal experimentation in the laboratory setting. This setting, where she works testing appropriate drug therapies on sheep before they are used in intensive care patients, was where our interview was held. For an overview of this example of “inner conflict” conceptualized as part of an ongoing type of repression, see Appendix E.

56 JUANA: Y la cuarta es la vencida. 57 CLARA: Me quedé sin ningún conocido. Entonces yo creo que por eso volví a comer carne porque al final lo terminé sufriendo. No pude tener tanta – no tenía apoyo.

Understanding the dynamics at play during the stage of repression requires turning to theories of meat consumption and the meanings of meat. As Twigg notes, “animal derived foods have a potential for provoking unease that is not found in vegetable foods” (Twigg 1983: 22). Participants in this study reported not only unease, but also guilt when recalling periods during which they felt the need to repress their repulsion towards meat. The centrality of meat in religious ceremonies across societies underscores the difficulties of disentangling human-animal relationships. Scruton has suggested that “qualms about meat eating have therefore often been soothed by God’s dietary commands” (Scruton 2004: 81). Interestingly, several vegetarians in this study offered the fact that, even though they were baptized, they identify as atheists (see Appendix D). Fully developing the relationship between traditional and religious, meat-eating, and time spent in this stage of repression is beyond the scope of this study. However, findings show that social context decisively influences the conversion process, as social and family pressures to eat meat represented major barriers to change for participants in this study.

REALIZATION

Vegetarianism (or Veganism) is Desirable and Possible: A Decision is Made

LUCIA: I started feeling bad, and there was a lot I was already thinking about, and well, I met him [Alejandro] – well, really we already knew each other but we saw each other again around that time, and he was vegetarian – he wasn’t eating meat. And at the beginning I was, I was still eating meat. We started having lunch together and talking and a moment arrived where I started to feel really bad. I already felt bad eating meat and I think, that in some way, he sped up a process that had already started in me.58

MATÍAS: One night, I remember arguing, you know, I was arguing with my brother, and he was saying, I can even tell you that God put animals on the earth for something, for the food chain, and a lot of other things that didn’t make much sense, and I was telling him I thought it was all ridiculous. [He said]: “You think it’s crazy but you eat milanesas every day.” “The truth is, you’re right,” I said, “That’s it – I’m starting now.”59

58 LUCIA: Me empecé a sentir mal, digamos, y todo eso venía dando vueltas en mí, y bueno, lo conocí a él [her partner, Alejandro]. En realidad ya nos conocíamos pero nos volvimos a ver en esa época y él era vegetariano, no comía carne. Y yo al principio sí, seguí comiendo carne. Empezamos a compartir almuerzos o charlas y llegó un momento donde me empecé a sentir muy mal. Ya me sentía en falta comiendo carne y creo que él de alguna manera aceleró un proceso que ya venía en mí. 59 MATÍAS: Una noche, me acuerdo discutiendo, que sé yo, yo discutiendo con mi hermano, que estaban discutiendo, que me decía bueno, te pueden llegar a decir desde que Dios los puso en el mundo para algo, de la cadena alimenticia, de una cantidad de cosas que ninguna tiene mucho sentido, y yo diciéndole que me parece una locura. “Y vos decís que es una locura y estás todo el día comiendo milanesas.” “Y la verdad tenés razón,” le digo, “Ya está. A partir de ahora.”

Realizing that meat is not necessary for good health or that industrial production involves immense animal suffering affected several participants deeply. In some cases, realization was a more gradual process that blended into a decision to stop eating meat, first at home, and then in more social settings as well. Lucia conceptualized the process as finally pushing her towards vegetarianism upon meeting her current partner, Alejandro. Realization was more directly brought on via interactions with others for participants with close friends who were already vegetarian. Matías, whose friends Andrés and Alejandro had already become vegetarian, was arguing with his brother about it one night and (drunkenly) declared he would stop eating meat. The next morning he fully realized the implications of his decision and avoided telling his father initially, as an asado was waiting when he awoke. However, later that evening, he explained that this decision was permanent as he had fully realized he did not want to eat meat again in his life.

As conceptualized in Figure 4-1 (page 56), reaching the stage of realization provokes an additional process, in which each individual must re-negotiate their position with respect to the meat-eating culture and may even re-evaluate their attitudes towards specific meat-eaters in their lives. I argue that participants moved toward adopted one of four possible positions: rejection, avoidance, tolerance, or active adaptation. These categories and the attitudes and practices associated with them will be the focus of the next chapter on “Practicing Vegetarianism.” Yet before this step is taken, I will consider two additional themes connected to becoming vegetarian: (1) the extent to which the decision represents a life-long commitment, and (2) the salience of lone vegetarianism, which characterized nearly half of the processes of conversion reported by study participants. Exploring the idea of “otherness” will also lead into chapter five, as it captures one way in which vegetarians feel that this conversion process ultimately leads to distancing from the meat-dominant culture and, in some cases, meat-eating family members and friends.

A LIFE-LONG COMMITMENT

“Conversion” sometimes implies unidirectional change that may involve a dramatic re-definition of self. Yet by understanding conversion as a process, it becomes clear that some back-and-forth movement occurred between stages, especially by women in this study. This finding, however, does not mean that participants were ambivalent about their decision. On the contrary: the pescatarians, vegetarians, and vegans in this study overwhelming stated that this is a permanent

67 decision for their lives, which I refer to as a life-long commitment. Few gender differences were found here. Only one participant, Agustina, anticipated a period of possible meat eating, during future (hypothetical) pregnancies after which she would hope to return to vegetarianism. All others indicated that they were planning to continue without interruption. One-fourth of participants (Lucas, Sonia, Claudia, Noelia, Emilia, Ezequiel) stated that it was simply difficult for them to imagine eating meat again, while a majority of participants ardently declared their long-term commitment:

DANIELA: It’s like a life decision for me. It’s not momentary, something I want to try and that’s it. I’ll still be vegetarian when I die. 60

LUCIA: I know I’m never going to return to meat-eating in my life [...] I hope to die vegetarian. Yes, without a doubt.61

MARIANA: From the moment I made this decision, I started getting into greater awareness about what veganism is and yes, now I have a lot of reasons. Every day I’m happier about my decision.62

FLORENCIA: When I make a decision, I don’t change it. [...] There is something in me that says, “You shouldn’t do this anymore,” or “This, this is something you should do.”

ADP: Do you think this decision is like that?

FLORENCIA: Yes, this decision is not going to change. I’ll be like this from now until I die.63

Plans to move more towards (deeper) veganism and/or raw foods were mentioned by eight of those who were considered vegan (Diego, Laura, Gaston, Maia, Juana, Clara, Soledad, and Raquel). Going vegan is truly a long-term process and becoming entirely vegan is often seen as goal that may be unattainable (as it also involves avoiding all medication tested on animals), but is still worth striving for. Even if it cannot be attained with dietary changes, several vegetarians indicated a desire to learn more about other products they consume. Andrés, for example, planned to do even more research into Wall Street companies before investing any of his own

60 DANIELA: Es como una decisión de vida para mí. No es algo como momentáneo, que quiero experimentar y después ya está. Yo me voy a morir vegetariana. 61 LUCIA: Sé que nunca más en mi vida voy a volver a comer carne. [...] Espero morirme vegetariana. Sí, ni hablar. 62 MARIANA: A partir desde que tomé la decisión, me fui como introduciendo más en el conocimiento sobre lo que es el veganismo, y sí, como que ahora tengo muchas más razones. Cada día más feliz de la decisión. 63 FLORENCIA: Cuando tomo una decisión, no la cambio. [...] hay algo en mí que dice: “Vos, no lo tenés que hacer más.” o “Vos, esto si lo tenés que hacer.” [...] ADP: ¿Y vos pensás que esta decisión va a ser así? FLORENCIA: Sí, esta elección no va a cambiar. Así voy a ser de acá a que me muera.

68 money, given his knowledge of animal testing for a wide variety of products. Raquel discussed her plans to learn more about which animal cruelty-free products she could buy at the drug store.

Individual commitment towards vegetarianism also extended into their image of how currently single individuals without children imagined raising a family in the future. Some indicated the need for further research, as Andrés presented a reason-based response to my question. Some expressed emotional reactions to the idea. Maia squirmed as she imagined her future children: “It would get to me, a baby, who is my child, that – poor thing – is already being fed meat.” Most were certain that they would not provide meat for their children, but expressed the sentiment that it would ultimately be up to the child to decide. Matías also allowed for the idea that a child would eventually be able to decide for him/herself, while recalling a debate over this very subject that he had seen on television, one that he found ironic:

MATÍAS: There is a lot of debate that sometimes comes up on TV – it’s funny [= ironic], really. Because you hear people saying that you can’t take away the right to...that if you’re vegetarian, you shouldn’t force your kids into it. And no one is forcing anyone. I mean, starting from there, I say that if I have a child, I have two choices: one which will imply the death of many animals for the rest of his life, and two, one that won’t. Let’s say he eats the same as I do, his diet is the same as mine, and he’ll live – and he won’t kill anyone.64

Cristián made this even more explicit, referencing principles within veganism that compare speciesism to racism and sexism:

CRISTIÁN: It’s like – imagine this. It’s very simple. I don’t know if other people have given you this answer in the interviews you’ve done, but it’s the same as if you were – you aren’t a Nazi, nor someone who discriminates, nor a murderer – you shape your child and your child isn’t going to be racist. Your child isn’t going to discriminate against black people. He’s not going to discriminate against women. He’s not going to have that type of discrimination, and this is the same: Speciesism. [...] I can’t imagine cutting up an animal and giving it to my child. That would be like bringing in a black person and making him get on all fours just so that my child can put his feet up.65

64 MATÍAS: Hay una gran discusión que a veces se da en la tele, lo que sea. Que es gracioso. Porque escuchás a gente diciendo que vos no le podés denegar el derecho de - si vos sos vegetariano, que a tus hijos no los tenés que obligar. Y nadie está obligando a nadie. O sea, partiendo de esa base, yo digo que si tengo un hijo, tengo dos elecciones. Una, que va a implicar la muerte de varios animales por el resto de su vida. Y otra, que no. Que coma lo mismo que yo, se alimente igual que yo, va a vivir, y no va a matar a nadie. 65 CRISTIÁN: Es que, vos imaginate eso. Es muy sencillo. Yo no sé si la gente te da esta respuesta en las entrevistas que vas, pero esto es lo mismo que vos fueses...vos, no sos Nazi, ni discriminadora, asesina - vos vas a hacer tu hijo y no va a ser racista tu hijo. Tu hijo no va a discriminar a los negros. No va a discriminar a las mujeres. No va a discriminar - no va a tener ese tipo de discriminación. Esto es lo mismo. Especismo. [...] Es inconcebible para mi cortar un animal y dárselo a mi hijo. Es como traer un negro y ponerlo en cuclillas para que mi hijo apoye los pies.

These responses about plans to raise future children indicate the depth of the commitment made by vegetarians and vegans in this study. They also underscore the meanings that most participants give to vegetarianism as they believe it to be the morally-superior decision. As noted at the beginning of this chapter, many vegans and vegetarians conceptualized their decision as adherence to ethical principles that extend beyond themselves as individuals: giving up meat is the right thing to do once one has knowledge of the animal suffering that goes on behind the scenes. Therefore, looking to the future, participants like Cristián and Joaquin (cited above) believe that their children will be vegan or vegetarian naturally. This is consistent with the parental role of teaching children the difference between right and wrong. It also aligns with the development of a changing (vegan) worldview as described by McDonald (2000) as a result of a deepening process of learning to become vegan (or an ethical vegetarian, in this study). Follow-up with participants into the future may entail the evaluation of whether and how these statements align with their practices.

66 LONE VEGETARIANS: SOS UN BICHO RARO

Lone-term commitments to continue, however, were not always easy given the ways in which vegetarianism is seen as something strange or not normal. It is very new to Argentina and, given the centrality of beef in the culinary culture and a lack of awareness of meat-free diets, participants reported feeling that family and friends often treated them as ‘The Other’ or un bicho raro in reaction to their decision.67 This was especially when they first announced their decisions:

RAQUEL: I felt alone.68

MAIA: I didn’t have anyone who was vegetarian. ADP: A friend? MAIA: No, nobody, no one, no one.69

66 As noted in a footnote earlier, this means, “A strange bug,” literally translated; this exact expression came up in six interviews and it captures the idea of “otherness;” it is usually translated as “weirdo,” “strange person,” “strange bird,” “outsider,” or “alien.” 67 It is also consistent with my own experience in Argentina, where I constantly faced questions about what I would eat – countless looks of surprise. Once my vegetarianism was known in Argentina, it quickly became a way by which others identified me. The cheese shop owner, Miguel, always asked about it. Even the owner of the Laundromat would announce me as ‘the vegetarian.’ Restaurant owners would remember this as well, as after just one or two dinners at a place I could return and the staff would recall that I was vegetarian (and sometimes offer to make something else than what was one the menu). 68 RAQUEL: Me sentía sola.

JUANA [quoting something she heard another vegetarian say]: “With meat, I feel that I belong.” You’re really, really alone when you’re vegetarian and there just isn’t anyone else.70

LUCAS: At the beginning it was, also like surprising, like “Wow.” “Why?”71

LUCIA: You’re like un bicho raro, you know what I mean?72

As noted earlier, I categorize these individuals as lone vegetarians, or people who did not have any vegetarians among their friends, family, or close school/work acquaintances. Previous empirical work on vegetarianism has shown that up to two-thirds of vegetarians in the United States reported their own decision had been influenced by someone else, and 40% of practicing vegetarians claimed to have influenced others in turn (Maurer 2002: 6). In contrast, only about one-fourth of participants in La Plata had a close friend or partner who was already vegetarian.73 Participants overwhelmingly reported a sense of social isolation: more than two-thirds (17 including Lucia on her first attempt) reported that they did not have a single close friend or family member. About half of these ‘lone vegetarians’ had met vegetarians or vegans at some point, several had acquaintances in their extended circle of contacts. Half of these individuals stated that they did not know anyone who was vegetarian or vegan when they underwent their own process of conversion.

The sense of feeling isolated was pronounced. In her first attempt at vegetarianism during adolescence, Clara reported feeling embarrassed by her decision, as the way that people reacted made her feel like un bicho raro. Emilia similarly noted that she constantly encounters these attitudes since she started her position at the vegan restaurant. Several days before our interview, she ran into some friends on the street nearby, who said, “I’m definitely not going to that restaurant, because if there isn’t any meat....”74 Emilia recognizes that for friends and family members, eating meat is essential to the act of eating itself – especially when going out to dinner. She feels that this is a common reaction, explaining among men in Argentina, because they see

69 MAIA: No tenía a nadie que sea vegetariano. ADP: ¿Ningún amigo? MAIA: No, nadie, nadie, nadie. 70 JUANA (she was first quoting something she had heard another vegetarian say at a vegan cooking workshop): “Con la carne, me siento como contenida,” Y sé - estás re sola cuando sos vegetariana y no hay nadie más. 71 LUCAS: Al principio fue como, también como sorprendente, así como “wow” ¿por qué? 72 LUCIA: Sos como un bicho raro, ¿entendés? 73 See chapter three, Table 3-1. Participant Overview, for a detailed list of those who were reported that they had become vegetarian without any support from or connections to other vegetarians. 74 EMILIA: “Yo a ese restaurant no voy a ir, porque si no hay carne...”

71 you as un bicho raro. That makes it even less likely that they will understand veganism. Because of a lack of familiarity, Emilia also noted that many Argentines have not heard of vegetarianism within the country, and repeatedly ask with curiosity and surprise, “You don’t eat meat?! You don’t eat meat?!”

