Abstract
Animal agriculture (including dairy) is the second largest source of greenhouse gas emissions, after energy use by buildings. Animal agriculture is also a major source of air, soil, and water pollution, as well as animal suffering. Yet efforts to raise these issues in the classroom are hampered by the “meat paradox”: most people who like to eat meat do not like to harm animals, especially animals with minds and feelings. The resulting cognitive dissonance is typically resolved by a combination of denial and stigmatization of those who question the cultural dominance of meat consumption—a response similar to that of climate change deniers. Studies of what does and does not work in climate change communication offer valuable insights for educators interested in exploring the negative consequences of industrialized meat production: emphasize local impacts, co-benefits, and shared community values; avoid moral reproach; frame the issue to engage multiple values. If the educator’s goal is to explore the morality of meat consumption itself, however, these bridge-building techniques may founder upon the fundamental and ultimately irreconcilable philosophical gulf between those who believe that it is morally acceptable to breed and slaughter animals for food and those who believe that it is not.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
As a practical matter, the widespread adoption of vegetarian and vegan diets would very effectively reduce the environmental and health risks posed by livestock agriculture, and many environmentalists have adopted meat-free diets for precisely this reason. Our point is that this is not a necessary condition for near-term progress in reducing the industry’s negative environmental or public health impacts, whereas it is a necessary condition for eliminating the breeding and killing of animals for human consumption.
References
Bastian, B. (2011, March 23). The meat paradox: How we can love some animals and eat others. The Conversation. Retrieved from http://theconversation.com/the-meat-paradox-how-we-can-love-some-animals-and-eat-others-149
Bastian, B., & Loughnan, S. (2017). Resolving the meat-paradox: A motivational account of morally troublesome behavior and its maintenance. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21, 278–299.
Bastian, B., Loughnan, S., Haslam, N., & Radke, H. R. M. (2012). Don’t mind meat? The denial of mind to animals used for human consumption. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 247–256.
Bohm, I., Lindblom, C., Åbacka, G., Bengs, C., & Hörnell, A. (2015). “He just has to like ham”—The centrality of meat in home and consumer studies. Appetite, 95, 101–112.
Bratanova, B., Loughnan, S., & Bastian, B. (2011). The effect of categorization as food on the perceived moral standing of animals. Appetite, 57, 193–196.
Center for Research on Environmental Decisions (CRED). (2009). The psychology of climate change communication: A guide for scientists, journalists, educators, political aides, and the interested public. New York, NY: Center for Research on Environmental Decisions.
Cohen, S. (2001). States of denial: Knowing about atrocities and suffering. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Darst, R. G., & Dawson, J. I. (forthcoming). Exit, voice, and denial: Confronting the factory farm in the United States. Society & Animals.
Dinker, K. G., & Pedersen, H. (2016). Critical animal pedagogies: Re-learning our relations with animal others. In H. E. Lees & N. Noddings (Eds.), Palgrave international handbook of alternative education (pp. 415–430). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Elliott, C. (2014). Food as people: Teenagers’ perspectives on food personalities and implications for healthy eating. Social Science & Medicine, 121, 85–90.
FAO. (2006). Livestock’s long shadow: Environmental issues and options. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization.
FAO. (2013). Tackling climate change through livestock: A global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization.
Graça, J., Oliveira, A., & Calheiros, M. M. (2015). Meat, beyond the plate. Data-driven hypotheses for understanding consumer willingness to adopt a more plant-based diet. Appetite, 90, 80–90.
Jabs, J., Sobal, J., & Devine, C. M. (2000). Managing vegetarianism: Identities, norms, and interactions. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 39, 375–394.
Kahan, D. M., Peters, E., Wittlin, M., Slovic, P., Ouellette, L. L., Braman, D., & Mandel, G. (2012). The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nature Climate Change, 2, 732–735.
Kulick, R. (2017). Teaching about meat: Socializing forces in our media-saturated fast food nation. Report submitted to the Office of Faculty Development, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth. North Dartmouth, MA.
