I’m asking more broadly why people dislike it when market demand for something they like decreases. (After reading the other replies, I guess that’s at least partly because liking stuff with low market demand is considered low-status.)
In at least some cases, network effects come into play. For example, if I prefer a non-mainstream operating system or computer hardware, there will be less support for my platform of choice. For instance, I may like Windows Phone but I can’t get the apps for it that I can for the iPhone or Android. Furthermore, my employer may give me a choice of iPhone or Android but not Windows. Thus someone who prefers Windows Phone would want demand for Windows Phone to increase.
Furthermore, supply is not always fixed. For products for which manufacturers can increase output to match demand, increasing demand may increase availability because more retailers will make them available. If economies of scale come into play, increasing demand may also decrease price.
OK. I observe that both of the examples you provide (vegetarians and homosexuals) have a moral subtext in my culture that many other market-demand scenarios (say, a fondness for peanuts) lack. That might be relevant.
(None of the vegetarians I’ve met seemed to be particularly bothered when other people ate meat, but as far as I can remember none of them was from the US¹, and from reading other comments in this thread I’m assuming it’s different for certain American vegetarians.)
Though I did met a few from an English-speaking country (namely Australia), and there are a few Canadians I met for whom I can’t remember off the top of my head whether they ate meat.
Fair enough. If there isn’t a moral subtext to vegeterianism in your culture, but omnivores there still dislike vegetarians, that’s evidence against my suggestion.
I have seen plenty of ‘jokes’ insulting vegetarians in Italian on Facebook; but then again, I’ve seen at least one about the metric system too, so maybe there are people who translate stuff from English no matter how little sense they make in the target cultural context.
If there isn’t a moral subtext to vegeterianism in your culture,
What army said is not the same thing. Most of the vegetarians I know also don’t seem particularly bothered when other people ate meat but will nonetheless give moral reasons if asked why they don’t eat meat.
In context, though… well, I said that vegetarians have a moral subtext in my culture, and army1987 replied that vegetarians they’ve met weren’t bothered by others eating meat. I interpreted that as a counterexample… that is, as suggesting vegetarians don’t have a moral subtext. If I misinterpreted, I of course apologize, but I can’t come up with another interpretation that doesn’t turn their comment into a complete nonsequitor, which seems an uncharitable assumption.
If you have a third option in mind for what they might have meant, I’d appreciate you elaborating it.
If I misinterpreted, I of course apologize, but I can’t come up with another interpretation that doesn’t turn their comment into a complete nonsequitor, which seems an uncharitable assumption.
Army mistakenly believes that because the vegetarians he’s met weren’t bothered by others eating meat their vegetarianism does not have a moral subtext.
With you so far. I understood army1987 to be going further, and suggesting not only that the vegetarians they’ve met display vegetarianism without a moral subtext, but also that they are representative of vegetarians in their culture more generally… that is, they aren’t some kind of aberrant statistical fluke. I summarized this as the claim that “there isn’t a moral subtext to vegeterianism in [army1987′s] culture,” which is what you took exception to. This doesn’t seem like a controversial next step to me.
No I haven’t—after all, so far as I’m concerned what people eat is their own business.¹ ISTR that one of them once told me that he disliked the taste of meat, though.
Except insofar as it has externalities, but if anything a vegetarian diet has less externalities than an omnivore one.
Someone who really dislikes the taste of meat but lacks other objections to eating meat should not object to eating byproducts such as gelatin that don’t taste like meat, or eating small amounts of meat in a context where they can’t taste it as meat. Furthermore, they should refuse to eat vegetarian products intentionally designed to taste like meat. And many meat products just taste different; disliking the taste of meat is a bit like disliking the taste of all products whose names begin with the letter A—it’s logically possible, but it’s an unusual category for one’s sense of taste to so exactly fit.
I suspect a lot of people who “dislike the taste of meat” are really just rationalizing away their desire to be vegetarian for other reasons that they can’t rationally defend.
Someone who really dislikes the taste of meat but lacks other objections to eating meat should not object to eating byproducts such as gelatin that don’t taste like meat, or eating small amounts of meat in a context where they can’t taste it as meat. Furthermore, they should refuse to eat vegetarian products intentionally designed to taste like meat.
That particular guy didn’t seem particularly bothered when he found out that the bread in the sandwiches he had previously eaten contained lard in its ingredients, saying that he hadn’t noticed that. I also can’t recall him ever eating meat substitutes.
And many meat products just taste different; disliking the taste of meat is a bit like disliking the taste of all products whose names begin with the letter A—it’s logically possible, but it’s an unusual category for one’s sense of taste to so exactly fit.
Then again, not all rock music sounds the same, not all alcoholic beverages taste the same, etc., but there still are people who say they don’t like rock music or alcoholic beverages. (But yeah, probably some of them are rationalizing away something.)
If you presented them with vegetarian fake meat, would they then refuse to eat it because they don’t like the taste of meat?
Do they eat bacon? Gelatin? Spaghetti with meat sauce? Soups containing beef broth? Liver? Do those all really have enough of a similar taste that they would really refuse to eat all those things because they “don’t like the taste of meat”?
Why do we hardly ever see people who say “I don’t like the taste of bread” and refuse to eat not only bread, but fish coated with bread crumbs?