Participants expressed some willingness to explain and possibly move beyond the distance that vegetarianism created, especially when they first announced their decision. Yet even after the initial surprise of family and friends, vegetarians and vegans report continued encounters, especially with acquaintances. The notion of vegetarianism was reinforced in these social interactions, as evidenced by Matías’ narrative about the neighborhood grocery store:

MATÍAS: More than anything, surprise – a lot of uncertainty, they have a lot of questions about the subject. It happens to be here – everywhere. The grocery store owner – every time I go to buy whatever it is I need, he tells everybody – people who I don’t even know – that comes in, who come in that I am vegetarian. And I want to kill him, because it drives you crazy. Because an 80-year-old lady comes in, and I don’t even know her, and I asked for 100 grams of cheese. “He’s vegetarian,” [says the store owner, to which the women responds by asking Matías]: “What’s that like, darling? What do you eat? And what don’t you eat?” And I usually explain.75

Being constantly identified as vegetarian, and having to explain the decision, eventually became tiresome for most participants. Most reported a willingness to explain if the person appeared to have a more open attitude:

RAQUEL: It depends on how open the person is to listen. I always try to explain and tell others. But really there are a lot of people who are closed-minded, and older people who are really closed-minded. And when it comes down to it – I sometimes say I don’t eat meat because I don’t like it. “And dairy?” Then I say I’m lactose intolerant.76

Participants often noted, however, that some people were extremely closed off to new ideas and concepts. When this was the case, like Raquel, they made quick and easy excuses for not eating meat, rather than explain to others what vegetarianism was. The fact that nearly all participants reported this to some degree or another, and that several vegetarians and pescatarians were

75 MATÍAS: Es sobre todo, sorpresa – mucha duda, tiene mucha duda la gente sobre el tema. Me pasa acá – me pasa en todos lados. El almacenero que cada vez que voy a comprar lo que sea, cada gente - cada persona que ni yo conozco, entra, le cuenta que soy vegetariano. Yo lo quiero matar. Porque te vuelve loco. Porque viene una señora de 80 y le cuenta, y yo ni conozco a la señora. Le pedí 100 de queso, “El es vegetariano.” “Como es eso, querido?” (la vieja). “¿Qué comes? ¿Y qué no?” Y le cuento, que sé yo. 76 Depende que tan abierta este la persona para escuchar. Yo trato de siempre explicar y contar, ¿no? Pero bueno, hay gente que es muy cerrada. Y por ahí gente mayor que es súper cerrada. Y de ultima, digo, hay no - no como carne porque no me gusta. “¿Y los lácteos?” “No, soy intolerante lactosa.”

72 unfamiliar with veganism themselves, is revealing of the lack of awareness in La Plata and the pro-meat attitudes that permeate social interactions. Although it may be changing now, vegetarians and vegans are still seen as “The Other.” Some thus recalled meat-eating with fondness, as sharing in these traditions made them feel like they belonged (see Juana’s excerpt above). The extent to which vegetarianism thus challenges feelings of belonging and requires a re-positioning of self with respect to the meat-dominant culture will thus be the subject of the following chapter.

CONCLUSION

The model of the process of conversion (depicted in Figure 4-1, page 56) that builds off of McDonald’s (2000) work model emphasizes the notion of conversion as a cumulative process for many, which involves moving through stages before reaching realization and the decision to become vegetarian or vegan. Interestingly, men in this study all provided unidirectional narratives of conversion whereas the most circuitous routes to veganism were taken by women. Several women reported responding to societal pressures by eating meat again, returning to the stage of repression; men did not report such externally-induced reversions in their processes of converting to vegetarianism. Literature on meat and masculinity might suggest that men would be critiqued more but, as an alternative explanation, it is possible that these men simply dismiss any challenges to their masculinity or sexuality as stemming from ignorance. Thinking about the perspective of women, at least two possible explanations are possible: women may face more criticism of their dietary decisions, as they are seen as less capable of making logical choices. This would be in line with Merriman’s findings that female vegetarians were not only more likely to report critique, but that the people who most challenged their decisions were male family members (2010). Second, women may be more susceptible to societal pressures to conform or they may want to fit in by engaging with meat-based traditions (either by eating meat again or by preparing it for others). These points are further explored in the next chapter.

CHAPTER FIVE

PRACTICING VEGETARIANISM

From “Sos Un Bicho Raro” to Adapting the Asado Tradition

The previous chapter explored the ways that individuals become vegetarian and vegan by transitioning through stages, from “Who I Was,” to a catalyst or exposure to new information, to repression (and a possible return to meat-eating) and finally to realization. These stages form the process of conversion and, in the previous chapter, it was possible see the salience of social context and the ways that social isolation (i.e. a lack of vegetarian support) conditioned these process. Once reaching realizing and making the commitment to eliminate meat and/or dairy, participants then had to confront the meat-dominant culture in Argentina as they began to ‘practice’ vegetarianism or veganism. The process by which dietary change prompts a re- negotiation of social relationships and affects food traditions, such as the asado, is the focus of this chapter, which consists of two main sections.

It is impossible to fully disentangle the directionality of social interactions as they are relational: just as meat-eaters react to vegetarians, vegetarians react to meat-eater comments and critique. Both of these components are important for understanding the ways that vegetarians re- position themselves in the meat landscape (or even step outside of it). I therefore begin with one side of the story and first analyze meat-eater reactions, or the ways that family, friends, and acquaintances reacted to the initial decision to become vegetarian (as perceived by study participants). Participants were asked about how their family and friends responded.77 These reported reactions are organized around three primary themes that emerged: (1) Dismissal, (2) Concerns, and (3) Jokes.

Second, I consider the attitudes that vegetarians hold with respect to the dominant meat- culture and meat-eaters in their own lives. As noted in chapter 2, limited attention has been paid to conceptualize vegetarian practices. I therefore began by comparing attitudes with vegetarian practices, such as whether or not they cook meat for others, and whether or not they date meat- eaters, to develop a four-category typology of vegetarians. This typology can be connected back

77 Open-coding was first used and nearly a dozen different specific meat-eater reactions to vegetarianism were reported by study participants. These, however, were grouped into broader categories and the three main themes are presented here.

74 to the model of the process of conversion as it consists of the four positions that vegetarians may adopt following the realization that vegetarianism is desirable and possible in their own lives. These four positions identified are: (1) rejection, (2) avoidance, (3) tolerance, and (4) active adaptation.

After providing an overview of this typology, I present evidence that clarifies the attitudes towards the asado encapsulated in each position. I also consider the ways that these four positions overlap with dating preferences and partnership patterns. Attitudes and reported changes indicate that it is this final strategy of adaptation that has the potential to spark gradual culinary change by pushing others to eat lower on the food chain, even if it is infrequently. This is supported by reports of accommodation and adaptation by family and friends, which is especially likely in those situations where vegetarians and vegans continue to embrace the asado, incorporating more vegetables and soy products into its preparation. Gender differences are also pronounced within this typology, as women generally expressed greater willingness or even desire to retain the asado as part of shared family traditions, whereas those who reject meat- centered traditions are all men. I then offer concluding thoughts on the gender differences in reported reactions and in adapting meat-centered traditions like the asado in particular.

REPORTED REACTIONS

Reactions by family and friends ranged from curiosity to outright hostility, mirroring the spectrum of attitudes reported by Amato and Partridge (1989) and sometimes producing conflict at the family table, in line with Roth’s findings (2005). Three broad types of reactions reported by participants emerged from interviews. First, initial dismissal by meat-eaters was commonplace. Vegetarians said that meat-eaters doubted their commitment or attributed it to a period of ‘craziness.’ Second, concerns, often well-intentioned, were expressed about the health implications of meat- and dairy-free diets for participants, their children and future children. Younger mothers trying to raise their children as vegans were most likely to face ongoing conflict and concern from their meat-eating family members, which undermined their parental autonomy. Finally, a third set of commonly reported reactions was anti-vegetarian humor, which participants usually attributed to ignorance and/or the extent to which practicing vegetarianism makes others feel uncomfortable.

After considering these three reactions, I turn to the ways in which participants defended their diets and/or lifestyle changes, noting gender differences. Understanding these reported reactions is interesting because women were most likely to report feeling upset by these encounters whereas men were more irritated by the reactions of others. These differences anticipate the ways in which men and women positioned themselves with respect to the meat- dominant culture, the subject of the second main section of this chapter.

DISMISSAL: “YOU’VE LOST IT” OR “IT WON’T LAST”

ANDRÉS: Everybody treats you almost like you’re crazy. No – it’s like you’re part of a sect.78

SONIA: They think it is female craziness, as we reach our 40s, and they associate it with clichés about vegetarianism and yoga.79

FLORENCIA: My husband says to me, “What got into you, craziness? Menopause is messing with your brain.” He didn’t understand. It’s not like he treated me like I was crazy, I mean, but he died laughing and he said that to me as if it were a fad. You know? It was going to pass.80

Participants were told they were ‘crazy’ by family and friends. Vegetarianism was associated with religious fanaticism, at least in Andrés’ interpretation. Soledad, Florencia, and Sonia clearly recalled moments where family and friends reacted by saying, “You’re crazy.” Raquel even internalized these reactions and noted that since veganism started receiving some attention in mainstream media more recently, her family “now realizes that I’m not so crazy.” Dismissing vegetarianism as “crazy” overlapped with the notion that it could be attributed to psychological problems. Lucas and Alejandro reported feeling this way. Florencia, a medical doctor, further verified this attitude. When she first entered medicine, giving up meat was usually interpreted as a sign of an eating disorder.

Around half of participants reported reactions that questioned their long-term commitment; this particularly was the case for women. Sonia, age 38, and Florencia, age 55, both reported reactions that associated the decision to stop eating meat with women undergoing

78 ANDRES: Todos te tratan como loco prácticamente. No - sos como una secta. 79 SONIA: Piensan que son locuras de las mujeres que nos vamos acercando a los 40 y tomando esos clichés de vegetarianismo, yoga... 80 FLORENCIA: Mi marido, me dice, “¿Qué te agarró, locura? La menopausia te está quemando el cerebro, ¿qué es esto?” Así que bueno. No, no entendió. No es que me trató de loca, digamos, se mató de risa, me lo dijo así, como pensando que era un capricho. ¿No? Que se iba a pasar.

76 change as they age, either seeking out new activities as part of a mid-life crisis or hormones. They took these comments in stride, as both continue to willingly cook meat for family and friends. Florencia was further questioned by her husband as he doubted it would last. She responded to his disbelief with firm commitment, emphasizing that vegetarianism is not a passing phase for her but part of a life change she deeply believes in. When attempting vegetarianism for a second time one year ago, Lucia told a close female friend she was planning to stop smoking and stop eating meat. Several months later, she admitted to the friend that she had started smoking again, and the friend replied (as reported by Lucia), “Should I tell you the truth?’ – she said to Lucia – “I thought you would return right away, and start eating meat again.”81

In at least seven instances, participants encountered these reactions from close family or friends. For example, Soledad’s sister gradually came to accept the decision as permanent. However, she was questioned and is still questioned by her older brother, who constantly offers her meat to see if she has changed her mind. Daniela’s father reacted to her decision, asking, “Until when?” He did not believe it would last but, as she made it clear to him, he was intrigued by the subject and sought out information. A medical doctor, he eventually relented and no longer questions her commitment, as he has even admitted to her that vegetarianism is healthier than the Argentine diet.

Matías was the only male participant who reported being seriously challenged about his commitment. After a night of drinking with friends, including Andrés and Alejandro, and older brother, Matías realized he was defending vegetarianism. His brother finally challenged him. The next morning, his brother and the rest of his family all assumed it was a commitment made in haste, accusing him of ‘copying’ Andrés and acting as if it were a “competition” to see how long he could last. His girlfriend similarly reacted: “Let’s see how long you last.” Matías then replied that, “This isn’t a bet or a game or anything – it’s a decision made for life. And also if you don’t feel it, you won’t last.”82 Not only has Matías remained a vegetarian, but since that argument, he reports that his girlfriend has also become a vegetarian.

81 LUCIA: “Te digo la verdad? – me dice – pensé que ibas a volver enseguida, volver a comer carne.” 82 MATÍAS: Esto no era ni una apuesta ni un juego ni nada, sino que es una decisión de vida. Y aparte que si no lo sentís, no durás nada.

CONCERNS

LAURA: [My family said] that what I was doing was silly. The same thing – that animals exist for that reason, that it’s crazy to stop consuming milk, or that something was going to happen to me – that I be careful, go to the doctor, and regularly get check-ups.83

Participants reported three main types of concerns in response to their vegetarianism. Unlike the initial dismissal described above, these tended to last longer in duration and many participants continued to face pressures to respond to concerns that vegetarianism is unhealthy for them, that it will impede child development, and that it will affect their ability to find a suitable romantic partner into the future. These findings reveal the ways that non-vegetarians in Argentina perceive vegetarian diets as dangerous for their health, which even leads individuals to question the mothering abilities of those who take this path.

Initial concerns about health were reported by around two-thirds of participants, although they were frequently dismissed as participants felt confident that not eating meat was the healthier choice. Female participants were more likely to report extended reactions of concern and continued pressures from family and friends to see nutritionists or have regular medical check-ups. In some cases, however, these concerns diminished over time. Daniela’s father, a doctor, was very skeptical at first. He decided to research the matter and ultimately came to see things from her perspective, which she was relieved by as she no longer felt such a need to defend herself. The mothers in this sample, however, reported much more pushback and continuing critique of their decision.

“WHAT ABOUT YOUR KIDS?”

None of the male participants were fathers and no one in this study knew of any vegetarian or vegan fathers in their family and friendship circles. Of female participants, more than one-third were mothers (6 total: 2 pescatarians, 1 vegetarian, and 3 vegans). Two mothers reported little conflict, as they both continued to cook meat for others. Florencia, age 55, and Emilia, age 44, had older children and were married to their partners; they had both decided to become pescatarian within the past year. Florencia’s three children were all adults and were fine with her decision. Emilia’s philosophy towards raising her three children, the youngest was age

83 LAURA: [My family decía] que era una pavada lo que estaba haciendo. Bueno, lo mismo. Los animales están para eso, que era una loca por dejar de consumir leche, o que me iba a pasar algo, que tenga cuidado, que vaya al médico, que me haga controlar.

4, had already been shaped by beliefs in healthy eating, even before starting to work at the vegan restaurant. She reported that her friends and extended family critiqued her because of her anti- corporate (and “anti-yanquilandia”84) philosophy in general, but not vegetarianism specifically. Her philosophy towards raising her children was less related to vegetarianism and more to a desire to feed her family well. Emilia’s attitudes towards cooking meant that she viewed the asado as an opportunity to cook for others, including her children, even after she became a pescatarian.

Unlike Emilia and Florencia, the four younger mothers in this study preferred that their children avoid meat and, in some cases, dairy as well. This generally produced conflict in their own household, within the family, and/or in other settings:

LUCIA: (speaking of her young daughter’s desire to become vegetarian) And I found myself saying, on the one hand, “It makes me really proud, don’t feel pressured, you can change your mind as much as you want,” and all that, “But, eat meat – or eat meat at least until we can figure something out.” And it’s true that now, she eats less and less.85

RAQUEL: I only cook vegan food. When I cook, I ask [my daughter] if she wants to eat with me or if she wants to eat with grandma. She likes [the vegan food], and she’s getting used to it. But my grandma is like, “Don’t you want to eat a little chicken? Aren’t you going to eat the milanesas that I made?” It’s like they manipulate my daughter, and well, she says, “This time, I’ll eat with grandma because if I don’t, she’ll feel bad.”86

MARIANA: I have a daughter and I don’t give her any meat, dairy, nothing. But she goes to her grandparents’ house, and they feed her, she goes to her friends’ house, and well...... 87

JUANA: I try to make her [my daughter] vegetarian, too, but it’s difficult because other people take care of her, and I know – I’m absolutely certain – that when I leave her, they say, “That’s terrible that the mother doesn’t give her meat.” [...] Because that’s what people think. And, well, I don’t veganize her, vegetarianize her for those reasons –

84 Anti-yanquilandia – in Argentina, people from the United States are “yanquis” so by this, Emilia means that she avoids the consumerism she sees in U.S. culture. 85 LUCIA: (speaking of her youngest daughter’s desire to become vegetarian) Yo me encontré por un lado ya te digo, diciéndole, “Me pone muy orgullosa, no te sientas presionada, podés cambiar de opinión todas las veces que quieras,” que sé yo, “Pero, comé carne. O por lo menos comé carne hasta que arreglemos esto.” Y lo cierto es que ahora, ella come cada vez menos. 86 RAQUEL: Yo cocino comida vegana nada más. Cuando yo cocino, le pregunto [my daughter] si quiere comer conmigo o si quiere comer con la abuela. Igual le gusta, esta como que acostumbrándose. Pero mi abuela esta, “¿No vas a comer pollito? ¿No vas a comer las milanesas que hice?” Como que hacen esa manipulación con la nena, y bueno, dice, “Esta vez voy a comer con la abuela porque si no, se va a sentir mal.” 87 MARIANA: Tengo una hija y no le doy nada de carne, lácteos, nada. Pero va a la casa de los abuelos y le dan comida, va a la casa de los amigas, y bueno.

because of social reasons. It’s the same reason why I gave up vegetarianism three times before; it’s the same for my daughter.88

Lucia had two daughters, ages 7 and 9, from a previous relationship, and she had become vegetarian a year earlier after starting to date Alejandro. Lucia’s decision to become vegetarian made her feel conflicted about her role as a mother, as both her daughters’ father and her own mother believed it was wrong for Lucia to stop providing meat for her daughters. Her oldest daughter then expressed interest in becoming vegetarian as well, further complicating the situation, not only within the family but also with her daughter’s school. As evidenced by the initial excerpt above, Lucia was conflicted about the appropriate role. She had tried becoming vegetarian at the age of 15 due to interested in ecology, but had not found support in her own parents. Backed up by Alejandro, who she said knew much more about eating well, Lucia seemed positioned to move forward with her commitment. She had plans to visit a nutritionist, as the school required, and had not cooked meat for daughters at home in recent weeks despite pressures from her mother and their father.

