Sam & Sara #389: Eating Animals

Jonathan Safran Foer’s book title does not imply animal-eaters only eat animals and do nothing else. It is a way to de-objectify animals as merely ‘meat’.

(As inspired by a recent post:
Any likeness is, well, just inspired, and any differences are, well, just creative.)

Sam & Sara #389: Eating Animals

Sam: She claimed she was reduced to a simple label – an ‘animal-eater’, and nothing else.
Sara: Strange, because I never did that. I only wrote about animal-eaters in general, and never said all they do is eat animals.
Sam: Strange too, that she forgets that she reduces animals to simple labels every day, and nothing else.
Sara: Such as?
Sam: Fillet, pork, beef, drumstick, nugget, roast… fancy non-sentient names.
Sara: Sigh… as if these animals are just for eating?

Sam: Anyway, animal-eaters don’t see vegans as plant-eaters, and nothing else either. But why use ‘animal-eaters’ anyway?
Sara: The use of ‘animal(s)’ instead of ‘meat’ is a reminder not to objectify animals as ‘meat’ only.
Sam: What is a nicer term for those who eat animals, other than ‘animal-eaters’, that at the same time does not objectify animals?
Sara: ‘Carnivores’ sounds harsh and most are omnivores anyway. But ‘omnivores’ isn’t a good term as it doesn’t spur compassion for the animals.
Sam: What about ‘plant-and-animal-eaters’?
Sara: It’s a mouthful, but why not? Let’s just call a spade a spade!

Since words have power,
may all only use words,
and listen to words such,
that they increase compassion and wisdom.

Related Article:
Call Us By Our True Names

This’ll be expanded & illustrated as a comic in a ‘Sam & Sara’ book sequel later.

Get ‘The Amazing & Amusing Adventures of Sam & Sara: The Zen of All Kinds of Stuff’ Book for #1-100 illustrated:

Go Bookshop:
46 Book reviews:
5 Book trailers: