The Newsweek article, in the last two sentences, reduced itself to a farce with the snide (failed) attempt to be clever. The writer shows great disrespect for Katzen and Weaver, and to the real meaning of eating meat that is raised cleanly, sustainably, and humanely. Fie on Newsweek.

Such a ridiculous argument and condemnation of people who are trying to promote sustainable, healthy food. For many vegetarians, it wasn’t a matter of saving all animals, it was a choice not to support the industrial meat industry. I say good on food writers and activists for helping to make people more aware of their healthier, more ethical food options.

I’ve been a vegetarian for about 25 years, way before it was popular, at least in my social circles. I don’t get the whole flexitarian label. Why do you need a label? If you eat meat, you are simply not a vegetarian. I admire and respect Mollie Katzen completely, but she is not the reason I became a vegetarian. Nor does the fact that she eats meat change my mind about what I choose to eat.

Wow. It never fails to amaze me what flesh-eaters will come up with in their justifications for what they intend to do anyway (their reasoning usually includes demeaning others who have made more humane and environmentally responsible choices).

But really, there is no such thing as a vegetarian that eats meat. Personally I think it should be “flexivore” but “flexitarian” is enough of a distinction for an omnivore who eats a plant-based diet most of the time yet still isn’t vegetarian/vegan.