Mariana, Juana, and Raquel similarly faced criticism for wanting to raise their daughters with vegan diets. All were young, single mothers who had long been interested in vegetarianism and/or veganism, and only Mariana was living alone with her daughter at the time of the interview. She reported the least amount of resistance, which was not surprising given that her mother was the owner of the natural foods store where she worked. Even so, Mariana resigned herself to the fact that others would not respect this decision outside of her own home.

Juana and Raquel faced even sharper criticism. Juana ultimately decided that her mother was not respecting her decision and moved out of the house. Raquel wanted to raise her daughter as vegetarian and tried to respond to her family’s critique, but found it difficult because of her living arrangements. Her family expressed concerns about her ability to adequately feed her child. Raquel lived with her daughter and her grandmother and, after she decided to become vegan 10 months ago, her grandmother started hosting asados more often to try and ‘tempt’ her to eat meat again. The grandmother also undermined Raquel’s ability to make decisions about

88 JUANA: Trato de hacerla vegetariana también pero es más difícil porque como la cuida otra gente, yo sé - estoy absolutamente segura - de que cuando la dejo, dicen, “Esta mal, la madre que la deja sin carne.” [..] Porque así piensa la gente. Y bueno, entonces, no la veganizo, vegetarianizo en todo por eso. Por más - más por una cuestión social. Por lo mismo que dejé el vegetarianismo tres veces, que fue también por presión social, a mi hija le pasa lo mismo.

80 what she would feed her daughter: Raquel’s daughter was thus stuck in the middle of this food- centered dispute. Getting out of such a situation was difficult, at least in terms of changing households, but one of Raquel’s strategies was to seek out more information so that she could better defend her decision to others. She had been a lone vegetarian, deciding to make the change without knowing any others and without support, but had since reached out to others by starting a small vegan food microenterprise, finding clients via Facebook, and getting involved with the promotion of veganism in March of 2012 by forming a vegan activist group (of which Mariana and Cristián also formed part).

JOKES

GASTON: Afghan. Someone who is really ignorant and has never heard the word vegan, says to me, “Afghan.”89

DIEGO: I remember once my boss told me, “No, no – if it didn’t suffer, I won’t eat it.” [...] But really it’s about how you deal with it. If you feel good about it, that’s all there is. Everyone else…well, that’s their choice.90

MATÍAS: [he starts chuckling] I’m laughing because sometimes they joke about it. A little while ago, one of the guys was cutting a lamb’s leg, all bloody, with an assassin’s knife like this [shows long blade], and they were laughing, “Look at this!” And I said, “I don’t know what you’re laughing about. Look at the mirror, look at yourself and see if you feel OK with yourself.” More than jokes, jokes come and jokes go, but more than anything I jokingly use sarcasm because otherwise you clash with them, and you realize that they end up thinking about things more. Because they start to associate what they are doing, what they are cutting into. They’re not cutting into a stick of butter – that foot was the foot of an animal.91

All participants reported that jokes were some of the most common reactions, both when they became vegetarian and continuing to the present; sometimes participants responded with their own pointed comments (as Matías’ response indicates). Typical jokes were things such as “Vegetables feel pain, too,” or “Vegetable-killer.” A more unusual joke reported by Gaston, a 21-year-old vegan, was confusion over the word vegano, which rhymes with afgano – Afghan –

89 GASTON: Afgano. Uno que es medio ignorante que jamás se escuchó la palabra vegano me dice, Afgano. 90 DIEGO: Me acuerdo en una mi jefe me dice, “No, no, yo si no sufre, no como.” [...] Esta más o menos en como lo tomes vos. Si vos te sentís bien con eso, ya está. Como que el resto puede…es elección de ellos. 91 MATÍAS: [he starts chuckling] Me rio porque a veces me joden. Pasó hace un tiempo que estaba uno de los chicos cortando una pata de cordero, con sangre, con un cuchillo así (shows length with his hands) de asesino, y se caga de risa, “Mirá lo que es eso.” Y le digo, “No sé de qué te reis. Ahí tenés un espejo, mirate vos a ver si te quedás tranquilo.” Más allá de lo que es un chiste, chistes van y chistes vienen, porque yo más que nada lo tiro en chiste un poco el sarcasmo porque si no vas muy del choque, te das cuenta de que terminan pensando de otra manera. Porque no relacionan lo que están haciendo, qué es lo que están cortando. No están cortando un pedazo de manteca. Esa pata era la pata de un bicho y fue así.

81 in Spanish. In other cases, a joking attitude was used to try to convince vegetarians or vegans to eat meat once again. Soledad, for example, was taunted by her older brother, which sometimes became mean-spirited. This made her feel angry and upset, although with the passage of time she has become less sensitive to his comments, like Diego.

In a similar fashion, Clara realized that it was up to her whether or not she would allow the jokes to bother her. She contrasted the situation with what she felt as a 12-year-old girl, when she first tried vegetarianism and was not only embarrassed, but tried to hide it from others. Now, when she is the butt of jokes, she thinks about the fact that meat-eaters are probably laughing because they feel uncomfortable and recognize the “inconsistencies in their own behavior.” Just in case they do not, several of the male participants noted that they often use humor to turn the tables on the person who is trying to attack them. Responding to jokes or teasing by meat-eaters, some vegetarians use sarcasm and humor to communicate their own messages. Like Matías (excerpted above), they hope that this will prompt meat-eaters to reflect more deeply on what meat-eating entails.

The majority of participants also expressed their views on why people make jokes. They suggested that meat-eaters make jokes about vegetarianism as a coping mechanism or as a way of defending themselves against what they perceive vegetarianism to be: an attack that may potentially affects their decision to eat and enjoy beef. Empirical studies of vegetarian interpretations of meat-eater attitudes frequently find similar patterns. As Twigg notes,

Vegetarians have long argued for an underlying unease, even guilt, within the dominant culture over meat eating evidence in myths and legends. Thus Eden has for many centuries been characterised within dominant culture as vegetarian and similar ideas have been held about the Golden Age (Twigg 1983: 22).

By attributing jokes, whether mean-spirited or good-natured, to this “underlying unease” or meat-eating guilt, it becomes easier for vegetarians to deal with the jokes themselves. Instead of feeling offended, they feel superior and may even feel bad for meat-eaters.

DEFENDING THE DECISION

Responding to constant criticism was difficult for many participants, especially vegans who were seen as “extreme,” when they decided to eliminate dairy products from their diets as well, or “getting worse,”92 when they decide to engage in activism (Maia). As the above consideration of reported reactions reveals, women often confronted substantial criticism from family and friends as well as an assortment of concerns. When asked about the need to defend their decision, men usually replied that they did at first, but that this is something of the past. For most male vegans and vegetarians, like Ezequiel, “They always respect you.”93 And in cases such as Alejandro’s, this respect translates into the preparation of meat-free meals, especially by mothers, in order to entice them to attend asados or other family gathers.

In contrast, female participants in this study not only reported more negative reactions, but these reactions also undermined their own decision-making power. Mothers like Raquel, Juana, Lucia, and Mariana all wanted to move towards raising their children as vegan or vegetarian. Other family members became involved, however, limiting their parental autonomy. Moreover, even as female participants reported greater acceptance than at the beginning, they still fret over the decision of having to reveal themselves in new situations:

DANIELA: When you make the decision – it’s the social impact, you know? To have to say that you don’t eat meat anymore. To have to explain why, sometimes – or go to some birthday or something. Now that it’s been a year, it’s not so difficult – they accept me. But sometimes, it’s difficult, you know?94

The idea of the coping mechanism is also recognized not only with respect to jokes, but by those vegetarians who explicitly recognized that they once formed part of the very same meat culture. Lucia, for example, reflects upon the level of discomfort she has observed in meat-eaters in a way that further develops Twigg’s (1983) observations about “underlying unease.”

LUCIA (reflecting on a conversation she’d had with a meat-eater): [I told him] that [vegetarianism], for me is an act of consciousness, becoming aware of what is right and what is wrong. So then he [the meat-eater] said to me, “But are you calling me unenlightened then? Because I still eat meat?” And I said, “No, no, no, not at all.” But I kept thinking. And the conversation continued [...] I mean, I understand a lot of things. I

92 MAIA: [My family tells me I’m] “Cada vez peor.” 93 EZEQUIEL: Te respetan siempre. 94 DANIELA: Cuando uno toma la decisión – el impacto social, ¿ no? Tener que decir que no comes más carne. Tener que explicar por qué, a veces, o eso – ir a algún cumpleaños. Ahora, porque ya hace un año que soy, no me cuesta tanto – me aceptaron. Pero a veces, es difícil, ¿no?

used to eat meat, too. And culturally, which also has a lot to do with this, culturally is seen as appropriate, you know? They don’t see it has a dead fish, or a murder, you know? But I decided to remove myself from that culture. And that’s why I realize all of this, that other people feel like you are questioning them, so they get defensive about it.

The “underlying unease” may also have a gendered element, as the women stated that some meat-eaters continued to question their commitment while the male participants stated that their family and friends had come to accept it. Agustina felt that the social pressures on male and female vegetarians were different. She had a unique opportunity in that she regularly interacted with another vegetarian in her daily working environment: Matías, her partner’s younger brother. It should be noted that she is atypical, as the majority of participants did not interact with other vegetarians on a daily basis (except those who were in intimate partnerships). She compared her experience to his by recalling interactions at work, where she felt that she did not receive the same level of respect because she was a woman:

AGUSTINA: It’s happened to me with a co-worker, who is pretty close-minded, and I always argue with – the same cook, he says to me, “But you are always eating salad to stay thin,” [and I said], “But my brother-in-law [Joaquin] is vegetarian.” It’s like, well, he’s vegetarian – that’s fine. And I’m vegetarian, and that’s not.95

She expressed frustration with this unequal treatment, which she thought stemmed from the belief of meat-eaters that women are vegetarians to lose weight or diet. Several other participants – both male and female – similarly reported that they had encountered such a stereotype: they thought that in the eyes of meat-eaters, it was more socially acceptable for a woman to be vegetarian than a man (both male and female participants thought this was likely true). However, in terms of reactions in their own circle of meat-eating family and friends, it is the women who reported resistance and continued questioning of their decisions. Agustina, for example, stated that every time she looked tired from not sleeping enough or caught a cold, her family would attribute it to her diet. None of the men in this study reported such continuous references to their vegetarianism as something that was undermining their well-being.

In sum, meat-eater reactions towards vegetarians in this study ranged from dismissal, concerns (especially health concerns about children and motherhood), and anti-vegetarian humor. Women, especially mothers, reported feelings of vulnerability to criticism even after

95 AGUSTINA: Me ha pasado con un compañero de laburo, que es bastante cerrado, y que siempre discuto, lo mismo el cocinero, y me dice: “Pero vos vivís comiendo ensaladita para mantenerte flaca.” [She replies] “Y mi cuñado [Joaquín] que es vegetariano,” Como, bueno, él es vegetariano, está bien. Y yo soy vegetariana, está mal.

84 conversion whereas men generally stated that others accepted their decision after they explained themselves. Vegetarians reacted to meat-eater comments and attitudes with frustration at times, but more often decided to adopt a “don’t-let-it-get-to-you” attitude. By attributing meat-eater attacks to their own ignorance, which is sometimes even pitied by vegetarians, the participants in this study are able to let most comments slide. Some of the participants in this study also recognize that it is extremely difficult for meat-eaters to remove themselves from the culinary context in which they are embedded. They are surrounded by both strong and weak ties that reinforce the message that beef is something to be enjoyed, and vegetarianism subsequently is viewed as something strange and potentially threatening.

VEGETARIAN RE-POSITIONING IN THE MEAT LANDSCAPE

Current studies of vegetarianism and veganism tend to focus on what individuals do or do not consume (Arppe, Mäkelä, and Väänänen 2011), drawing boundaries based on such things as whether or not they eat meat, wear leather, or avoid products tested on animals. Other studies classify vegetarians and vegans based on their motivations for conversion and the way that their beliefs and priorities change over time, which may or may not fit into larger ideological changes within the vegan social movement. As noted in chapter two, a sociological perspective on vegetarianism requires an examination of the ways that individual-level commitments affect social interaction and their own culinary identity, which takes place within a culinary context structured by social, political and economic histories of development. From this perspective, what vegetarians and vegans actually consume is of limited importance. The notion of a “vegetarian career,” which documents vegetarian strictness in practices (Beardsworth and Keil 1991), is less helpful theoretically. Instead, what matters are the ways that they reconcile their beliefs in vegetarianism with their attitudes towards meat-centered cultural traditions (e.g. the asado) and meat-eaters as individuals.

As noted in chapters 2 and 3 of this thesis, one of the limitations of this study is the small sample of vegetarians and vegans – and that their reports could not verified by non-vegetarians. Despite this limitation, patterns emerged from the interviews with regards to the attitudes held towards the asado and other meat-centered traditions, meat-eaters, and veganism as a philosophy. Inductive logic was used to guide the coding process and, as codes were combined,

85 a typology of vegetarianism was developed based on their attitudes towards the asado, meat- eaters, and the principles of veganism.

Table 5-1. An Attitudinal Typology of Vegetarians

ACTIVE REJECTION AVOIDANCE TOLERANCE attitudes ADAPTATION towards: attendance often unwilling to share avoids going when accompanied by embraces asado as the same table; possible, but does not feelings of guilt, opportunity to share with the asado: lack of feel strongly either limited participation, non-vegetarians, participation way tries to avoid 'being sometimes feels excluded an imposition'

vegetarianism is a meat-eaters are personal decision, tries meat-eaters lack empathy, sadness in meat- ignorant and do not to impose (but often knowledge; meat is response to meat- not want to see the hopes family/friends will eaters: simply not healthy eaters’ myopia truth eat less meat), sometimes cooks meat for others embraces as considers it to be one “morally- of several alternative accepts, may be superior” to meat- accepts, but may view diets (e.g. raw food, involved in vegan veganism: eating activism as “extreme” trophology, activism (anti-speciesism) macrobiotics)

Claudia, Emilia, Cristián, Ezequiel, Raquel, Clara, Gaston, Diego, Lucia, Sonia, Alejandro, Juana, Daniela, participants: Laura Agustina, Florencia, Andrés, Matías Soledad, Mariana (N=3) Maia, Noelia, Lucas (N=5) (N=6) (N=9)

These four positions: rejection, avoidance, tolerance, and active adaptation, each have different implications for the ways that culinary traditions are subsequently adapted and change. Figure 5- 2 is a diagram that was created to describe the processes that vegetarians undergo as they re- position themselves with respect to the meat-dominant culture, as indicated by their attitudes towards the asado in particular, meat-eaters, and veganism. It should be noted that none of the participants were raised as vegetarian and our interviews suggested that no one was very familiar with vegetarianism, much less veganism, growing up. Therefore, before conversion, I conceptualize each individual as being embedded within the social context of a meat-dominant culinary culture. Once they realize it is possible to eliminate meat from their diets, a person then moves towards one of these four positions, altering their relationship with meat-centered traditions.

At one extreme, some people embrace veganism. They move towards rejection of the meat-dominant culture, which can include reluctance or outright refusal to attend asados or share any meal when meat is being served. They strongly believe that animals have rights and some openly adhere to the ethical principles of veganism such as the conviction that speciesism is the third pillar of oppression (alongside racism and sexism). Next is the position of avoidance, wherein traditions such as the asado are avoided and meat-eating is conceived as damaging to personal health; avoiding asados is usually done but if attendance is expected, these participants will usually go. The third position, tolerance, involves greater willingness to participate in, or at least attend, meat-centered traditions. However, this willingness is accompanied by feelings of guilt. Finally, there are those who aim to preserve aspects of the meat-dominant culture and therefore adopt a position of active adaptation. As indicated in Figure 5-2, it is those who actively adapt traditions who have the greatest interaction with the culinary practices of non- vegetarian family and friends. Each of these positions will now be considered in turn, with greater attention paid to the extremes (rejection and adaptation) as they are especially important for bringing about change.

