• news
  • WEDNESDAY AUGUST 1 2007 4:00 PM

"Vegansexuals" Say No to Hot Beef Injection

Submitted by Rahodeb

Edited by Rahodeb

Tags: Vegansexual, Hot Beef Injection, Animal Carcasses, New Zealand



A group of New Zealand vegans are taking their dietary choices to bed. In a brand-spanking new phenomenon being called "vegansexuality," some animal-friendly Kiwis are choosing "not to be sexually intimate with non-vegan partners whose bodies, they say, are made up of dead animals."

One vegan respondent from Christchurch said: "I believe we are what we consume, so I really struggle with bodily fluids, especially sexually."

Another Christchurch vegan said she found non-vegans attractive, but would not want to be physically close to them.

"I would not want to be intimate with someone whose body is literally made up from the bodies of others who have died for their sustenance," she said.

Okay, hang on just a minute, here. I'm a strict vegetarian—a vegan, for all intents and purposes (any animal products that make their way into my diet do so accidentally, at this point), and while I'm not too keen on swapping saliva with my boyfriend just after he's eaten a big, juicy burger, I find this vegansexuality thing to be verging on the absurd. Unless these vegansexuals are engaging in some kind of cannibalistic, Praying Mantis-inspired sex, I don't really see what the problem is. You're not eating your partner, are you? You're not wearing a jacket or a pair of shoes made out of your partner, right?

The revelation of this new little movement came through the research of Annie Potts, co-director of the New Zealand Centre for Human and Animal Studies at Canterbury University.

Cruelty-Free Consumption in New Zealand: A National Report on the Perspectives and Experiences of Vegetarians and other Ethical Consumers asked 157 people nationwide about everything from battery chickens to sexual preferences.

Many female respondents described being attracted to people who ate meat, but said they did not want to have sex with meat-eaters because their bodies were made up of animal carcasses.

"It's a whole new thing – I have not come across it before," said Potts.

Their bodies are made up of animal carcasses? That's just ridiculous. While I can understand being hesitant about romantic involvement with a meat-eater due to potential health issues like heart disease, hypertension, and colon cancer, viewing their bodies as "made up of animal carcasses" is taking it a bit far. I picture a zombie-like creature with a ham hock for a heart and chickens feet for eyes.

"When you are vegan or vegetarian, you are very aware that when people eat a meaty diet, they are kind of a graveyard for animals," she said.

"Sorry, I don't do the hot beef injection, but I do give great cabbage head."

  • PERMALINK
  • PRINT
  • Digg This
  • Email To A Friend
 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17

Next

Comments
soft_shoulder

soft_shoulder

Madison, WI
May 2006

AUG 05, 2007 07:48 AM

Wtf is wrong with people?
<3 veggie tales

Westley

Westley

Vatican City
April 2004

AUG 05, 2007 08:52 AM

BrownRecluse said:
Yeah, I kind of did. In the end, meat is meat (trying to avoid the old "it's all pink on the inside" joke...)


Um, no. In the end, a living piece of flesh being inserted in to you in a mutual act of consent is much, much different than the flesh of a dead animal bred and raised specifically so that it could be killed and eaten. I'm not trying to be difficult, but I honestly have no idea where you are coming from here. Are you actually eating penises or the entire guy or something? (in which case... HOT!) Who said you could not make any contact at all with any flesh, living or dead?

BrownRecluse said:
Besides, those people most likely weren't vegans from the time of birth...probably a choice made later in life, so they are PARTIALLY "made up of dead animals"...just an additional thought.


I may have missed a class at vegan finishing school, but I am almost sure that the idea here is to try and do the best you can now and in the future to lead the lifestyle, not to examine the past and span of each individual's entire existence to determine some mythical overall lifetime vegan rating. At least when it comes to something like making a determination that you only want to be in a relationship with another vegan.

If I told you that I prefer to not have a smoker as my significant other, it would be kind of silly for you to tell me that I should pick someone who is currently a smoker but has only smoked for one year of their life over a person who is not currently a smoker but has smoked for three years of her life. No?

Just saying.

Waldo_Jeffers

Waldo_Jeffers

United Kingdom
OLD SKOOL

AUG 05, 2007 09:01 AM

BrownRecluse said:

zelator said:

BrownRecluse said:
Well, the way I see it, if you're being penetrated by a penis, you're having the flesh of another being inserted in you. If you're the one doing the penetrating, you are putting a piece of your flesh in another's flesh.



