As a vegetarian, it freaks me out. As a human being, it. freaks. me. out!

I wasn't aware that eating meat was a "serious moral decision", or that it should be. I personally find that idea patently ridiculous.

Sure, some (generally affluent) people and (generally religious) societies have decided that it is a big moral issue. But a majority of the world doesn't see it that way. Morals, for the most part, are wholly subjective, making this a bit meaningless.

I see some practical problems with meat (wasteful supply chain), and to a lesser extent some ethical problems (animal treatment), but neither of these are terribly pressing. I don't wring my hands and dip into a moral crisis every time I'm confronted with a hamburger. I even find many many of the "new agey" trend diets (paleo, vegan, etc...) to be rather idiotic and artificial.

Even before becoming a vegetarian, these images bothered me profoundly. Even more disturbing is the Chick-Fil-A campaign, which ostensibly portrays one species' efforts to survive by compelling consumers to eat a different animal. Why this bothers me so much is because, unlike the images above which portray feeder food as though they WANT to be eaten, the Chick-Fil-A campaign plays with the idea that no animals want to be eaten and the cows are trying to get the chickens killed.
It's pretty gross.

You left out the best example of this: The Ameglian Major Cow from Douglas Adams' Restaurant at the End of the Universe. Quoting from wiki:

"a ruminant specifically bred to not only have the desire to be eaten, but to be capable of saying so quite clearly and distinctly. When asked if he would like to see the Dish of the Day, Zaphod replies, "We'll meet the meat." The Major Cow's quite vocal and emphatic desire to be consumed by Milliways' patrons is the most revolting thing that Arthur Dent has ever heard, and the Dish is nonplussed by a queasy Arthur's subsequent order of a green salad, since it knows "many vegetables that are very clear" on the point of not wanting to be eaten — which was part of the reason for the creation of the Ameglian Major Cow in the first place."

As an aspiring illustrator, I get why the illustrators / designers of these images chose these images to communicate their message and sell their product.

As a vegan, these FREAK ME OUT. How do omnivores reconcile these kinds of images? Most omnivores I know do it by not thinking about the animals as living beings (though I do realize that there's also a lot of people who raise the animals themselves, are intimately aware that the animals are living beings, and eat them anyway... and honestly I respect that a lot. I couldn't do that, and that's why I am a vegan) -- it's disturbing to see photos that promote both the idea that animals are living beings (and anthropomorphic, no less!) but that it's STILL OKAY because they are SO HAPPY to be eaten.

Very "Restaurant At the End of the Universe."

Also a trope (Let's Meet the Meat) on TV Tropes: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ptitlesacn2d4m3iyd

is there some privilege poking out there,when you refer to meat eating as a moral decision? not everyone has a choice to eat meat considering socioeconomic status may impede someone's ability to live a vegetarian lifestyle.
(not that you are implying this in your post but) I find it disturbing when people who have a higher SES treat food as currency for their status and try to force other people to eat the way THEY feel they should eat. As Norman Bourlaug said "if you are not starvation you have no right to tell others how to eat" (at least I think it was him).

It was a dark and stormy night. I stood over my kitchen counter, bun in one hand, fork in the other. Was I going to eat that leftover pulled pork, or not? My hand quivered as I piled it on. I was butting up against a serious moral decision, and I did not know if I had the power to confront it. My soul was pulled one way by my taste, another way by my beliefs. I did not know if I could justify this habit any longer. I reached for the barbecue sauce to cover up my weakness. I turned the jar around and saw the trademark - a cartoon pig holding a spatula. My guilt was eased. The sandwich was gone in a few bites.

I'm an omnivore, and these images STILL freak me out. I understand that (OF COURSE) an animal wants to be eaten about as much as we do. This is why I consider it important to thank the animal for its sacrifice, as it could just as easily have been me on that plate, had I been born in another form.

Please keep in mind that not all people are able to go veg*n or organic, etc. This practice takes a certain amount of monetary ability. Vegetables are often hard to come by in low income areas, and meat (via fast food) is easier and cheaper to come by, and makes one fuller faster.

As a ______ these images _______.

Can we have a post on diet-choice socialization? You can be a vegetarian without thinking that people who eat meat are savages or thinking that the death of non-humans is a tragedy. You can even be a vegan without thinking that.