REJECTION. Moving Outside the Meat-Dominant Culture.

MATÍAS: I don’t eat at the same table [...] It’s not that I’m repulsed. But I – I don’t feel comfortable with a piece of bone next to me.96

EZEQUIEL: For example, my friends from high school are planning a reunion and they’re going to have an asado, and they were going to have a vegetarian option [...] but I still said, “Invite me after the asado.” I don’t want to see a creature, a dead being. It’s like – it produces – I feel complicit, I feel complicit in that setting, that they – are acting without any awareness, you know? But I think they’re doing a whole ceremony around a living being.97

CRISTIÁN: The subject of symbolism that the asado has in Argentina – it’s very strong. And to say, I don’t go to soccer on Sundays and I don’t eat asado on Sundays, I don’t sit at the same table – it’s very shocking. So when there are gatherings with friends, coworkers, team members, everyone eats meat. They have an asado and well, they say, “We can make vegetables for you.” No. I won’t sit at the same table. I’m not going to be witness to the asado. And so, then they get the idea [...] In my view the asado is that – indignation.98

ANDRÉS: What happens is that in general, I don’t spend much time with intellectuals [...] they are people who are rather close-minded, elementary, and they question you in the same way as my family and my co-workers.99

From the position of rejection, meat-eaters are viewed as ignorant and loath to face their own ignorance, refusing to see the extent of animal suffering that happens with industrial food production. This frequently generates conflict with meat-eaters, as is indicated by the zigzagged red line in Figure 5-2 that separates the exclusive vegan worldview from meat-dominant culture. Such attitudes describe five participants in this study, three vegetarians and two vegans – all men – ages 25 to 31. Alejandro, Andrés, and Matías, all close friends, have adopted positions of rejection in line with their beliefs that meat-eaters are violating the rights of animals. They generally refuse to attend asados and order pizza when they get together with friends. As their

96 MATÍAS: No como en la misma mesa [...] No es que me causa rechazo. Pero no - no me siento cómodo con un pedazo de hueso al lado. 97 EZEQUIEL: Ahora por ejemplo todo mi grupo de la gente de mi secundario va a hacer un reencuentro y van a hacer un asado y decían de hacer una opción para los vegetarianos [...] pero igual yo les dije, invítenme después del asado. Yo no pienso ver un bichito, un muerto. Como que ya – me causa, me siento cómplice, me siento cómplice de esa reunión, de que están - de forma inconsciente, ¿no? Pero están haciendo un ritual alrededor de un ser vivo. 98 CRISTIÁN: El tema es que el simbolismo que tiene, el simbolismo que tiene el asado en la Argentina, es muy fuerte. Y decir, yo no asisto al fútbol los domingos y no como asado los domingos, no me siento en la mesa - es muy chocante. Entonces cuando hay reuniones entre amigos, reuniones de trabajo, reuniones de equipo, todos comen carne - hacen un asado - yo voy, bueno, “A vos te hacemos unas verduras,” No. Yo no me siento en la mesa. No voy a estar en presencia del asado. Entonces, captan la idea [...] El asado para mí es eso – es indignación. 99 ANDRES: Lo que pasa es que en líneas generales, no me muevo en un círculo de gente formada intelectualmente [...] son gente bastante cerrada, bastante elemental, que te hacen todos los mismos planteos que te contaba de mi familia, lo mismo en el trabajo.

88 dietary practices reveal, this does not lead them directly to veganism – although they are strict about avoiding leather and try to buy products and invest money in companies where testing on animals is not done. Ezequiel and Cristián, both vegans, reject the meat-dominant culture even more vehemently.

Their attitudes towards meat-eaters indicated a high degree of intolerance, as they conceive of vegetarianism as the rational choice that should be made to protect animal rights. Meat-eaters who do not understand their decision are less intelligent and closed off to logic. As a result of their interpretations of how others respond, these individuals avoid what they believe to be pointless arguments. They also avoid sharing meals with meat-eaters, preferring to cook alone and many times eat alone, rather than shared the family table. Matías, for example, lives with his brothers and parents, but does not eat with them on a regular basis. Connecting this back to his process of conversion, Matías felt that his father in particular was “waging war” against him by refusing to buy ingredients for vegetarian meals at home. This has changed, and Matías now feels more respected by others. However, given the attitudes they hold towards other meat-eaters, these individuals move towards the vegan philosophy. They do not want to be “complicit” or endorse any sort of tradition that involves the death of an animal, which Cristián in particular equates to supporting Nazism or discrimination against women. Cristián explained that the vegan philosophy is one of love towards animals and other human beings, but many people distance themselves from it because they do not want to have to question their own eating practices.

Vegetarians and vegans who adopt positions of rejection effectively remove themselves from the asado tradition, replacing it with other traditions. Andrés, Alejandro, and Matías, for example, said that at first, vegetarianism was all they would argue about as a group. However, as the balance shifted (following Andrés, Alejandro and then Matías became vegetarian), the circle of friends stopped organizing asados. Instead, when they get together, they usually order pizza or something else that everyone can eat. None of the men interviewed in this study expressed nostalgia or deep feelings of connection to the asado, unlike the women participants.

One final striking characteristic of the men in positions of rejection is that, of those in committed relationships, all were dating vegetarians who had made the transition after meeting them. Matías commented upon this, saying it was “funny” in a way, as his girlfriend gradually

89 gave up eating meat in the same way that Alejandro’s partner (Lucia) and Andrés’ partner (Daniela) ultimately became vegetarian. Cristián, who was single at the time of our interview, was even more explicit about how these dynamics work:

CRISTIÁN: Everyone that I’ve been with has ended up vegan, or close. [...] Girlfriends, 5 or 6 – less than that, no way. More. In fact, when I was with a person from the interior [the more rural areas away from the coast where cattle production takes place] it was with me that she became vegan. After dating me, she returned to meat-eating because she was dating a meat-eater.100

He had fully embraced the vegan worldview, refusing to take part in the asado tradition and instead advocating for veganism with his own involvement in the vegan social movement. Cristián’s confidence in his ability to ‘convert’ future partners, however, was exceptional among participants. When asked about his willingness to date non-vegetarians, he proclaimed:

CRISTIÁN: But she’ll end up vegan! You know that from the start – that if you fall in love with someone, you know – you can tell them in two minutes. I’ve told – and even beyond that, is more fun to date a meat-eater, because I get to see the whole process.101

He claimed to have “converted” at least 5 or 6 previous partners, although acknowledged that at least one of them went back to meat-eating after their relationship. This report of “conversions” parallels a dynamic in the interviews: it was these individuals who were most vocal about convincing me of the health benefits of veganism and vegetarianism and the moral imperative to give up meat. Cristián, for example, handed me a pamphlet about dairy products and declared that he thought I would be a “full vegan” in two months’ time.102

In addition to recognizing the impact that their vegetarianism has had on intimate relationships, the participants in this position of rejection also noted that their practices had affected friendships. As Matías explained, “a gap is unconsciously produced”103 between meat- eaters and vegetarians. He does not assign blame for this distance, but conceives of it as part of the transition away from the meat-dominant culture. When asked about the possible impact on his friendships, Cristián began by re-affirming the principles of veganism:

100 CRISTIÁN: Todas las personas con las que he estado han terminado veganas. O cercas. [...¿Cuántas?] Novias, 5 o 6 - menos que eso, ni en pedo. Más. De hecho, cuando yo estaba con una persona que comía carne, del interior, estuvo conmigo se hizo vegetariana. Después de estar conmigo se volvió carnívora porque estaba con un carnívoro. 101 CRISTIÁN: ¡Es que se va a ser vegano! Eso lo sabes de entrada - si vos te enamoras de alguien, sabes - le contás así dos minutos. He contado - además, es más divertido que sea una carnívora. Porque para mí, voy a ver todo el proceso. 102 I did not become a vegan, although he was partially right: I drastically reduced my milk consumption. 103 MATÍAS: Se genera una brecha inconscientemente.

CRISTIÁN: True veganism, veganism that goes beyond, is veganism of love. It is understanding of others, whether they are animals or humans. Just because someone is the owner of a slaughterhouse and tortures animals does not mean he should be killed. No, no. It’s necessary to understand that he is a cultural product. So in our surroundings, we transmit love and generally a meat-eater who doesn’t enter into the process of thinking about these things, he discriminates against people.104

This reliance on principles, rather than sharing his individual experiences, was something that Cristián frequently did. In contrast to Matías, Cristián placed the blame for any friendship loss solely on the shoulders of meat-eaters. And, when pressed about the potential social impact for friendships, Cristián said that it is others who “distance themselves – alone.” He had a black- and-white perspective on this: either friends would convert, as they realized it was the right thing to do, or they would back away, because veganism made them feel uncomfortable and they did not want to see the truth.

In sum, participants in the position of rejection expressed an unwillingness to attend most or all asados, often referenced philosophy or high moral principles that sustain their practices, and had stories of conversion in close friends and/or partners (i.e. strong ties). Andrés’ influence on Alejandro and Matías, and Cristián’s influence on Ezequiel, epitomize the way this process occurred in this study. Because these men are so committed to rejecting meat-based cultural traditions, their influence on friends and family was noteworthy. However, because they avoided the asado or refused to attend, they were not agents of culinary change within that tradition. Instead, they effectively removed themselves from it, replacing the asado with other foods at gatherings with friends. Cristián turned to collective action to promote veganism but, unlike study participants in other positions, those who have effectively stepped outside of the asado tradition also distance themselves from the process of sharing that the tradition represents.

104 CRISTIÁN: El veganismo de verdad, el veganismo que va más allá, es el veganismo del amor. O sea, es la comprensión del otro, sea animal o humano. No porque él sea el dueño de un frigorífico y tortura animales hay que matarlo. No, no. Hay que hacerle comprender que es un producto cultural. Entonces en nuestro entorno, nosotros emitimos amor y generalmente un carnívoro que no entra en todo el proceso de entrar a pensar en estas cosas, discrimina gente.

AVOIDANCE. Opting-Out of the Asado.

LAURA: People used to tell me that I would try to indoctrinate them when I talked about vegetarianism and veganism. So I gradually started trying not to talk. I mean, if people don’t ask me or they don’t get excited about it, I don’t say, “Don’t eat meat,” or “Meat has this or that.” I try not to say anything and do my own thing, follow my diet – to each his or her own.105

Some vegetarians take a less extreme position with regards to dominant meat culture, one of avoidance. They conceptualize their decisions as individual ones made primarily for health reasons, and therefore express less indignation in response to asados and sharing family meals. These individuals have a deep and personal commitment to veganism, which contrasts with those in positions of rejection, wherein asados are condemned as macabre and potentially offensive celebrations of death. The three vegans – two men and one woman – in this category express interest in alternative diets besides veganism as well, understanding food as medicine and aiming to improve their current practices by building not only on veganism, but also raw foods, macrobiotics, and trophology. They may attend asados but there is limited enthusiasm or connection to the tradition itself.

Their commitment to veganism and alternative diets, however, is generally quite strong and their processes of conversion were normally more unidirectional based on clear goals. As Diego explained, “I became vegetarian because it was faster. But my idea was always – to strive towards veganism.”106 Accompanying this decision, these individuals do not allow the preparation of meat within their homes and they refuse to cook it for others, as Gaston emphasized, “I don’t want to cook any meat at all.”107 Such a position similarly produces social conflict, especially because these individuals were often in charge of cooking meat – as the asador, for their family and friends. Diego felt that some of his friends reacted almost with great surprise and even irritation because “they ended up without an asador,”108 the role that he used to fill. Moreover, the individuals in positions of avoidance generally stated that they would need to date someone with similar interests in healthy eating and that cooking meat in the household

105 LAURA: Me ha llegado a decir que trato de adoctrinar cuando hablo acerca del vegetarianismo, el veganismo. Pero de a poco intenté no hablar. O sea, si la gente no me pregunta o no se copa así charlando, no le digo, “No comas carne,” o “La carne tiene tal cosa.” Trato de no decir nada y de hacer la mía, hacer mi dieta, digamos, cada uno por su lado. 106 DIEGO: Me hice vegetariano por una cuestión de que era más rápida. Pero siempre mi idea era - fue apuntar al veganismo. 107 GASTON: No quiero cocinar absolutamente nada de carne. 108 DIEGO: Se quedaron sin asador (the person who cooks meat at asados).

92 would not be allowed. These participants all indicated that if they were to have children, these children would also be raised as vegans; the tradition of the asado thus becomes marginalized here, just as it does in the lives of those vegetarians who have more explicitly rejected these traditions.

TOLERANCE. (Barely) Tolerating Meat-Based Traditions.

RAQUEL: Now, it’s like I’ve become more tolerant. Not only it is necessary to have empathy for animals, but also for people. And understanding that – they don’t do it because they’re bad people, but because it is the custom, it is the culture. They’re missing the connection.109

DANIELA: The truth is, I feel bad, because sometimes, not because of the asado, but because of the context. It’s like people start talking about the food, and I’m eating pasta, and they’re eating I don’t know what, and everyone reacts to [the meat] and I end up without anything to say. [...] and really I go because they’re family gatherings. But if not, it makes me feel uncomfortable, and the truth is, I don’t even want to be close, I don’t know. I don’t like it. Before I was more tolerant about that, but now I’m less and less so.110

CLARA: And I think about the lack of awareness, and I don’t want to judge them because I was part of all that for a long time. And so I don’t judge. But it makes me feel indignant to the point of saying, I feel like I have 15 monkeys eating meat here – and what I’m doing is useless. Sometimes I feel a little like that, but immediately I think – I try to focus on the fact that I do it for myself.111

Six participants, all women, exhibited positions of tolerance towards meat-eaters and meat- dominant culture. Vegetarians and vegans within this category all believe that a moral imperative to not eat animals exists, which is usually accompanied by avoidance of leather and the use of products not tested on animals. Most are involved in some form of activism for the protection of animal rights. Such individuals, however, do not reject the asado or other family traditions outright. Instead, they report feelings of guilt and sometimes avoid asados and other

109 RAQUEL: Ahora, como que me volví más tolerante. Y aparte de tener empatía por los animales, hay que tener empatía por personas. Y entender que, que no lo hacen porque sean malos sino, es porque es costumbre, porque es la cultura. Le falta hacer la conexión. 110 DANIELA: La verdad, me siento mal, porque a veces, no porque quizás el asado, sino por, por el contexto. Como que se dan esas charlas de comida. Ahí yo comí pasta, y ellos comen no sé qué, y todos reaccionaron a eso y me quedo como sin cosas de las que hablar a veces. [...] Que en realidad voy porque son reuniones familiares. Pero si, no - me incomoda, la verdad, no quiero tampoco estar re-cerca, no sé. No me gusta. Antes era más tolerante con eso, pero ahora cada vez menos. 111 CLARA: Y pienso en la inconsciencia. Y no los quiero juzgar porque yo misma fui parte de eso por mucho tiempo. Entonces no los juzgo. Pero me da un poco de indignación y a veces de decir, siento que tengo 15 monos comiendo carne acá - y siento que es inútil lo que estoy haciendo. A veces me da un poco de eso. Pero inmediatamente pienso - trato de enfocarme en que lo hago por mí.

93 family events. The five participants – all women – still value the asado as a social gathering and believe in the need to respect meat-eaters or at least show empathy and understanding. Their reaction to meat-centered traditions is quite complex and nuanced, where those in positions of rejection or avoidance were straightforward. The men in positions of rejection conceived of their decision to stop eating meat as the rational decision to make, whereas these individuals (all women) expressed more emotional reasons such as disgust, as Mariana explained, or simply “feeling bad” when surrounded by meat-eaters. Clara, like others in this category, attempted to balance these feelings with understanding and the fact that she felt the asado is more than food – it is a valued cultural tradition and an opportunity to share with family and friends.

