I've met people with PhDs in biology who were a little vague on where mammal begins and ends
and people who knew calculus but couldn't have figured out the angles in an octagonal frame if their life depended on it.
Right. It's lovely and natural, produced by a rumpled farmer in dirty bluejeans with furrows in his cheeks deeper than the ones in his fields, as opposed to the dirty nasty lettuce produced in the horrible giant monoculture field with the migrant laborers and the giant pesticide sprinklers. I know because the sign in the aisle at Whole Foods tells me so.
Giving a shit about the environment, or at least talking about giving a shit about the environment while feelingly mildly guilty about how little one does to live up to one's purported ideals, is a very, very important bourgeois value.
Not that's it's easy to go reaching for something 2-3 times more expensive, even when you know you ought to. It's like free-range eggs, that way, or like eating non-cannibalistic beef.
Yes, that's why poor people don't do it. Because they spend a bigger chunk of their total income on food, and you can get a lot more calories, and more pleasure, out of a lot less than it costs to live on organic, humanely and sustainably-raised food.
But, like I said, in 21st-century America, caring about the provenance of one's vegetables and whether or not the farmer was a decent fellow to one's burger is very, very bourgie.
Dude, our foremothers didn't spend whole weeks in August napalming themselves with boiling jam because they got a kick out of it or because it made them feel virtuous; they did it because they were poor and they needed to make use of every scrap they could wrench from the dirt in order to get by.
« Older Hoops, bellydance, circus, burlesque, fire, LEDs, ... | Herbie Hancock delivers a TED ... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Buy a Shirt