I once went veg for health reasons and I was absolutely appalled at the amount of people on either side of the road, who either lambasted me about being a wuss who wouldn't eat meat, or tried to pull me into their fringe animal cruelty society and anarchist potluck.

As a human being who is comfortable with what I eat (and what I eat includes animal muscle tissue), I think the logos range from strange to tacky, but it doesn't confuse me or ease any of my nonexistent guilt when I bite into a pork rib. If you feel guilty or if you feel like I'm a murderer for eating meat, you're well within rights to. However, I consider the animals I eat to be prey, and I don't feel like it's excessively violent or cruel to do so, because I know that my predators would do so in a split second given a chance where they were hungry enough.

I have no insight but just one data point to share...

Maybe people who think that eating meat is a serious moral decision are roughly the same as those who do not eat meat (among those of us who have that choice, obviously)?

My feeling reading your post is approximately the same as if you had written:

"The assertion is that these images trivialize vegetable eating. The cartoon characters — endorsing their own status as food, sometimes even enjoying eating themselves — make eating vegetables fun and funny, instead of a serious moral decision. In doing so, they contribute to a lax attitude towards eating vegetables. What do you think?"

(That is, I fail to see how these images enter in the morality debate, as I have never felt that this morality debate was pertinent. I suspect most of my carnivore friends would feel like me.)

Let's keep in mind that some of these are international images/ads and the commentary seems to be US-focused, especially around he economics of the choice to be vegan/vegetarian. Someone above made the comment that not all people can afford to go meatless/vegan/organic. Which I think is interesting because meat can be expensive, especially in some of the developing countries around the world, not to mention in the US as well. Even before I became vegetarian I often ordered the vegetable dishes at restaurants just to save money.

In general, I tend to find cartoons advertising food to be stupid. I also don't allow the media to make my food choices for me Yes, those are "weird" ads. The one for Auvergne Salami is also nearly 40 years old.

It is not a "moral decision" when I eat meat. Humans are omnivores. I do not feel guilty when I eat meat, no more than my cat feels guilt whether eating chicken or cat grass. Like an above commentor, I do agree that there are more efficient and more ethical ways the supply could be produced (and yeah, I do know that means killing an animal). I do agree there are socioeconomics involved in dietary choices. While I do respect people's right to make their own choices, I do not respect people who think themselves morally superior because they don't eat what I eat.

I find these very creepy. I always assume other people don't want to think of their meat as coming cute little animals, as modern society is so removed from the processing of meat, but I suppose this is evidence against that. Does this sort of advertising work? I find a bloody steak far more appetizing than a cartoon animal slicing itself up.

That said, I highly doubt most people consider meat-eating a "serious moral decision."

I think the speciesism on display in the images presented and in the comments is mirrored perfectly and shows us exactly where we stand in regards to consumption choices (let's say in Western society, just to keep it all simple).

To me, there is no demonstrable moral difference between any two people, be they different genders, sexes, classes, religions, species, etc.

It's ethics pure and simple once you learn to unpack all of the evidence we are forced to compartmentalize by our society. Non-human animals feel pain and have vested interest in their own existences. Since we require their use in no way to survive I think non-animal consumption is one of the best choices humans are able to make.

Not to mention it's healthier for myself and the planet and is much cheaper (unless you just eat all that processed vegan junk food which is also not necessary in the slightest to thrive and enjoy fine meals).

I'm just as speciesist as anyone else, since I was raised with that privilege (as all the other privileges I have) but I think it's one worth fighting against in myself and my culture. I'm sure I sound crazy to so many people but there are so many kinds of slavery, human and non-human, still happening that we can make a difference against.

I agree with those who point out that the people who think eating meat is one horn of a moral dilemma, have already decided which way they're going to eat, and the posters don't make much difference to them. Same for the people who think it's a decision with no moral content at all.

There's an interesting discussion to be had on the environmental impact of meat production, and bringing in distractions like meat-is-murder don't advance that discussion. I know the great inefficiency (in terms of protein out versus protein in) in eating meat rather than plants. On the other hand, if I have a stony, hilly piece of ground, I can't very well grow corn on it, and it might make more sense to hire a goat to walk up and down the slopes all day and then eat the goat.