Their attitudes towards meat-eaters are characterized by more empathy and understanding, in contrast to the clear attitudes of superiority expressed by those who reject these traditions. Such a position of tolerance generally stems from the recognition that change takes time, as Juana noted, “You can’t change the world in a day.” Feelings of guilt, sadness, or judgment are repressed as they do not want to miss out on the opportunity to share with non- vegetarians. For some, bringing their own food to these events and sharing the table with meat- eaters can be a chance to raise awareness about veganism in a less obtrusive way that is less confrontational than refusing to attend. They distinguished themselves from meat-eaters as they recognize the process that occurs in order for others to enjoy meat. In their view, veganism is not extreme – ironically it is meat-eating that is extreme, as this implies animal suffering and death. When I asked Clara if she had anything to add at the end of the interview, she responded:

CLARA: Lots of people say, “Don’t you think it’s a little extreme?” And I think it’s because of a lack of awareness [...] they serve an already-made dish, and you don’t know what’s happened to that piece of meat, you know? I think that’s what is more extreme – to eat a cooked body, that is disguised so that you can it eat. That’s what seems more extreme – to be unaware. And to not want to be aware.112

Attitudes towards dating and committed partnerships were even more difficult to reconcile than from the previous two positions (rejection and avoidance) discussed. The women in this group all expressed concerns about finding a suitable partner. These concerns may be well-founded in that studies have found more women than men become vegetarian. Amato and Partridge suggest

112 CLARA: Mucha gente me dice - ¿No te parece un poco extremo? Y creo que es por la falta de consciencia. [...] sirven ya, digamos, hecho - tu plato - no sabés todo lo que le pasó a ese pedazo de carne. ¿Viste? Creo que es más extremo eso, comer un cadáver cocinado, como esta disfrazado para que lo puedas comer, digamos. Eso me parece más extremo - no ser consciente. Y no querer ser consciente.

94 that, as a result, many vegetarian women are more open to dating meat-eating men. In their study of English-speaking vegetarians primarily from the United States, they found that only 20% of men had non-vegetarian partners, compared to more than half of women (Amato and Partridge 1989: 211). Within this La Plata study, none of the male participants had non- vegetarian partners whereas over half of women in committed relationships were with meat- eaters (see Appendix E).

Within this position of tolerance, then, attitudes towards meat-eaters are complex. Two different attitudes towards dating are represented by Clara and Raquel’s responses when they were asked if they would date meat-eaters:

RAQUEL: To be honest, no.....vegetarian, yes. But I don’t know if I could be with someone who – it sounds a little intolerant, doesn’t it? But no, no – I don’t think so.113

CLARA: It would be important, but yes, it’s something I really think about. But at the same time, I don’t want to think that if I met one of the 99.999% of men who do eat meat – I would say, “OK – chau.” Because it seems to me that I’d remain alone for the rest of my life. No, but to tell you the truth – the ideal would obviously be that yes [to date a vegan], because for me it is something important. It’s not trivial. But I don’t want to be closed-minded about it.114

Clara’s own fears of not finding a suitable partner had been exacerbated by her grandmother’s response to her own veganism; her grandmother had declared, “It’s going to be really difficult to find a boyfriend now!” that she would never find anyone now that she is vegan. Therefore, just as the women in this position express notable tolerance towards the asado tradition combined with conflicted feelings of guilt, they also recognize the social and cultural constraints on others and are thus more understanding of meat-eaters than the male attitudes expressed from the position of rejection.

113 RAQUEL: Sinceramente no [risa]...vegetariano, sí. Pero no sé si podría estar con alguien que - suena un poco intolerante, ¿no? Pero no, no. Calculo que no. 114 CLARA: Sería importante, pero eso sí, es un tema que lo re contra pienso. Pero igual, no quiero pensar que si conozco a cualquier de los 99,999% de hombres que comen carne - voy a decir bueno listo, chau. Porque me parece que me quedaría sola por el resto de mi vida. No, pero te digo la verdad - lo ideal sería obviamente que sí, porque para mí es algo importante. No es una pavada. Pero no quiero estar cerrada a eso.

ACTIVE ADAPTATION. Reconciling Vegetarianism with Meat-Centered Traditions.

MAIA: Sometimes I end up at a birthday party and there isn’t anything – I don’t eat pizza, I don’t eat anything and I eat potato chips, peanuts, and that’s it. I don’t make problems [...] I think that maybe this affects others because they see that I’m not eating or something, but I say that it’s not a problem. That I’m used to it.115

AGUSTINA: I adapt, it’s no problem [...] It happens with my mother-in-law. Like, the other day, she made raviolis with meat sauce, and she gave me the plate, and my boyfriend said, “Mom, she doesn’t eat meat!” [I replied] “Oh, Leonel, don’t worry – take the meat.” [I took out the pieces of meat and ate the raviolis].116

SONIA: Once I hosted a gathering and a lot of people were coming, and the majority didn’t like eating anything but meat, so I made a beef stew.117

CLAUDIA: When I was dating my last boyfriend – he was a big meat-eater – and at the beginning he would what I ate. And I said to him, “No, I mean, I’m not going to get angry. Eat what you want to eat, and I’ll eat what I want.” [...] I try to adapt because if not – I mean, if you’re inflexible and intolerant, you won’t get anywhere.118

The fourth position, active adaptation, characterized nearly one-third of participants (8 women, 1 man). These individuals did not report many feelings of guilt, sadness, or the repression of feelings. Their personal decisions seemed to be overshadowed by a desire to share in the asado tradition and avoid imposing on others. This position involves the constant questioning of their own beliefs and reconciliation with the meat-dominant culture, leading to the creation of new traditions and hastening the process of change by regularly interacting with non-vegetarians, encouraging them to eat less meat by example or by cooking alternatives to share. The 9 participants – 8 women and 1 man – actively adapted cultural traditions within their friendship and family circles by reducing the meat and sometimes dairy consumption.

The vegetarians and vegans in this group sometimes reported feeling excluded, but nearly all of them stated that they did not want their decision to inconvenience anyone else or make

115 MAIA: Por ahí caigo así en un cumpleaños y no, no hay - pero yo no como pizza, no como nada, y como papitas, maní, y listo. No me hago problema [...] creo que por ahí afecta más a ellos porque no me ven comiendo o algo, pero yo le digo que no hay problema. Que estoy acostumbrada. 116 AGUSTINA: Yo me adapto, porque yo no tengo problema [...] Me pasa con mi suegra. Por ahí, hizo el otro día ravioles con salsa y pedacitos de carne, y me dio el plato y le dice mi novio, “Mamá, ella no come carne.” “Ah, Leonel, nada - tomá la carne.” 117 SONIA: En realidad una vez hice una reunión y venia mucha gente, y a la mayoría no le gustaba comer otra cosa que no fuese carne así que hice un guiso con carne. 118 CARLA: Cuando salíamos con él, con el último novio que tuve, él era muy carnívoro y al principio él comía cosas que yo comía. Y yo le digo, “No, o sea, no me voy a enojar. Come lo que vos quieras comer, y yo como lo que yo quiero comer.” [...] Yo trato de adaptarme porque si no, o sea - ser tan inflexible e intolerante, no vas a ningún lado.

96 meat-eaters feel uncomfortable – sometimes they emphatically made this point at multiple times during our interview. Many of them actively respond by offering to prepare meat for others or brush off concerns by meat-eaters that they have not eaten, making excuses like, “I’m not hungry,” or “I’m used to this.” It should be noted that not all of these individuals cook meat for others, and several refuse to eat vegetables that have been touched by the same fork when they are both being prepared on the grill. These participants, however, do not want their feelings towards meat to affect their social relationships. They work to actively adapt and extend the asado tradition, which they value as part of their own culinary culture:

CLAUDIA: I love the folklore of the asado. For example, when my brother-in-law – he’s another big meat-eater – and we’re especially like he does the asado, and I add the red peppers, the vegetables that go on the grill and I do the antipasti. And I always loved that part of the folklore, that many people thought I wouldn’t because I’m vegetarian. But no – on the contrary, I like it.119

LUCIA: I was also asadora. And this is what happened. On December 31st of last year [...], I decided to stay alone and spend the day alone. And I prepared the fire, gathering wood, setting it up; I bought charcoal, and I made myself a beautiful vegetarian asado: with red peppers, potato, onion, and a ton of other grilled vegetables, and I was happy. And now I accept [the asado].....I have a more peaceful attitude.120

They have feelings of deep attachment for the asado and, as Lucia’s story indicates, the reconciliation of personal beliefs about vegetarianism with the asado stirs a great deal of emotion within. The solution lies in actively adapting traditions by bringing in vegetables to share with others, often cooked on the same grill. Many of them cook for others and/or seek out ways to share their personal beliefs in vegetarianism without infringing upon the desires of others to enjoy meat. On the one hand, four of the women in this category willingly and openly offer to cook meat for their partners that they share a household with. This involves everything from making empanadas to grilling and helping out with the asado. The desire to bring individuals together via food traditions is thus quite strong within these participants, eight of whom are female. This pattern, that women express greater flexibility and a continued desire to prepare

119 CLAUDIA: A mí me encanta el folklore del asado. Por ejemplo cuando me cuñado - mi cuñado también es otro muy carnívoro, y somos los dos particularmente que mientras él hace el asado, yo le voy poniendo los morrones, voy poniendo la verdura que va a ir a la parrilla, y hago una picada. Y siempre me encanta - me encanta esa parte del folklore, que muchos creían que porque yo era vegetariana, no, no me gustaba. No, no, al contrario - esas cosas, me gustan. 120 LUCIA: Yo me encontré también siendo asadora. Y me pasó esto. El 31 de diciembre, del año pasado [...] - yo decidí quedarme sola y pasar ese día sola. Y me prendí el fuego, junté maderitas, las acomodé, compré carbón, y me hice un hermoso asado vegetariano. Con morrones y papa y cebollas y un montón de verduras a la parrilla y estaba muy contenta. Y ahora lo tomo, por ejemplo, por eso te digo que yo tengo una actitud bastante pacífica.

97 meat for others, is consistent with work by Allen and Sachs, who note that “Women’s food provisioning represents their ties to family and also maintains cultural traditions that are the heart of many women’s identities” (Allen and Sachs 2007: 3).

Such an attitude can be understood from the basis that these participants, generally women, understand that they too once formed part of the meat-dominant culture. More than those in the other three positions – rejection, avoidance, and tolerance – they talked about change in the ways that the asado is prepared within their family and friendship circles. Other participants did not talk as much about changes in the asado tradition, although it may be occurring as well. Not one of the participants had hosted an entirely vegetarian asado for others, but several expressed interest in the idea or explained that since becoming vegetarian, they have noticed that the sector de verduras continues to grow.

GENDER AND RE-POSITIONING IN THE MEAT LANDSCAPE

These four positions in the meat landscape – rejection, avoidance, tolerance, and active adaptation – overlap with gender in ways that were not initially apparent. The creation of the typology revolved around what was said by individuals and, at first, I examined how their attitudes overlapped with dietary practices (i.e. whether they were vegetarian or vegan). Yet no clear patterns emerged there. Instead, notable gender differences discussed above were readily apparent. Fully exploring the ways in which these positions intersect with traditional gender roles is beyond the scope of this exploratory project, but some points of comparison can nonetheless be drawn here with existing literature on gender differences.

Previous research on vegetarianism has found that men may face challenges when deciding to become vegetarian or vegan, given the close connections between meat and masculinity (Nath 2011). Male vegetarianism may also cause greater distress in meat-eaters, especially in a machista society such as Argentina. For, if “femininity is not as highly valued as masculinity, women’s gender nonconformity is less disruptive of gendered power dynamics” (Guptill, Copelton, and Lucal 2013: 32). Women who opt not to eat meat may not “rock the boat” as much as men. Moreover, as indicated above, several participants believed that meat- eaters sometimes dismiss female vegetarianism as a form of dieting or a weight-maintenance strategy. On the surface, it might seem then that the transition to vegetarianism would be easier

98 for women. In the Argentine context in particular, the dominant culture is meat-based and meat is connected with masculinity (e.g. the person who prepares the asado is usually a man). Becoming vegetarian would thus signify a greater rupture for men, who not only confront the meat-dominant culture but may also be challenging the linkage between meat and masculinity.

It is therefore possible that this greater rupture leads men to distance themselves more and move outside the meat landscape. Their distance, however, was respected by meat-eaters, at least according to the male participants in this study. In contrast, of the female participants, those who attempted to move away from the meat-dominant culture reported facing social pressures and negative reactions. Other female participants reported that they wanted to continue to participate in the asado and felt good about being able to continue to cook meat for others – but it was not clear whether or not they felt they had the option not to cook meat. These gender differences may be more consistent with Merriman (2010), who found that female vegetarians were questioned more by their male relatives. Such differences could be related to power imbalances. Women may feel more sense of obligation to cook for others in the first place and/or meat-eaters may attempt to reinforce gender roles where women are expected to cook based on the needs of their partners and/or children, although additional research would be needed to explore these possibilities.

MAKING ROOM ON THE GRILL

More than half of the participants in this study reported that others accommodated them at asados by preparing vegetables or provoleta (a disk of provolone cheese). Not unsurprisingly, these participants had placed themselves in positions of tolerance or active adaptation towards meat-eaters and traditions. They do not demand meat alternatives when invited to asados, but normally have at least one friend or family member who goes out of their way to make them a vegan or vegetarian option. When participants shared these stories of accommodation by others, their faces often lit up with happiness, excitement, and love:

AGUSTINA: A vegetarian always has to adapt. But I think that, at least in my immediate family, and in my friends, they also are adapting. My friends come to dinner and know that they’re going to have something with meat for them [...and for example] there was a

birthday party not long ago, and everyone was eating asado and my sister knew she had to get something else for me and my youngest sister.121

Maia’s father was not nearly as understanding as Agustina’s – she did not have a close relationship with him, which she partially attributed to his lack of acceptance of her decision. She recalled going to his house and being served stuffed pasta with duck pâté and meat sauce by his new wife, even though she had been a vegetarian for nearly five years and recently transitioned to veganism. This memory clearly produced an emotional reaction, but it was also something that she contrasted with efforts by her father-in-law:

MAIA: For example, my father-in-law122 encourages me the most with respect to veganism, too. I go to his house and he always tries to give me something that doesn’t have cheese or egg or anything. ADP: Oh, nice. MAIA: No, he’s great – and he makes things with quinoa, so that I always have something to eat. ADP: That’s nice. MAIA: No, he’s great!123

She deeply valued his efforts to always prepare something for her, as he took extra care to make a vegan dish so that she would not have to worry about bringing food for asados and family dinners at her partner’s house. Sometimes those who make special efforts to accommodate vegetarians are the same individuals who originally made fun of their decisions. Daniela’s uncle, for example, used to repeat silly jokes and tempt her with meat. The morning of the interview, however, he called her about an asado that he was planning for the family to let her know that he already bought red bell peppers, onions, and potatoes to add to the grill. Daniela fondly told me this story, expressing her happiness that finally her family was not only respecting her decision, but also making an effort to include her in traditions like the asado. Vegetarians and vegans were also excited when their family and friends expressed interest in their recipes or when they

121 AGUSTINA: Uno, uno siempre se tiene que adaptar como vegetariano. Pero yo creo que, por lo menos en mi núcleo familiar, o de amigos, también se van adaptando. Mis amigos vienen a cenar y saben que van a tener algo de carne ellos [...] fue el cumpleaños hace poco, y todos comían asado y mi hermana sabía que para mi hermanita y para mí, tenía que comprar otra cosa. 122 This is directly translated from the word suegro/a, which in Argentina is commonly used by anyone in a committed relationship regardless of formal marital status (instead of saying ‘my boyfriend’s father’). 123 MAIA: Por ejemplo mi suegro es el que más me alienta en cuanto al veganismo también. Yo voy a la casa y el trata de nunca, darme algo que tenga ya queso ni huevo ni nada. ADP: Mirá. MAIA: No, divino. Y me hace cosas con quínoa a veces como para que tenga, no sé, que este comiendo algo. ADP: Mirá vos. MAIA: No, divino.

100 wanted to try vegan foods. Juana, for example, was thrilled when her mother asked her to pick up extra milanesas from the vegan food microenterprise (that was started by Laura and Gaston), even if it was for health reasons.

CONCLUSION

In this chapter, I have analyzed two major areas of ‘practicing vegetarianism’ – patterns in the reported reactions of meat-eaters and differences in the ways that vegetarians position themselves with respect to the meat-dominant culture. Female participants were more likely to report concerns from family in particular, especially if they are mothers trying to raise their children on vegetarian or vegan diets. Mothering autonomy is undermined. An attempt was made to find fathers to compare, but this was not possible. However, given the partnership patterns that will be discussed in the next chapter, it is likely that most vegetarian fathers are in relationships with vegetarian mothers. Married or cohabiting couples raising their family as vegetarian – as nearly all participants in this study aim to be in the future – would also provide an important point of comparison.