Macdiarmid, J. I., Douglas, F., & Campbell, J. (2016). Eating like there’s no tomorrow: Public awareness of the environmental impact of food and reluctance to eat less meat as part of a sustainable diet. Appetite, 96, 487–493.
Marshall, G. (2014). Don’t even think about it: Why our brains are wired to ignore climate change. New York, NY/London, UK: Bloomsbury.
Minson, J. A., & Monin, B. (2012). Do-gooder derogation: Disparaging morally motivated minorities to defuse anticipated reproach. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 200–207.
Norgaard, K. M. (2009). Cognitive and behavioral challenges in responding to climate change. Background paper prepared for the World Development Report 2010. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4940.
Norgaard, K. M. (2011). Living in denial: Climate change, emotions, and everyday life. Cambridge, MA/London, UK: MIT Press.
Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2010). Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. New York, NY: Bloomsbury.
Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production. (2008). Putting meat on the table: Industrial farm animal production in America. Philadelphia, PA: Pew Charitable Trusts.
Piazza, J., Ruby, M. B., Loughnan, S., Luong, M., Kulik, J., Watkins, H. M., & Seigerman, M. (2015). Rationalizing meat consumption. The 4Ns. Appetite, 91, 114–128.
Pohjolainen, P., Tapio, P., Vinnari, M., Jokinen, P., & Räsänen, P. (2016). Consumer consciousness on meat and the environment—Exploring differences. Appetite, 101, 37–45.
Rice, S. (2013). Three educational problems: The case of eating animals. Journal of Thought, 48, 112–127.
Rogers, R. A. (2008). Beasts, burgers, and Hummers: Meat and the crisis of masculinity in contemporary television advertisements. Environmental Communication, 2, 281–301.
Rothgerber, H. (2013). Real men don’t eat (vegetable) quiche: Masculinity and the justification of meat consumption. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 14, 363–375.
Rothgerber, H. (2014). Efforts to reduce vegetarian-induced dissonance among meat eaters. Appetite, 79, 32–41.
Rothgerber, H. (2015). Can you have your mean and eat it too? Conscientious omnivores, vegetarians, and adherence to diet. Appetite, 84, 196–203.
Rowe, B. D. (2012). Food, habit, and the consumption of animals as educational encounter. Philosophy of Education, 210–218. Retrieved from http://m1.cust.educ.ubc.ca/journal/index.php/criticaled/article/view/132
Ruby, M. B., Alvarenga, M. S., Rozin, P., Kirby, T. A., Richer, E., & Rutsztein, G. (2016). Attitudes toward beef and vegetarians in Argentina, Brazil, France, and the USA. Appetite, 96, 546–554.
Schlosberg, D. (2007). Defining environmental justice: Theories, movements, and nature. Oxford, UK/New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Schösler, H., de Boer, J., Boersema, J. J., & Aiking, H. (2015). Meat and masculinity among young Chinese, Turkish and Dutch adults in the Netherlands. Appetite, 89, 152–159.
Silva, L. (2017). Teaching about meat: Lesson plan and project summary. Report submitted to the Office of Faculty Development, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth. North Dartmouth, MA.
Tian, Q., Hilton, D., & Becker, M. (2016). Confronting the meat paradox in different cultural contexts: Reactions among Chinese and French participants. Appetite, 96, 187–194.
Wibeck, V. (2014). Enhancing learning, communication and public engagement about climate change—Some lessons from recent literature. Environmental Education Research, 20, 387–411.
Wright-Maley, C. (2011). Meet them at the plate: Reflections on the eating of animals and the role of education therein. Critical Education, 2, 1–21.
Zerubavel, E. (2006). The elephant in the room: Silence and denial in everyday life. Oxford, UK/New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Darst, R.G., Dawson, J.I. (2019). Putting Meat on the (Classroom) Table: Problems of Denial and Communication. In: Lloro-Bidart, T., Banschbach, V.S. (eds) Animals in Environmental Education. Palgrave Studies in Education and the Environment. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98479-7_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98479-7_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-98478-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-98479-7
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)