I’m asking more broadly why people dislike it when market demand for something they like decreases. (After reading the other replies, I guess that’s at least partly because liking stuff with low market demand is considered low-status.)
In at least some cases, network effects come into play. For example, if I prefer a non-mainstream operating system or computer hardware, there will be less support for my platform of choice. For instance, I may like Windows Phone but I can’t get the apps for it that I can for the iPhone or Android. Furthermore, my employer may give me a choice of iPhone or Android but not Windows. Thus someone who prefers Windows Phone would want demand for Windows Phone to increase.
Furthermore, supply is not always fixed. For products for which manufacturers can increase output to match demand, increasing demand may increase availability because more retailers will make them available. If economies of scale come into play, increasing demand may also decrease price.
Good point, though in this particular example, I guess meat eaters aren’t anywhere near few enough for these effects to be relevant.
OK.
I observe that both of the examples you provide (vegetarians and homosexuals) have a moral subtext in my culture that many other market-demand scenarios (say, a fondness for peanuts) lack. That might be relevant.
(None of the vegetarians I’ve met seemed to be particularly bothered when other people ate meat, but as far as I can remember none of them was from the US¹, and from reading other comments in this thread I’m assuming it’s different for certain American vegetarians.)
Though I did met a few from an English-speaking country (namely Australia), and there are a few Canadians I met for whom I can’t remember off the top of my head whether they ate meat.
Fair enough. If there isn’t a moral subtext to vegeterianism in your culture, but omnivores there still dislike vegetarians, that’s evidence against my suggestion.
I have seen plenty of ‘jokes’ insulting vegetarians in Italian on Facebook; but then again, I’ve seen at least one about the metric system too, so maybe there are people who translate stuff from English no matter how little sense they make in the target cultural context.
What army said is not the same thing. Most of the vegetarians I know also don’t seem particularly bothered when other people ate meat but will nonetheless give moral reasons if asked why they don’t eat meat.
In isolation, I completely agree.
In context, though… well, I said that vegetarians have a moral subtext in my culture, and army1987 replied that vegetarians they’ve met weren’t bothered by others eating meat. I interpreted that as a counterexample… that is, as suggesting vegetarians don’t have a moral subtext.
If I misinterpreted, I of course apologize, but I can’t come up with another interpretation that doesn’t turn their comment into a complete nonsequitor, which seems an uncharitable assumption.
If you have a third option in mind for what they might have meant, I’d appreciate you elaborating it.
Army mistakenly believes that because the vegetarians he’s met weren’t bothered by others eating meat their vegetarianism does not have a moral subtext.
With you so far.
I understood army1987 to be going further, and suggesting not only that the vegetarians they’ve met display vegetarianism without a moral subtext, but also that they are representative of vegetarians in their culture more generally… that is, they aren’t some kind of aberrant statistical fluke.
I summarized this as the claim that “there isn’t a moral subtext to vegeterianism in [army1987′s] culture,” which is what you took exception to.
This doesn’t seem like a controversial next step to me.
How the hell do you know? Have you ever even seen them?
Sorry, I was adding a possibility to Dave’s list not asserting that this was indeed the case.
By the way, have you ever asked them why they’re vegetarians?
No I haven’t—after all, so far as I’m concerned what people eat is their own business.¹ ISTR that one of them once told me that he disliked the taste of meat, though.
Except insofar as it has externalities, but if anything a vegetarian diet has less externalities than an omnivore one.
Someone who really dislikes the taste of meat but lacks other objections to eating meat should not object to eating byproducts such as gelatin that don’t taste like meat, or eating small amounts of meat in a context where they can’t taste it as meat. Furthermore, they should refuse to eat vegetarian products intentionally designed to taste like meat. And many meat products just taste different; disliking the taste of meat is a bit like disliking the taste of all products whose names begin with the letter A—it’s logically possible, but it’s an unusual category for one’s sense of taste to so exactly fit.
I suspect a lot of people who “dislike the taste of meat” are really just rationalizing away their desire to be vegetarian for other reasons that they can’t rationally defend.
That particular guy didn’t seem particularly bothered when he found out that the bread in the sandwiches he had previously eaten contained lard in its ingredients, saying that he hadn’t noticed that. I also can’t recall him ever eating meat substitutes.
Then again, not all rock music sounds the same, not all alcoholic beverages taste the same, etc., but there still are people who say they don’t like rock music or alcoholic beverages. (But yeah, probably some of them are rationalizing away something.)
But it is still closer to other rock music than music from other genres.
I don’t believe taste is the reason for most people’s objection.
Have you tried the exercise on this page?
Hence the “say they” and the bit in parentheses at the end.
I know people that specifically say “I dislike red meat” but still eat chicken and fish, and identify as “sort of vegetarian.”
If you presented them with vegetarian fake meat, would they then refuse to eat it because they don’t like the taste of meat?
Do they eat bacon? Gelatin? Spaghetti with meat sauce? Soups containing beef broth? Liver? Do those all really have enough of a similar taste that they would really refuse to eat all those things because they “don’t like the taste of meat”?
Why do we hardly ever see people who say “I don’t like the taste of bread” and refuse to eat not only bread, but fish coated with bread crumbs?
See also economies of scale.