I also presented a typology of vegetarianism and a diagram for conceptualizing the ways that vegetarians, post-realization, re-position themselves in the meat landscape. One of the most important findings in this study is that those who assume positions of rejection of the meat- dominant culture are all men. They conceive of their decisions as the only logical and rational way to eat in today’s world and do not report any sense of loss or continued connection to the asado or other meat-centered traditions. These participants look down on meat-eaters as unenlightened and unwilling to see the truth. In stark contrast, those in positions of tolerance and active adaptation are overwhelmingly women. The only male participant, Lucas, is one of the youngest (age 21) and cooks alongside Emilia in the vegan restaurant in town. He embraces an area that is normally within the ‘female’ domain, especially in Argentina, which may lead him to adopt an accepting attitude towards meat-eaters.

Meat matters in relationships, both in romantic partnerships and within friendship groups and across these four categories of vegetarian positions with respect to the meat-dominant culture. Notable gender differences were found in dating preferences and existing committed relationships (for a complete list see Appendices F and G). Vegetarianism has been identified as

101 a contributing factor in marital disputes and even divorce (Amato and Partridge 1989). None of the participants in this study reported such dramatic outcomes and only two (Agustina and Diego) indicated that it had negatively affected previous relationships. Several expressed that it would be problematic to date or have a long-term relationship with a meat-eater, but most were uncertain or offered nuanced opinions on the matter. Women in particular recognized the difficulties in finding a suitable partner if they were strict about only dating fellow vegetarians, although several were hopeful that they would. These women had generally positioned themselves with an attitude of tolerance towards the asado.

As noted earlier, four of the five female participants dating meat-eaters regularly cooked for their partners; these were also within the position of active adaptation. No instance of the opposite gender dynamic could be found. It should also be noted that in the study as a whole, all of the male participants stated that they would no longer cook meat whereas 40 percent of women indicated willingness and even desire to cook meat for partners, family, and friends. In contrast, all of the men in committed relationships in this study were dating vegetarians, and they all reported that their female partner’s conversion occurred after they started dating. These three men were also close friends and generally rejected the meat-dominant culture. The two female partners who were interviewed, however, were more tolerant and willing to adapt traditions. These dynamics further underscore the finding that women are key agents of culinary change.

That said, none of the women interviewed reported past stories of conversion as a result of their influence on family or friends. Some indicated that previous male partners ate less meat with them or even ate primarily vegetarian meals. Most of the men, on the other hand, indicated that their current and/or past partners had adopted vegetarianism. It was not possible to fully understand these dynamics without deeper interviews and data collection over time. However, to the extent that cooking is still seen as a woman’s responsibility in the Argentine context, it makes sense that the man’s food preferences win out within a household. Vegetarianism transmission thus seems to occur along strong ties connected o male vegetarians. Weak ties are not similarly affected, as several of the men were unwilling to sit down at the table with others who eat meat, an attitude that potentially distances them from family and friends. The main findings around these gender differences as well as possible avenues for future research will be further developed in the next and final chapter.

102

CHAPTER SIX

DISCUSSION

The historical and political development of Argentina would seem to belie the emergence of vegetarianism in such a staunchly beef-centric culinary culture. Yet vegetarianism has emerged and even appears poised to grow. Given the changing climate and burgeoning world population, such dietary change and the principles of veganism have the potential to shift populations towards more sustainable eating practices (Goodland 1997, Pimentel 2004). This study aimed to contribute to our understanding of vegetarianism by studying the phenomenon outside of the English-speaking world and outside of the advanced industrialized country context. It is informed by sociological literature that conceptualizes meal-sharing as inherently social (Simmel 1997). Furthermore, because no cases of Argentines being raised as vegetarians were found, this La Plata case study has the potential to provide important insights into the ways that dietary change occurs despite the social constraints of the meat-dominant culture.

Primarily exploratory in nature, this research builds upon the model of conversion constructed by McDonald (2000) and extends a framework for understanding the ways that vegetarians interact with meat-eaters, potentially influencing meat-centered traditions. It was anticipated that gender differences might exist with regards to sexuality or dating patterns, given the close connections between meat and masculinity. Little was known, however, about the ways that women and men would differ in terms of the process of conversion and the ways that their attitudes reflect differential positioning with respect to the dominant culinary culture. Therefore, there are several findings relevant here.

First, this study underscores the need to pay more explicit attention to social context. Most studies of vegetarianism cast wide nets or attempt to reach large samples without paying attention to the unique social setting that influenced their decision to stop eating meat in the first place or those factors that could deepen or challenge their continuing commitment. Only by placing the process of conversion within the cultural and social context is it possible to see the ways that decisions of this study’s participants were constrained by relationships with family and friends as well as the deeply-felt connections to society in general and the meat-centered tradition of the asado. Social relationships thus condition the process of becoming vegetarian or vegan as well as the ways that it is practiced.

103

Second, gender differences were noted in the process of conversion, especially with regards to social context and repression (chapter 4), and reported reactions (chapter 5). Several women had circuitous narratives of conversion in which they drew stark parallels to their own upbringings within the meat-dominant culture; some returned to eating meat because of social pressures. Men, in contrast, generally presented narratives of conversion that were more unidirectional. They did not report such high levels of criticism. Mothers, especially those who wanted to raise their children as vegan, faced sharp comments and did not have support from family or, in many cases, their friends. Social context thus seems to matter enormously overall, but quite differently for the men and women in this study.

Third, a typology of vegetarianism was developed based on vegetarian attitudes towards the asado, meat-eaters, and veganism. Four possible positions were discussed: rejection, tolerance, avoidance, and adaptation. The two extremes offer the most potential in terms of prompting both dietary and culinary change. At one end, those who reject the meat-dominant culture have reported stories of conversion (especially in their partners) and/or they are engaged in activism that promotes animal rights and awareness of veganism. Meat-eaters influenced by vegetarians in positions of rejection may begin by implementing dietary change in their own lives, as several participant partners did, but they may also be re-shaping some culinary traditions, especially in friendship circles. In one friendship circle in this study, for example, a larger group of friends essentially stopped making asado together and instead opted for pizza during their social events.

On the other side of the spectrum, those who actively adapt to the culinary tradition continued to feel deeply connected to traditions such as the asado and were keenly aware of the factors that drive others to continue eating meat. Rather than position themselves as superior, these key agents of adaptation appeared to be expanding traditions such as the asado by bringing more vegetables onto the menu while also working to increase vegetable consumption within their households – even as they continued to cook meat for others. The position of active adaptation could therefore have great potential for change as well. As a result of their efforts, more and more vegetables are being cooked alongside meat as part of the asado tradition. This suggests that even as more people eliminate meat from their diet, the ritual of the asado can retain its position at the heart of Argentine culinary culture; meat does not need to define it.

104

Finally, and building off this typology, it was found that women overwhelming put themselves in positions of active adaptation or tolerance whereas most men rejected or avoided meat-centered traditions. The explicit rejection of the asado by many of these individuals is somewhat disconcerting, as it might indicate that for these people, the tradition is lost over time. Of course, given the high rate of consumption, even these people are likely to remain exposed to the asado for some time to come. In contrast to the men in positions of rejection, women who actively adapted to the situation were sometimes willing to cook for or date meat-eating men. The gender imbalance widely documented by polls of vegetarianism appears to be sustained in the Argentine context, as women and men have different approaches to the reconciliation of personal beliefs with culinary traditions.

LIMITATIONS

One of the primary ways in which this study is limited is that is solely relies on the perspective of vegetarians and vegans. Verifying their narratives of conversion or acquiring the perspective of close (meat-eating) family and friends could provide a fascinating point of comparison. Vegetarians believe that meat-eaters close to them are eating less meat and/or dairy, but do these meat-eaters have the same perception? Do they really feel uncomfortable when vegetarians attend asados they have cooked, or is vegetarianism being accepted within this traditional setting?

Another limitation is that the data collected here is cross-sectional. Efforts were made to stay in touch with study participants, but data collection only occurred at one point in time. The discussion of the “life-long commitment” would require additional work to evaluate whether these participants continue as vegetarians as they currently plan to. Longitudinal data collection could aid in the understanding of vegetarianism enormously, particularly with regards to the ways that conversion occurs. Once someone becomes vegetarian, just how likely is it that one of their family members or close friends will do the same?

Finally, connecting back to my discussion of researcher perspective (chapter 3), my status as a vegetarian, a foreigner, and a woman may have mattered in several ways. Being a vegetarian gave me greater capacity for empathy, but because it is also something I deeply care about and identify with, I had to take care in crafting my questions. A meat-eater may find that

105 some of my interview questions and/or analysis reveals my bias. Some participants seemed more aware than others of my position as a foreigner: in a handful of cases, it did not come up as a subject until the end of our interviews. Others who asked more about my background at the start seemed to make a conscious effort to reduce their use of slang or speak more slowly. An Argentine researcher from La Plata would not have encountered these linguistic differences. Lastly, I have intimate knowledge of being a female vegetarian in Argentina which, as this exploratory study suggests, may be very different than it is for men. I likely had more difficultly relating to and capturing the experiences of men in the Argentine context. Post-fieldwork reflection, including in-depth conversations with my partner (a male, Argentine vegetarian, who was a meat-eater at the time of my fieldwork), have brought this to the surface.

AVENUES FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

Future work could delve into the perceptions of family and friends and how they change over time, and connect these patterns back to broader trends in Argentine society. Another underexplored area in this research was traditional religiosity. Atheism came up repeatedly in interviews but it is not clear whether this is simply common among Argentines from La Plata of the same socioeconomic backgrounds, or whether religiosity can be tied more directly (or inversely) to vegetarianism.

With regards to friendships, this study uncovered close ties connecting one-third of the participants; the vegan food microenterprises and Facebook groups meant that another third of the participants were distantly connected (via, for example, participation in vegan cooking classes). For the circle of male friends, one person’s conversion was enough to prompt two more – it would be interesting to interview the remaining friends within this circle in order to more fully understand why two friends converted but the remaining 5-7 did not. Gathering data on their perspectives of dietary change would also be interesting: do these meat-eating friends consume less meat and/or more vegetables now that three of their closest friends are vegetarian?

The extent to which the practices of veganism and vegetarianism prompt changes in friendships is difficult to evaluate, particularly given the one-sided nature of stories of friendship loss. Future work on friendship dynamics between vegetarians and non-vegetarians is much needed, covering friendship loss, friend conversion, and social network expansion. Additional

106 research could utilize a social network approach to analyze and examine the exchange of information that occurs within the vegetarian Facebook groups online. Several participants reported that they find new recipes and ask for support online. In some cases, Facebook was the primary way in which they learned that vegan cooking classes and vegan microenterprises appeared in La Plata in 2012. The relations between actors could not only be mapped out and defined by online interaction, but they could also be connected to survey data to more fully understand how information availability and knowledge of veganism online affects social interactions outside of the virtual realm.

The gender differences in the ways that individuals become and practice vegetarianism could also be more deeply explored. A conceptual framework that more explicitly considers gender roles and power imbalances, together with the collection of more data from men in particular, could delve further into the reasons why these differences have appeared. Interviews with more vegetarians of different ages (assuming they exist and could be found) would also shed light on gender dynamics. Younger generations may be more likely to challenge elements of the machista society, which could affect the ways that they view vegetarianism – whether or not they themselves eliminate meat from their diets. This area thus reaffirms the need for simultaneous data collection on meat-eaters and vegetarians in order to better capture changes in the social dynamics.

AN EMERGING SOCIAL MOVEMENT?

When this study began, little evidence of a social movement could be found. Maurer’s (2002) study of vegetarianism in North America compiled extensive information from a myriad of organizations – the gap between this reality and the fact that there was only one vegan restaurant in all of La Plata seemed enormous. It was thought that treating veganism as a social movement was premature and, at the time of the interview, it might have been. Yet two of those interviewed, Cristián and Ezequiel, directly identified as part of the global vegan social movement. Raquel did not, but she did note that she formed part of a small group and has since become more active online.

From the start of this project, several trends suggest that a social movement is emerging to accompany and promote veganism. Signs of more people becoming interested in veganism

107 and vegetarianism include an increase in the number of vegan food micro-enterprises, growth in the availability of vegan products at health food stores, more Facebook groups and posts, and a blog that chronicles development in La Plata. Nearly one-third of study participants could be classified as directly engaging in some form of collective action. Examples include protests against a puppy exposition (which I directly observed), protests against McDonald’s and Monsanto, and celebrations for El Día del Animal. At the time of these interviews, three vegan cooking classes had been held. Nearly a year later, the frequency of these events has increased to more than once per month and talks about veganism have been much more widely promoted and attended.

The expansion of microenterprises is also quite notable and, as summarized in the introductory chapter, the number of people who form part of vegan and vegetarian Facebook groups has increased dramatically; for one group, it is nearly three times higher than when study interviews took place. Raquel and Cristián reported that they helped to form a group, with a core of fifteen individuals, who meet regularly to organize protests and awareness-raising actions. This includes a stand at one of the main parks in town at least once or twice per month, where they distribute information about veganism as a philosophy and also sell vegan food. They have banners and matching shirts in addition to pamphlets and other info sheets that reveal their connections to veganism as defined at the global level. Future research could further investigate the ways in which these activities can be conceptualized as part of a larger, potentially global social movement increasingly connected via nonprofit organizations and initiatives such as Acción Vegana Argentina.

FUTURE PROSPECTS OF VEGETARIANISM IN ARGENTINA

Vegetarianism appears poised to rapidly expand within the Argentine context. As noted in the first section, political, economic, and environmental factors are coalescing, pushing beef prices up and potentially shifting more production to feedlot finishing techniques. Such industrial practices were essentially unheard of two decades ago and, as people become aware, vegetarianism and/or veganism could become more attractive alternatives. More attention is also being paid to healthy eating in Argentina at a national level, especially in larger cities. A recent study carried out by the University of Buenos Aires noted the difficulties of changing dietary practices given the complexity of subsidies and a partially internationalized food sector, yet it

108 also pointed to the clear need for less meat, less sugar, fewer processed grains, and more fruits and vegetables (Iglesias, Clarin 25 June 2013). Modern-day eating practices of consumers appear to be suffering from “gastro-anomie,” or a lack of culinary norms (Fischler 1980). Vegetarianism helps to resolve this conflict with strict norms about what should and what should not be consumed. Because it demands eating lower on the food chain, it can form part of strategies in climate change mitigation. Yet the ways that conversations about dietary and culinary change take place will vary from one social context to the next, across diverse meat landscapes. In Argentina, the asado remains a deeply cherished and meaningful part of the national culinary identity. As interest in healthy eating, animal rights, and the environment grows, shifts towards plant-based diets may challenge traditional gender roles and alter related power dynamics. The results of this exploratory study suggest that accommodation and adaptation may be possible: meat does not define the Argentine asado for everyone as vegetarianism diversifies the food landscape.

109

APPENDIX A. MODEL COMPARISON WITH MCDONALD (2000)

Elements of the Vegan Learning Process (McDonald 2000: 6) - The background and experiences that made the participa who they were prior to the Who I Was learning experience. - The experience that introduced the participant to some aspect of animal cruelty, and Catalytic Experience resulted in repression or becoming oriented. Repression - The repression of knowledge. Becoming Oriented - The intention to learn more, make a decision, or do both. Learning - Learning about animal abuse or how to live as a vegetarian or vegan. Decision - Making the choice to become vegetarian or vegan. World View - The new perspective that guides the vegan's new lifestyle.

Table 4-2. Stages in Becoming Vegetarian*

“Who I was” Perception of self, prior to becoming vegetarian or vegan, including attitudes towards animals and towards meat-centered traditions catalyst / exposure to Experiences that challenged “Who I was,” including exposure to new new information information (may or may not have been intentional) repression Repression of knowledge, by individual or driven by family / social pressures (those who have previously become vegetarian return to meat-eating and (return to meat-eating) repression, where knowledge and/or feelings that meat-eating generates are suppressed)

realization Realization that vegetarian or vegan lifestyle is possible, sparks decision to re- position self with respect to meat-dominant culture

110

APPENDIX B. INTERVIEW GUIDE

Background Where are you from? / How old are you? / What do you do? (professional, student, etc.)

Relationships, family, living situation Who do you currently live with? / How many vegetarian friends and family members do you have?