However, so long as the penetrator and penetratee are both consenting adults, most vegetarians and vegans would not have an issue with this.



Did you read the article? I think you miss the point; there are vegans saying they don't want to sleep with non-vegans because they don't want to be intimate with someone whose body is "made up of dead animals."

My point that it's still a "fleshy" act - whether or not the person you're having sex with's body is "made up of dead animals" or not, in the end, we are animals.

So regardless of whom they are sleeping with, they are still having animal (human) inserted in them, or putting themselves in animal (human) flesh - whether the sex partner is vegetarian, vegan or omnivore.



Your response makes me think of the people who don't understand why vegans and veggies eat non-animal meat substitutes such as soya mince, who say things like, "What's the point in eating meat substitutes if you are a vegetarian? I mean if you don't want to eat meat then why eat meat substitutes? Surely that's defeating the object of being a veggie?"

Kes

Kes

USA
August 2006

AUG 05, 2007 09:36 AM

mamet said:
Their rationale is sort of amusing and odd, but the general idea is fairly basic. People tend to pair with those who have similar ideologies and interests. That seems par for the course; these people have just been dubbed with a silly name. I'm not sure what there is to be upset about. confused



agreed.

I read an interview about ten years ago with Natalie Merchant of 10,000 Maniacs and she held the same viewpoint. She basically explained it as similar to a non-smoker not wanting to date a smoker.

Interestingly, a lot of angry people wrote into the magazine saying how offended they were that she would think like this (because it implied they would never have a chance with her, being meat-eaters).

the mindset comes off as both elitist (especially if held by a gorgeous celebrity) and a little nutty, in my opinion.

apologies if someone has already mentioned this in the thread, I'm too lazy to read it.

Mockingbird

Mockingbird

Chicago, IL
January 2006

AUG 05, 2007 04:06 PM

The semantics and stereotyping in this thread are annoying...

Although I think militant ANYTHING and vegansexuals are pretty silly, I also don't think anyone deserves to be grouped together for how they choose to eat/live.

I don't think I could ever make anyone I cared about be a vegetarian or think any less of them if they didnt want to. Nor do I care what my pets eat. It's just a personal choice.

thefreak

thefreak

NEWSWIRE

Gardner, MA

AUG 06, 2007 12:25 AM

dingoes8 said:
I think his point was, publishing stories about these weird, isolated (and naked!) vegans and trying to make it look like all vegans are like that is similar to the way the right wing always talks about bath houses and child molestors instead of the millions of average, everyday gay people out there.


I have absolutely no issue w/vegans, nor did I take this story as lumping into one group. These people are just a little out there. That's all.

-TM

thefreak

thefreak

NEWSWIRE

Gardner, MA

AUG 06, 2007 12:30 AM

PointBlank said:

thefreak said:

s5 said:
yay, more media coverage that shows vegans as "extreme" or "crazy" or "terrorists". I guess the knuckle-dragging right wing started running out of people who would lap up their gay hating hot air, so next up, vegans. puke


Here's an idea...how about you not lump anyone who may have an issue w/these people into the "knuckle-dragging right wing" group? Your accusation of broad prejudice only brought about (guess what?) more broad prejudice.


That was an impressive job of missing the point entirely. Nice.


I misread his intent. It happens, and I apologize. My opinion that his statement was knee-jerk still stands, though.

-TM

SilverRevolver

SilverRevolver

United Kingdom
May 2004

AUG 06, 2007 02:48 AM

This entire thread is full of idiocy and broad generalizations from both sides (so of course I couldn't resist getting involved!wink). These people are entitled to fuck or not fuck whomever they please, but the rest of us are also entitled to think the whole thing seems kind of silly. On the other hand I also think relationships between people of such vastly different systems of ethics (or ideology is you want to be an ass!) tend not to work anyways, so what's the point of even discussing it?

apesamongus

apesamongus

Atlanta, GA
July 2002

AUG 06, 2007 05:06 AM

SilverRevolver said:
On the other hand I also think relationships between people of such vastly different systems of ethics (or ideology is you want to be an ass!) tend not to work anyways, so what's the point of even discussing it?