I have two cats, and wish they were more carnivorous. Have to kill the mice myself.

Plants want to live, too.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/22/science/22angi.html

The only ethical source of energy is photosynthesis. Shame on you all.

There's something really unsettling in seeing "meat" as a living animal (an anthropomorphized animal at that) instead of as food; there are "pigs," which are animals, and there's pork, which is food divorced from its animalness, I guess you could say. I live in the southeast US, and barbecue (pulled pork, as other parts of the country call it) restaurants are everywhere, and their signs inevitably feature a smiling pig in an apron holding a spatula. This does not put me at ease but makes me see food as not only a living thing, but a living thing with human characteristics. These images do not naturalize meat eating, but make the practice uncanny and unsettling. Look at what depravity our lust for meat has wrought: cows preserving their own lives by persuading us to eat chicken, pigs cooking other pigs! ;)

I don't see that sort of issue with it, since inadvertently, those images are reminding the human consumer that they are eating once-living things. I'm an omnivore who believes that there is absolutely nothing wrong, implicitly, about eating meat, but that the animals who give their lives to us should be respected instead of ignored. Perhaps if more people acknowledged that they were ONCE ALIVE, they will see the root of what makes consuming meat now generally unethical -- the animals are treated as if they are just walking, bleating automatons to be crammed into tiny stalls and ignored.

"The cartoon characters — endorsing their own status as food, sometimes even enjoying eating themselves..."

This had freaked me out since I was a child. Any anthropomorphic food, really. The reason given in the post doesn't describe what I find unsettling (I don't know myself) but something about it is so very wrong.

Do images like these make anyone else uncomfortable? Maybe it's just me.

The presumption of guilt is interesting. As an omnivore, like the majority, I feel no shame or guilt. I presume those that felt guilt of feelings like that would become vegetarian. SO the title might better have been "stirring up vegetarian guilt"

I to don't feel any shame or guilt eating meat. I don't see that as having a lack of empathy for animals, but rather as recognizing fundamental differences between animals and humans.

That being said, I don't believe the moral arguement for or against eating meat is a matter of agency. A person in a vegetative state lacks agency, but we would still consider it immoral to eat that person.

(I'm not a vegetarian, but I respect vegetarians.)

I think this post is a little off-target. We don't need images such as these to "ease omnivore guilt," because we feel very little--if any--guilt in the first place. The people whose choices are most aggressively questioned are those who choose non-normative eating patterns, like vegetarians and vegans. Meat eaters do not need their consciences soothed, because it's just not an issue.

You could take away all such images and I doubt society's attitude toward meat-eating would change one bit. It's just a tiny, tiny thing. I think they're interesting, but not because they prop up meat-eating.

There are meat-eaters who feel squeamish or guilty, but these types of images do nothing to ease that. In fact, they probably make it worse for those people, as they present an image of the whole animal, reminding consumers of what they are eating.

I've ways found these depictions of animals and veggies committing seppuku to be disturbing. I am omnivorus, so I live off of whatever there is to eat. I have no moral quandaries about eating a cheeseburger. Or a stalk of celery. (But obviously, no one gives a f*** about how plants feel.) Life feeds off of life, so no matter what you eat, you're eating something that used to be alive. :P

I would put that French pig on my wall.

I ran a farm and slaughtered my own animals. It is messy, but otherwise no big deal. They aren't sentient, particularly. No major angst. And farm animals aren't the adorable clavier and pickets and baby lambs everyone likes to think about---they are big, stupid and usually somewhat dangerous. People picture pigs as cute because they are lethally dangerous. Not to mention filthy.

Eating meat is an immoral decision, for anyone who could reasonably survive on a vegetarian diet. That's the end of it.

Yes, some people are too poor, or have special medical needs. That doesn't excuse the rest of you.

'easing omnivore guilt' is right!

I'm a pseudo-vegan (I'm a regular dumpster diver and am willing to eat unexpired food with animal products or food that people will throw out otherwise) and I'm an unapologetic welfarist (vs. abolitionist) when it comes to my stance on animal rights. This makes me less than popular with most people in my camp.