Identity / type of vegetarianism practiced - beef, chicken, fish, eggs, dairy /- all-natural / organic How long have you been a vegetarian? What foods do you avoid? (meat, chicken, fish, dairy products, egg, honey, animal fat) Is meat usually prepared in your home? What does ‘vegetarianism’ mean to you?

Process of conversion - age / total time, reasons (health, environmental, animal welfare) Could you tell me about your decision to become a vegetarian? What were the main reasons? What was the process like? How did your family / friends react? What are their attitudes towards your being a vegetarian today?

Asado / Dominance of meat in Argentine cuisine Could you tell me about your typical experience at an asado (barbecue)? When was the last time you went to one? What do you say when people you don’t know very well invite you? What do you do (bring your own food, expect that they prepare something for you)?

Social Acceptance What stereotypes do you think people have about vegetarianism here? Has anyone ever criticized you for being a vegetarian? What other difficulties do you experience? / Do you go out to eat at restaurants? Do you think it is more or less expensive to be vegetarian?

Perceptions of vegetarianism Do you think there are more male or female vegetarians? Why? Dating – in partnership. Is your partner vegetarian/vegan? How does it influence your relationship? Dating – single. How important to you is it that your next partner be vegetarian/vegan?

Challenges Do you ever feel like eating meat? Has there ever been a time when you decided to eat meat despite being a vegetarian? What is the most difficult aspect for you? Do you think you’ll continue the same diet into the future?

111

APPENDIX C. SNOWBALL SAMPLING

112

APPENDIX D. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON PARTICIPANTS

length place of involved in does name connected by: atheist (min.) interview activism? yoga?

Alejandro Lucia (dating) 48 home unknown No unknown not Andrés Alejandro (friends) 45 work No unknown religious Agustina Matías 40 home yes No no

Clara Noelia (sisters) 46 cafe unknown No unknown

Claudia Florencia (coworkers) 39 work unknown No unknown

Cristián Raquel (friends) 83 home unknown Yes unknown

Daniela Andrés (dating) 43 home unknown Yes yes

Diego Facebook 37 cafe unknown No unknown

Emilia business 25 work yes No unknown

Ezequiel Raquel (friends) 70 home unknown Yes unknown

Florencia personal contact 49 apartment yes No unknown

Gaston business 44 home unknown Yes unknown

Juana Facebook 35 cafe yes No unknown

Laura business 44 home unknown Yes unknown not Lucas business 26 work No unknown religious coworker of friend of Lucia 60 home unknown No unknown personal contact Maia Daniela (friends) 51 cafe yes Yes no

Mariana business 18 work unknown Yes unknown

Matías Alejandro (friends) 53 home yes No unknown friend of personal Noelia 48 work unknown No yes contact's sister Raquel Facebook 28 cafe yes Yes yes friend's Soledad Daniela (friends) 34 unknown Yes unknown home Sonia Florencia (coworkers) 36 work unknown No unknown

113

APPENDIX E. INNER CONFLICT

Many participants reported feelings of guilt that came up as a result of the decision to become vegan or vegetarian, which stemmed from the difficulties of living in a beef-centric society. One story, however, epitomizes the inner conflict that emerges when the decision to become vegetarian cannot be reconciled with other aspects of their lives. The following is from my field notes, part of a reflection on my interview with Sonia, an intensive care specialist who has also worked in the La Plata laboratory at the medical college for the past 10 years:

Today was an interesting day, a difficult day to get going but when I finally got in touch with the doctor who works at the hospital, things started looking up. I headed up to the Facultad de Medicina, an old, crumbling building near the city’s main park that was intimidating to enter. I’m not sure when it was constructed, and although it seems like they’ve invested a bit in updating it in recent years, I didn’t feel like I had the authority to just go wandering in. The dark, dank hallways were poorly lit and it took some time for me to find the right stairway (so of course, I was running a little bit late). I was a little worried I knew that Sonia was a doctor, and worked in a lab, but did not quite expect what happened. As we’d planned, I gave her a call when I made it to the area and was waiting in the hallway marked Pharmacology. OK. Chemicals. Much to my surprise, however, a man’s voice responded when I called Sonia, and the thought of quickly hanging up briefly crossed my mind – I was creeped out already. I asked for Sonia, however, and he said that she was “taking measurements.” OK. Measurements. He came to the door to let me in, asking me a quick question about whether or not I was squeamish about animal experimentation. “If it doesn’t bother you, come right in.” OK. Expecting to find a bunch of white rats in cages, I went in without thinking twice. Oh. No, no, not rats. Wait, what? I stepped into a small, stifling room, and was immediately overwhelmed by the smell. It reeked of chemicals and the sound of a breathing machine disoriented men. A young woman (Sonia) was intently staring at a small computer screen and two men were bent over the table, clearly deep in concentration. She pointed to a chair, asking if I could wait. “Por supuesto.” (Of course). I took a seat, within arm’s length from the operating table, and tried to process where I was. All I could see well were hooves – two-toed and furry brown legs coming out from the plastic. I realized it was an animal, strapped down to the table and hooked up to the breathing machine, its innards were partially hidden by a bloodied sheet of plastic. Sonia was at the computer trying to take photos (from what I could tell). Later, when they took a break, I saw the entire creature with its head propped up against the wall – splayed out on the table. The smell – I came close to vomiting. Not too close, but close. It was a field/farm smell mixed with all sorts of chemicals, and the heat – it was way too warm. It reminded me of waiting to interview Carla, in the hospital’s Intensive Care Unit. Later, Sonia would explain to me that this procedure is done to find out the best way of treating patients who go into shock. So….they induce shock – complete failure of the circulatory system – and

114

then pump the body full of drugs to see the best way to bring it back to life. The animal on the table was a sheep. It is necessary for science. After waiting for fifteen minutes, intrigued but overheating (I was worried I’d interrupt something if I started nosily taking off my winter layers), Sonia turned to me. “Thanks for waiting. Do you want to do the interview in here, or shall we go somewhere else?” “Not a problem,” I replied, hiding my incredulity, “But could we step out into the hall?” Each interview in this project offered unique insights into the process of becoming and practicing vegetarianism in Argentina, but speaking with Sonia was particularly helpful for understanding the ways that a belief in vegetarianism can produce unresolved inner conflict. She brought up the subject after explaining her reasons for being vegetarian:

SONIA: I don’t want to hurt anything that has to do with my environment. And as a matter of fact, I feel a lot of conflict – it saddens me. At the same time, I think that research is different from eating because food, you can supplement with a lot of things. Experimental research, you can’t. There isn’t another option. I mean, it’s the model of animal experimentation or there isn’t another way for us to study these things. And one does research to try to improve, to advance the field of medicine to save lives. I mean, that’s the ultimate goal. It’s a goal, let’s say, that has to do with, not with – one thing is eating, which I can do something about and get proteins or whatever I need from another source, and another thing, for me, is that I’m a doctor – and it’s different using animals in research. We do it under international norms, with anesthesia, with pain killers, with – you know, avoiding as much suffering as is possible. I mean, in whatever way, trying to avoid, as much as we can, suffering. I figure it’s less cruel to die – under anesthesia – than with a bolt in the head. ADP: You say that meaning – SONIA: For the animal. At the same time, the animal – when we don’t infect it, when we don’t do that, we take it to a community center. But if we do, we can’t. Because with animal experimentation, we have to cremate it.124

Sonia aimed to reconcile her role as a medical researcher with her individual decision to be vegetarian, and it was interesting to note the contrast she drew between animal suffering in experimentation – which they tried to minimize – and the ways that animals are slaughtered for

124 SONIA: No quiero lastimar a nada que tenga que ver con mi medioambiente. Y de hecho tengo bastante conflicto...Me da lástima. Igualmente, la investigación para mí es distinto que la alimentación porque la alimentación, uno la puede suplementar con un montón de cosas. La investigación experimental, no. O sea, no hay otro. O sea, o es un modelo animal o no hay otra posibilidad para lo que nosotros estudiamos. Y uno estudia para tratar de mejorar, y de proceder un avance en la medicina que permita salvar vidas. O sea, ese es el objetivo final. Eh, es un fin, digamos, que tiene que ver con, no con, una cosa es alimentarse, con algo que lo puedo hacer y sacarlo de otro lado, las proteínas o lo que necesite de otro lado y otra cosa es, para mí, que soy médica, hacer una - utilizar un animal en un modelo. Lo hacemos todo bajo las normas internacionales con anestesia, con analgesia, con, digamos, evitando el mayor sufrimiento posible. O sea, de cualquier manera tratar de evitar, como se puede, el sufrimiento. Calculo que es menos cruel la forma de morir así que - anestesiado - que morir de un mazazo en la cabeza. ADP: ¿Decís por - SONIA: - Por el animal. Eh, sí, igualmente el animal este, nosotros cuando no lo infectamos - cuando no hacemos, se lo lleva a un comedor. Pero si no, no. Porque es experimental así que hay que quemarlo y no se puede.

115 food consumption. She also pointed out that when the animal has not been infected first, it is donated to a food pantry. Otherwise, it is cremated as its meat is no longer safe for consumption. We then began our interview with my questions, and after speaking for nearly half an hour, ended the conversation as follows:

ADP: Your job draws my attention, you know?125 SONIA: Of course, well, there’s that. It produces an enormous conflict for me because really it is: I’m a doctor [...] I believe that “scientific” is a very big word, I always think it’s too big for me, but I mean, a person who is interested or who believes in science and the scientific endeavor, it’s very hard to give up – it creates a conflict, which I haven’t been able to entirely resolve just yet. I mean, the conflict it: I don’t want to kill animals for eating or for clothing, and I would love it if there were a way to do research that didn’t involve animal death, that they didn’t have to raise animals to be killed in laboratories, even if it is done in compliance with international norms avoiding suffering – I would love it if it were possible to avoid that. But the truth is – we can’t. I mean, someone who is a doctor knows that vaccinations – vaccinations are tested on animals and are released after this. So it’s like there is a big conflict that I just haven’t resolved. I mean, I don’t take a position because if I were against this, apart from not coming back to the laboratory, I would have to say I won’t get vaccinated, and won’t use anything that comes from that [animal testing]. And these are advances that have in actuality permitted a real evolution for the human species. And for someone who has a child, to tell them – I would never recommend that they don’t get vaccinated. I mean, those who criticize or get upset because of research but it’s research that benefits them and it comes from animals. I mean, it’s difficult – it’s a very, very controversial subject. It’s easy if you’re outside of the medical field.

125 ADP: Pero me llama la atención tu trabajo, ¿no? SONIA: Claro, bueno, eso. A mí me genera un conflicto enorme porque en realidad es: Yo soy médica. […] Entonces, yo no, para mí la palabra científica es una palabra muy grande - cada vez pienso que me queda grande a mí, pero digo, como una persona que está interesada o que cree en la ciencia o que trabaja para la ciencia, es muy difícil poder rescindir de - se me genera un conflicto, un conflicto que todavía no puedo, no lo tengo totalmente resuelto. O sea, un conflicto digo: yo no quiero matar animales para comerme ni para vestirme, me encantaría que existiese una investigación que no implicase la muerte de animales, o se críen animales para ser matados en un laboratorio, por más que sirvan a la ciencia, o sea bajo las normas éticas que se deban hacer, el sufrimiento, con todo lo que se debe cumplir y todo eso, me encantaría. Pero la verdad es que eso no es así. O sea, él que es médico sabe que sale una vacuna, y esa vacuna se probó en animales y sale por el estudio en animales. Entonces es como que se le genera un conflicto que yo no tengo resuelto. O sea, que no tomo postura porque no sé qué decir porque, digo, si yo estuviese en contra de eso, además de no venir más al laboratorio, tendría que decidir no vacunar, no usar nada que provenga de eso. Y son avances que en realidad permitieron realmente un, una gran evolución para la especie humana. Y para si uno tiene un hijo, decirle - jamás le recomendaría a nadie que no lo vacune. O sea, o que - se mofe, o critique y se enoje por una investigación que lo beneficia a uno y que viene de los animales. O sea, es difícil. Es un tema, muy controvertido. Es fácil si uno está fuera de la medicina.

116

APPENDIX F. PARTICIPANTS IN COMMITTED RELATIONSHIPS

cooks Name veg*n status age partner cohabit? meat for partner?

Laura vegan, 1 yr. / avoid 21 vegan (Gaston) yes n/a

Gaston vegan, 2 yrs. / avoid 22 vegan (Laura) yes n/a

Alejandro vegetarian, 4 yrs. / reject 31 vegetarian (Lucia**) yes n/a

Lucia* vegetarian, 1 yr. / adapt 31 vegetarian (Alejandro) yes n/a

Andrés vegetarian, 4 yrs. / reject 31 vegetarian (Daniela**) no n/a

Daniela* vegetarian, 1.5 yrs. / tolerate 25 vegetarian (Andrés) no n/a

Matías vegetarian, 3 yrs. / reject 25 vegetarian** no n/a

Noelia vegetarian, 7 mo. / adapt 29 vegetarian no n/a

Emilia* pescatarian, 8 mo. / adapt 44 meat-eater yes yes

Florencia* pescatarian, 3 mo. / adapt 55 meat-eater yes yes

Maia vegan, 5 yrs. / adapt 25 meat-eater yes yes

Agustina vegetarian, 4.5 yrs. / adapt 26 meat-eater yes yes

Soledad vegan, 1.5 yrs. / tolerate 21 meat-eater no no

* became vegetarian during current relationship ** partner became vegetarian after they started dating

117

APPENDIX G. DATING PREFERENCES OF SINGLE PARTICIPANTS

would date Name veg*n status age meat-eater?

Claudia pescatarian, 20 yrs. / adapt 37 yes

Lucas vegetarian, 3 mo. / adapt 21 yes

Ezequiel vegan, 1.5 yrs. / reject 28 yes

Juana vegan, 3 mo. / adapt 30 maybe eater

Sonia vegetarian, 1 yr. / adapt 38 it depends

Clara vegan, 8 mo. / tolerate 23 not sure

Mariana vegan, 5 mo. / tolerate 28 no

Diego vegan, 5 yrs. / avoid 26 no

willingness to date meat date to willingness

Raquel vegan, 2 yrs. / tolerate 30 no

Cristián vegan, 10 yrs. / reject 30 no

118

REFERENCES

Adams, Carol J. 2000. The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory. 10th anniversary edition. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group. Adams, Carol J. 2004. “The Sexual Politics of Meat.” Pp. 248-260 in Food for Thought: The Debate over Eating Meat, edited by Steve F. Sapontzis. Contemporary Issues. Prometheus Books. Alkon, Alison Hope and Julian Agyeman (editors). 2011. Cultivating Food Justice. MIT Press. Allen, Patricia and Carolyn Sachs. 2007. “Women and Food Chains: The Gendered Politics of Food.” International Journal of Sociology of Food and Agriculture 15(1): 1-23. Amato, Paul R., and Sonia A. Partridge. 1989. The New Vegetarians: Promoting Health and Protecting Life. New York: Plenum Press. Association of Religious Data Archives (ARDA). n. d. “National Profiles: Argentina.” www.thearda.com (accessed 11 July 2013). Arelovich, Hugo M., Rodrigo D. Bravo, and Marcela F. Martínez. 2011. “Development, characteristics, and trends for beef cattle production in Argentina.” Animal Frontiers 1(2): 37–45. Arppe, Tiina, Johanna Mäkelä, and Virpi Väänänen. 2011. “Living Food Diet and Veganism: Individual vs. Collective Boundaries of the Forbidden.” Social Science Information 50(2): 275-297. Azcuy Ameghino, Eduardo. 2007. La carne vacuna argentina: historia, actualidad y problemas de una agroindustria tradicional. Buenos Aires: Imago Mundi. Beardsworth, Alan and Teresa Keil. 1991. “Health-related Beliefs and Dietary Practices Among Vegetarians and Vegans: a Qualitative Study.” Health Education Journal 50 (1): 38–42. ------. 1992. “The Vegetarian Option: Varieties, conversion, motives and careers.” The Sociological Review 40(2): 253-293. ------. 1997. Sociology on the Menu: An Invitation to the Study of Food and Society. Routledge. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Harvard University Press. Christakis, Nicholas A., and James H. Fowler. 2007. “The Spread of Obesity in a Large Social Network over 32 Years.” New England Journal of Medicine 357 (4): 370–379. Creswell, John W. 2013. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. 3rd edition. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications. Cuestas Acosta, Fedra, and Alejandro Lotti. 2011. Anuario 2010: Ganados y carnes. Ministerio de Agricultura, Ganadería y Pesca de la Nación, Buenos Aires, Argentina. Deblitz, Claus. 2012. “Feedlots: A new tendency in global beef production?” Working Paper 2/2011. Agri Benchmark. Beef and Sheep Network.