The thing is, that it entirely possible to be vegan without having such an extreme ideology. Sure, we're making fun of that particular decision (not to date non-vegans), but also, we're making fun of the extreme, overarching ideology that leads to them making that individual decision. And if we can't make fun of extremists, then the terrorist have already won...

waylonlove

waylonlove

I'm lost
August 2007

AUG 06, 2007 03:28 PM

I didn't read all of the comments, but I was really wondering...

DO VEGANS SWALLOW!!!!?????

Do they? Animal byproducts and such.

It's been awhile since dated much. I remember going out with a vegi that said that my umm...spunk tasted better, presumably because I' was on a pretty strict organic diet and didn't eat alot of meat. I'm sure there is a very real basis for such an opinion. The taste test I mean. But that girl was a vegitarian, not a vegan....I'm don't think that I knew what a vegan was in the early 90's.

The whole vegan sexual thing is a bit funny, I mean I could declare myself a non-crackheadsexual and it might not turn alot of heads. I don't smoke crack and don't sleep with crackheads. If I smoked crack, I'd probably sleep with more people that did the same. If I was a vegan I would bet that I would probably end up sleeping with more vegans. Or a car enthusiast or knitter, it doesn't matter.

I am an EMT and found out the other day that injectable insulin is an animal byproduct. They get it from cows. So I guess that people with type 1 diabetes could never be vegan. Maybe millitant vegans would just let these people die I don't know.

I'm a Buddhist and refrain from taking life needlessly but I don't fall victim to dogma. I have been a hunter in the past and many of my friends are hunters. I don't see anything wrong with that. If you have ever tried to kill an animal that you have helped raise from birth, or taken from the wild, or depended on for you own existence, you can develop a very deep respect for life on a level that is not possible from getting your hamburger or tofu at the local grocery chain.

So do Vegans swallow?

waylon

mamet

mamet

Charleston, SC
March 2005

AUG 06, 2007 03:40 PM

apesamongus said:

SilverRevolver said:
On the other hand I also think relationships between people of such vastly different systems of ethics (or ideology is you want to be an ass!) tend not to work anyways, so what's the point of even discussing it?


The thing is, that it entirely possible to be vegan without having such an extreme ideology. Sure, we're making fun of that particular decision (not to date non-vegans), but also, we're making fun of the extreme, overarching ideology that leads to them making that individual decision. And if we can't make fun of extremists, then the terrorist have already won...



How is it extreme? Seriously, how is it different from any other discriminating standard people use in their dating and sexual habits? It seems so very basic that I'm tempted to ask "how is this news?," but then I would be forced to shoot myself in the face. I have a multitude of things that would keep me from dating someone else, and I presume everyone else does, too. So I'm really perplexed with all the negative comments, unless it's just a lot of resentment for vegans.

waylonlove

waylonlove

I'm lost
August 2007

AUG 06, 2007 04:30 PM

vegans are a pretty easy target

apesamongus

apesamongus

Atlanta, GA
July 2002

AUG 06, 2007 05:10 PM

mamet said:

apesamongus said:

SilverRevolver said:
On the other hand I also think relationships between people of such vastly different systems of ethics (or ideology is you want to be an ass!) tend not to work anyways, so what's the point of even discussing it?


The thing is, that it entirely possible to be vegan without having such an extreme ideology. Sure, we're making fun of that particular decision (not to date non-vegans), but also, we're making fun of the extreme, overarching ideology that leads to them making that individual decision. And if we can't make fun of extremists, then the terrorist have already won...



How is it extreme?


Veganism is already extreme and this is a step beyond that.

Cigarette

Cigarette

Cleveland, OH
April 2004

AUG 06, 2007 05:13 PM

I fail to see how veganism is particularly extreme. Hell, if it's the prime mode of nutrition for most of the animal kingdom, seems pretty reasonable to me.

StarBelliedBoy

StarBelliedBoy

Philadelphia, PA
December 2003

AUG 06, 2007 05:20 PM

Cigarette said:
I fail to see how veganism is particularly extreme. Hell, if it's the prime mode of nutrition for most of the animal kingdom, seems pretty reasonable to me.



You pretty much have to put everything you eat under a microscope and your diet is severely restricted. How is that not extreme?

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17

Next

featured interviews