Equality for Animals

           Peter Singer discusses the harsh conditions animals face, and why it is no longer needed for us to eat meat in his article, Equality for Animals.” He also makes the point that humans can achieve long, healthy lifestyles without the need for the consumption of flesh. The argument that we need to eat meat solely for protein has become outdated in that there are many different alternatives we can utilize to obtain protein. Such alternatives include protein bars, peanuts, tofu, and many more varieties.

            Singer opens up with a strong ethical appeal, in that he puts animals in our shoes when vouching for them. An example of this would be when he states that when,” considering the ethics of the use of animal products for human food in industrialized societies, we are considering a situation in which relatively minor human interest must be balanced against the lives and welfare of the animals involved.” (Singer 179) The main point Singer makes, is that he is not just vouching for animals, but for equality itself. He doesn’t believe that major interests should be sacrificed for minor interests.

            I agree and disagree with Singer’s point of view. I agree that the industrialization of animal products needs to stop, and that they shouldn’t live their lives cooped up in crowded and disgusting living conditions. I also agree with the fact that it is indeed possible for us to live without eating meat.

However, he doesn’t consider the cost of living a vegan lifestyle. One has to be financially stable in order to be able to afford the alternative foods. For example, soy and almond milk are considerably more expensive than regular milk, and not every family in the US can afford that. He also fails to look at the global scale, in that some countries continue to fight for their lives and can barely make it hunting for animals.  In counties like the Philippines, there are still people living on the streets, having to eat dogs because those are the only wild animals they can get their hands on. So although I respect his flowery argument for animals, I don’t believe it is realistic worldwide.

Service Learning Reflection 2

So, for the past few weeks I have been spending a fair amount of time working at the SOL garden. I helped in building a soil sifter and building raised beds. Both tasks were pretty straight forward, the hardest part was probably getting the measurements right. Both projects consisted of drilling four planks together to create a rectangular-like shape, however, we added a galvanized mesh screen to the soil sifter in order to pull apart the chunks of soil as well as get rid of any rocks.

Although learning carpentry work was very rewarding, what I'm most proud of is the bench I got to paint with Anneisia for the SOL garden. It became a personal project for us that only Anneisia and I were allowed to touch. At the bottom we painted it green for the grass, and at the top we made the sky, and a rainbow in between. The rainbow wasn't meant to represent gay pride, but everyone has misconstrued it that way, so I've just been rolling with it.

Another really cool thing I got to do at the SOL garden was learn how to make a seed mixture, and plant it into one of the beds. I've never planted anything like this before, so this experience was pretty exciting for me. Working with the community has really taught me a lot about team effort and how to get along with others. I also never learned how much I love gardening and eating fresh vegetables until I went through these experiences. I tend to get bored really easily, so thankfully there's always something to be doing at the SOL garden. In fact, Miles, the guy who runs the garden, talked to me about planting mushrooms here soon, so I'll be anxiously looking forward to that. 

Obesity in America

            Back in 2012, New York put a ban on 32-ounce sodas in an effort to combat America’s ever growing obesity epidemic. However, the ban enraged many politicians, making this an extremely controversial topic. In James Suroweicki’s article, “Downsizing Supersize,” he reflects upon the ban and argues that although it may upset the majority of people, it is very likely to work.

            Surowiecki appeals to the reader by using a purely logical appeal. He references many different psychological findings to show that the ban would be extremely effective in that it will make it harder for individuals to get a 32-ounce serving if they have to buy two 16-ounce servings. Surowiecki uses the M&M test as an example, which “suggests that most of us don’t have a fixed idea of how much we want; instead, we look to outside cues-like the size of a package or cup-to instruct us.” (Surowiecki 124)

            Everyone can agree that Asians tend to be a lot thinner than Americans. This is largely due to the difference in portion sizes. When you go to an Asian country, the portion sizes are immensely smaller than they are here. In fact, the smallest cup size here is the largest size in Asia. You can imagine my family’s astonishment when I was 10 years old, visiting the Philippines, ordering a large ice cream cup. “Are you serious? Can you really eat that much,” My relatives would ask me. And I would just tell them that I was used to that serving size.

            That being said, Surowiecki makes a valid point when he states that changing the size of our portions will make a big impact, as well as making it harder for individuals to obtain over-excessive amounts of food to intake.

            Dhruv Khullar’s argues a similar point in his article, “Why Shame won’t stop Obesity.” Just like Surowiecki, he discusses a states attempt to combat obesity in America. However, he disagrees with Georgia’s ‘fat campaign.’ Khullar also uses psychological approaches in order to create a logical appeal to the reader.

            Georgias campaign in order to stop obesity was to air fat shaming commercials on TV. Khullar disagrees with such campaigns by stating that, “it increases the stigma on those already struggling with the psychological consequences of being overweight, and shifts the focus of obesity control efforts to personal responsibility at a time when, for many individuals, options for improving eating habits may be limited.” (Khullar 128) This creates not only a logical appeal, but also an ethical one by connecting to human experiences.

            Instead of totally disagreeing with the campaigning, Khullar gives alternative options to the problem. The three initiatives he lays out are to, “provide monetary incentives to promote the production of and access to fresh and healthy food,” “minimize junk food advertising,” and to “center on education and empowering youth to make informed decisions.” (Khullar 129) The initiatives the author lays out make the article a lot more persuasive in that he not only addresses why there’s a problem, but also comes up with reasonable solutions.

            I, personally, agree with both the articles in that obesity has become a serious problem in America. I think that if we promote healthy lifestyles, then we can become a happier and more productive nation.