119

Dixon, Jane. 2002. The Changing Chicken: Chooks, Cooks and Culinary Culture. University of New South Wales Press. Dyczewska, Agnieszka. 2008. “Vegetarianism as an Example of Dispersed Religiosity.” Implicit Religion 11(2): 111–125. Einwohner, Rachel L. 1999. “Gender, Class, and Social Movement Outcomes: Identity and Effectiveness in Two Animal Rights Campaigns.” Gender and Society 13(1): 56–76. Ferns, H. S. 1953. “Britain’s Informal Empire in Argentina, 1806-1914.” Past & Present (4): 60- 75. Fiddes, Nick. 1991. Meat: A Natural Symbol. Routledge. Fischler, Claude. 1980. “Food habits, social change and the nature/culture dilemma.” Anthropology of Food. Social Science Information. 19 (6): 937-953. ------. 1988. “Food, self and identity.” Anthropology of Food. Social Science Information. 27(2): 275-292. Flyvbjerg, Bent. 2006. “Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 12(2): 219-245. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO). 2006. Livestock’s Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options. Livestock, Environment, and Development Initiative (LEAD). Fox, Michael A. 1999. Deep Vegetarianism. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Freeland-Graves, J.H., S.A. Greninger, and R.K. Young. 1986. “A Demographic and Social Profile of Age- and Sex-Matched Vegetarians and Nonvegetarians.” Journal of the American Dietetic Association 86: 907-13. Freidin, Betina, Matías Ballesteros, María Belén Morejon, and Mariano Echeconea. 2012. “Choosing Ayurveda as a health care practice in Argentina.” Distributed Paper 64.7 at The Second International Sociological Association (ISA) Forum of Sociology: Social justice and democratization. Buenos Aires, Argentina. August 1-4. Friedmann, Harriet and Philip McMichael. 1989. “Agriculture and the State System: The rise and decline of national agricultures, 1870 to the present.” Sociologia Ruralis 29(2): 93-117. Gaard, Greta Claire. 2002. “Vegetarian Ecofeminism: A Review Essay.” Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 23(3): 117–146. Gandhi, Mohandas. 1999 [1931]. "Vegetarianism as Moral Choice." Pp. 141-144 in Ethical Vegetarian: From Pythagoras to Peter Singer, edited by Kerry S. Walters and Lisa Portmess. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. Germov, John and Lauren Williams. 2008. Exploring the Social Appetite: a Sociology of Food and Nutrition. 3rd edition. Oxford University Press. Gilbody, Simon M., Sara F.L. Kirk, and Andrew J. Hill. 1999. “Vegetarianism in young women: Another means of weight control?” International Journal of Eating Disorders 26(1): 87– 90. Glaser, Barney G. and Anselm L. Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.

120

Goodland, Robert. 1997. “Environmental Sustainability in Agriculture: Diet Matters.” Ecological Economics 23 (3): 189–200. Gossard, Marcia Hill and Richard York. 2003. “Social structural influences on meat consumption.” Human Ecology Review, 10(1): 1–9. Government of Argentina. 1991. “Desregulación Económica.” Presidential Decree 2284/ 91. Granovetter, Mark S. 1973. “The Strength of Weak Ties.” The American Journal of Sociology 78 (6): 1360–1380. Granovetter, Mark S. 1983. “The Strength of Weak Ties: A Network Theory Revisited.” Sociological Theory 1: 201-233. Greenebaum, Jessica B. 2012. “Managing Impressions: “Face-Saving” Strategies of Vegetarians and Vegans” Humanity & Society 36(4): 309-325. Gregory, James. 2007. Of Victorians and Vegetarians: The Vegetarian Movement in Nineteenth- century Britain. New York: Tauris Academic Studies. Guptill, Amy E., Denise A. Copelton and Betsy Lucal. 2013. Food and Society: Principles and Paradoxes. Malden, MA: Polity Press. Hamilton, Malcolm. 2000. “Eating Ethically: ‘Spiritual’ and ‘Quasi-Religious’ Aspects of Vegetarianism.” Journal of Contemporary Religion 15 (1): 65–83. Hinrichs, C. Clare. 2003. “The Practice and Politics of Food System Localization.” Journal of Rural Studies 19: 33-45. Hirschler, Christopher A. 2011. “What Pushed Me over the Edge Was a Deer Hunter: Begin Vegan in North America.” Society & Animals 19: 156-174. Hussar, Karen M. and Paul L. Harris. 2010. “Children Who Choose Not to Eat Meat: A Study of Early Moral Decision-making.” Social Development 19(3): 627–641. IBOPE. 2012. “Dia Mundial do Vegetarianismo: 8% da população brasileira afirma ser adepta do estilo.” 1 October. Retrieved June 22, 2013 from: www.ibope.com.br. Iglesias, Mariana. 2013. “Los argentinos tienen una mala nota en alimentación.” El Clarín. 25 June. Retrieved June 28, 2013 from: www.clarin.com. Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos (INDEC). 2001. Censo Nacional. Retrieved from http://www.indec.mecon.ar/webcenso/index.asp. Instituto de Promoción para la Carne Vacuna Argentina (IPCVA). 2008. “Estructura de la oferta de carnes bovinas en la Argentina – Actualidad y evolución reciente.” Cuadernillo Técnico No. 6. November. ------2005. "Estudio de Usos y Actitudes sobre el consumo de Carne Vacuna en Argentina - En Población Nacional y en Hogares." Prepared by TNS Gallup. Buenos Aires, Argentina. April. Retrieved June 3, 2012 from: http://www.ipcva.com.ar/vertext.php?id=365andpalabra=. ------2012. Estadísticas (Statistics Division). http://www.ipcva.com.ar/estadisticas/ (accessed 3 June 2012).

121

Kalof, Linda, Thomas Dietz, Paul C. Stern, and Gregory A. Guagnano. 1999. “Social Psychological and Structural Influences on Vegetarian Beliefs.” Rural Sociology 64(3): 500–511. Kreager, Derek A. and Dana L. Haynie. 2011. “Dangerous Liaisons? Dating and Drinking Diffusion in Adolescent Peer Networks.” American Sociological Review 76(5): 737–763. La Nación. 2011. “Cristina lanzó el plan Carne para todos.” 26 April. Lappé, Frances Moore. 1975. Diet for a Small Planet. New York: Random House Digital, Inc. Lee, Paula Young (editor). 2008. Meat, modernity, and the rise of the slaughterhouse. UPNE, University of New Hampshire Press. Leneman, Leah. 1997. “The awakened instinct: vegetarianism and the women's suffrage movement in Britain.” Women's History Review 6(2): 271-287. Lin, Nan. 1999. “Building a Network Theory of Social Capital.” Connections 22(1): 28-51. Liu, Haiming. 2009. “Chop Suey as Imagined Authentic Chinese Food: The Culinary Identity of Chinese Restaurants in the United States.” Journal of Transnational American Studies 1(1). Mahoney, James and Gary Goertz. 2006. “A Tale of Two Cultures: Contrasting Quantitative and Qualitative Research.” Political Analysis 14(3): 227–249. Manzetti, Luigi. 1992. “The Evolution of Agricultural Interest Groups in Argentina.” Journal of Latin American Studies, 24(3): 585-616. Marx, Karl and Friedrich Engels. 1971 [1844]. “On Class Conflict.” Pp. 202-221 in Marcello Truzzi (Ed.) Sociology: The Classic Statements. New York: Random House. Maurer, Donna. 2002. Vegetarianism: Movement Or Moment: Promoting A Lifestyle For Cult Change. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. McDonald, Barbara. 2000. “Once You Know Something, You Can’t Not Know It: An Empirical Look at Becoming Vegan.” Society & Animals 8(1): 1-23. McIntosh, William Alex. 1996. Sociologies of Food and Nutrition. Springer. McCorkel, Jill A. and Kristen Myers. 2003. “What difference does difference make? Position and privilege in the field.” Qualitative Sociology 26(2): 199-231. Mennell, Stephen, Anne Murcott, and Anneke H. van Otterloo. 1992. The Sociology of Food: Eating, Diet, and Culture. Sage. Menzies, Kenneth, and Judy Sheeshka. 2012. “The Process of Exiting Vegetarianism: An Exploratory Study.” Canadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and Research 73(4): 163-168. Merriman, Ben. 2010. “Gender Differences in Family and Peer Reaction to the Adoption of a Vegetarian Diet.” Feminism and Psychology 20(3): 420–427. Milanesio, Natalia. 2010. “Food Politics and Consumption in Peronist Argentina.” Hispanic American Historical Review 90(1): 75 -108.

122

Morris, Carol, and James Kirwan. 2006. “Vegetarians: Uninvited, Uncomfortable or Special Guests at the Table of the Alternative Food Economy?” Sociologia Ruralis 46(3): 192– 213. Naples, Nancy A. 2003. Feminism and Method: Ethnography, Discourse Analysis and Activist Research. New York: Routledge. Nath, Jemal. 2010. “‘God Is a Vegetarian’: The Food, Health and Bio-spirituality of Hare Krishna, Buddhist and Seventh-Day Adventist Devotees.” Health Sociology Review 19 (3): 356–368. ------2011. “Gendered Fare? A Qualitative Investigation of Alternative Food and Masculinities.” Journal of Sociology 47(3): 261–278. Newport, Frank. 2012. “In U.S., 5% Consider Themselves Vegetarians.” 26 July. Gallup Poll 2012. ONCCA. 2012. Estadísticas. Ministerio de Agricultura, Ganadería y Pesca de la Nación. http://www.oncca.gov.ar/ (accessed 29 June 2012). Página/12. 2011. “Carne para Todos llega al barrio.” April 27. Retrieved May 15, 2012 from: http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/economia/2-167077-2011-04-27.html. Pastor, Manuel and Carol Wise. 2001. “From Poster Child to Basket Case.” Foreign Affairs. November/December. Pimentel, David. 2004. “Ethical Issues of Global Corporatization: Agriculture and Beyond.” Poultry Science 83: 321-329. Potts, Annie and Mandala White. 2008. “New Zealand Vegetarians: At Odds with Their Nation.” Society and Animals 16: 336-353. Potts, Annie, and Jovian Parry. 2010. “Vegan Sexuality: Challenging Heteronormative Masculinity Through Meat-free Sex.” Feminism and Psychology 20(1): 53–72. Prell, Christina. 2011. Social network analysis: history, theory, and methodology. Sage publications. Puiggrós, Rodolfo. 2006. Historia crítica de los partidos políticos argentinos: El Yrigoyenismo. Buenos Aires, Galerna. Quesada, Ernesto. 1911. The Social Evolution of the Argentine Republic. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 37(3): 129-152. Regan, Tom. 2004. The Case for Animal Rights. University of California Press. Romero, Simon. 2013. “Argentina Falls From Its Throne as King of Beef.” 13 June. The New York Times. Roth, LuAnne K. 2005. “‘Beef. It’s What’s for Dinner’: Vegetarians, Meat-Eaters and the Negotiation of Familial Relationships.” Food, Culture and Society 8(2): 181–200. Rzezak, Hernán Fair. 2008. “El conflicto entre el Gobierno y el campo en Argentina. Lineamientos políticos, estrategias discursivas y discusiones teóricas a partir de un abordaje multidisciplinar.” Iberóforum 6: 82–106.

123

Schroeder, Ted C., Andrew P. Barkley, and Kathi C. Schroeder. 1996. “Income Growth and International Meat Consumption.” Journal of International Food and Agribusiness Marketing 7: 15–30. Scruton, Roger. 2004. “The Conscientious Carnivore.” Pp. 81-91 in Food for Thought: The Debate over Eating Meat, edited by Steve F. Sapontzis. Contemporary Issues. Prometheus Books. Singer, Peter. 2009 [1975]. Animal Liberation. Haper Perennial. Simmel, Georg. 1997. “Sociology of the Meal.” Pp. 130-135 in Simmel on culture : selected writings, edited by David Frisby and Mike Featherstone. Sage Publications. Simmel, Georg. 1964. Conflict and The Web of Group-Affiliations. New York, The Free Press. Smith, Adam. 1909 [1776]. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Edwin Cannan, ed. Library of Economics and Liberty. Retrieved December 6, 2011 from: http://www.econlib.org/library/Smith/smWN.html Smith, Peter H. 1969. “Social Mobilization, Political Participation, and the Rise of Juan Peron.” Political Science Quarterly 84(1): 30-49. Solberg, Carl. 1969. “Immigration and Urban Social Problems in Argentina and Chile, 1890- 1914.” The Hispanic American Historical Review, 49(2): 215-232. Speciesism. 2013. In Merriam-Webster.com. Retrieved July 15, 2013, from http://www.merriam- webster.com/dictionary/speciesism. SPIEGEL Online International. 2010. “SPIEGEL Interview with Argentina's President: 'We Are Slowly Starting To Enjoy Greater Trust.'” 5 October. Retrieved June 14, 2013 from: www.spiegel.de. Stahler, Charles. 2012. “How Often Do Americans Eat Vegetarian Meals? And How Many Adults in the U.S. Are Vegetarian?” The Vegetarian Resource Group. 18 May. Retrieved June 15, 2013 from: www.vrg.org/blog. Sutton, David E. 1997. “The Vegetarian Anthropologist.” Anthropology Today 13(1): 5–8. Taylor, Alan M. 1994. “Mass Migration to Distant Southern Shores: Argentina and Australia, 1870-1939,” in Migration and the International Labor Market, 1850-1939, edited by T. J. Hatton and J. G. Williamson. Psychology Press. Thornton, Philip, Mario Herrero and Polly Ericksen. 2011. “Livestock and climate change.” Issue Brief 3. International Livestock Research Institute. Tobin, Jeff. 2005. “Patrimonializaciones gastronómicas: La Construcción Culinaria de la Nacionalidad,” in Primeras Jornadas de Patrimonio Gastronómico, La cocina como patrimonio (in) tangible. Comisión para la preservación del patrimonio histórico cultural de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Retrieved December 6, 2011 from: estatico.buenosaires.gov.ar/areas/cultura/cpphc/archivos/libros/temas_6.pdf#page=29. Trigg, Andrew. B. 2001. “Veblen, Bourdieu, and Conspicuous Consumption.” Journal of Economic Issues, 35(1): 99-115.

124

Twigg, Juana. 1983. "Vegetarianism and the Meanings of Meat," Pp. 18-30 in The Sociology of Food and Eating, edited by Anne Murcott. England, Gower Publishing Company Limited. Unión Vegetariana Argentina (UVA). n. d. www.uva.org.ar (accessed 30 May 2013). Veblen, Thorstein. 1971. “On Conspicuous Consumption” Pp. 235-248 in Marcello Truzzi (Ed.) Sociology: The Classic Statements. New York: Random House. Vegetarian Messenger (Manchester). 1895. 1 April, p. 93. Retrieved June 15, 2013 from: www.ivu.org/history/societies/new-york.html. Vegetarian Resource Group. n.d. www.vrg.org (accessed 20 June 2013). Vegetarian Times. 2008. “Vegetarian Times Study Shows 7.3 Million Americans Are Vegetarians and an additional 22.8 Million Follow a Vegetarian-Inclined Diet.” Retrieved June 15, 2013 from: www.vegetariantimes.com/article/vegetarianism-in-america/. Vinnari, Markus. 2008. “The Future of Meat Consumption - Expert Views from Finland.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 75(6): 893–904. Walters, Kerry S., and Lisa Portmess (editors). 1999. Ethical Vegetarianism: From Pythagoras to Peter Singer. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. Weber, Max. 1946. “Class, Status, and Party.” Pp. 180-195 in H.H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills (Eds.) From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology. New York: Oxford University Press. Weisner, Tom. 2012. “The Value of Qualitative and Ethnographic Methods for Understanding Family Life.” Paper presented at the 2012 National Symposium on Family Issues: Emerging Methods in Family Research. The Pennsylvania State University. Worsley, Anthony, and Grace Skrzypiec. 1997. “Teenage vegetarianism: Beauty or the beast?” Nutrition Research 17(3): 391–404. Zycherman, Ariela. 2008. “To Beef or Not to Beef: Defining Food Security and Insecurity in Tucumán Argentina.” Ecological and Environmental Anthropology 4(1): 28-38.

125