I feel the assertion that eating animals is inherently immoral virtually always comes from a place of privilege where the vegan speaking is of a socio-economic class that can afford alternative sources of protein or can otherwise compensate due to having the time to shop and prepare food and having the luxury of not living in a food desert. (or in my case, having the luxury of living in an area where it is feasible to go about living as a freegan)

Personally, I would eat all manner of animal products (octopus... I miss you so) if they were being sustainably and humanely produced in an environment that was sanitary and not exploitative of its (often undocumented) workers. I'm not asking that chickens be given a full body massage every day and be fed their mash sprinkled on top of tiny creme brulees. I'd just sort of like it if they could not have their beaks seared off with a hot iron and be given more than an envelope's worth of personal space.

While we're at it, I'd also like if they weren't kept artificially cheap due to massive government subsidies - such as that meat might become more of a "once a week" food for the average family rather than an "every freaking day food." My delightfully pointy canines were designed to tear flesh... its true, but for the majority of human history our omnivorous diet has been very sizably plant-based with meat as an occasional boost of protein and fat.

Perhaps the solution is finally here: Soylent Brown! It's not meat, but it's not a vegetable either. It's... the future?

This is NOT a joke: http://news.yahoo.com/s/digitaltrends/20110615/tc_digitaltrends/japanesescientistscreatesmeatoutoffeces

I love the morality debate because some people think their morals are universal and all societies and cultures should accept it as fact. I love it, specifically because, it is so easy to tear apart.

Some cultures also believe that premarital sex makes you a whore. Others believe homosexuality is a sin. Polygamy is fine. Misogyny is fine. Hell, slavery and sex trafficking is still Morally A-OK too!

So why does one person who thinks eating animals is equivalent to murder okay? Because that's her opinion. Now think back to elementary school. What is the different between opinion and fact? Facts are true in every single way possible. Opinions is just one person's view point of something. Sure, a bunch of people can share an opinion, work together to pass legislation to make certain things illegal or frowned upon, but that is still opinion. Luckily, vegetarians have not done any of that, and judging from Earth's history, never will.

Now to prove why an omnivorous diet is not evil. I don't feel an ounce of guilt when consuming animals for a slew of reason.

First off, homo sapiens would not exist without the consumption of animal protein. [http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128849908] Eating animal protein makes your brain smarter. That's how we evolved. That's how we evolve.

Second, animals are not human. Vegans and vegetarians have no qualm with killing insects when it comes to protecting crops. Than they will refute with the varying levels of cruelty, and than I call horse shit. This form of favoritism or "Speciesism" is again, opinion. And those opinions can also dominate cultures. As other posters have noted, people in the US don't eat dogs or horses. Well in other countries and cultures, they are no different from pigs and cows. To each their own. Course, vegetarians like to oppress other cultures in favor of their own with their twisted imperialistic tendencies.

Third, mind your own God damned business. If I love eating bacon, sausage, or hamburgers, I don't need some morality police to share their different views with me. The majority is quite aware of these people's views on such things, they just don't care. If you start policing what goes into our bodies, this is only a slippery slope on what "goes into our bodies" [that was a pun about queer politics if you didn't catch that].

Why is it that when people wish to bash non-meat/animal inclusive diets, they go on about health and nutrition? As if everyone who eats meat/dairy/etc has a healthy, balanced diet?

The city I'm from, with a long tradition of fried foods, heavy on meat and other animal products, has an average life-expectancy of 53 for men, 74 for women. Don't try to pretend that diet has nothing to do with it, and don't pretend that cutting down (or out) animal fats wouldn't have an effect of that.

Are any of you aware of the cartoon character "Shmoo"? That's the second thing I thought of when I saw this post. The first thing I thought of was that Pizza Hut commercial where Miss Piggy eats a slice of pepperoni pizza.

Courtesy of Vintage Ads -- blog entry at http://pzrservices.typepad.com/vintageadvertising/2010/09/add-from-copyranter.html, larger pic at http://pzrservices.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451ccbc69e20134851d5e87970c-pi -- an 1890 print ad for a food chopper that shows chickens, turkeys, pigs, fish, and vegetables all eagerly dashing forward -- the latter on little root-legs -- to be processed in the Universal Food Chopper.