> "many" -- vegetarians are so for the moral/ethical reason
> of reducing the suffering of animals).
I've actually found that many vegetarians are inarticulate about their preference. Of the three types I listed, I encounter them about equally. I'm not an expert on "most" or even "many" vegetarians; all I have is my inquisitive self and those who agree to
But I'll tell you this: it's not rare to encounter people who say things like "meat has no flavor that can't be duplicated with spices" -- and other kinds of things that are just so far out of the realm of seriousness that it's not even worth considering.
And I will say that so far, none of those who I have encountered that say they wish to "reduce animal suffering" -- including you -- can clearly articulate what they would do in the face of such reduced suffering (which clearly exists, and I support personally).
Your answer: I'm uninterested in eating.
*shrug*
Or as the kids say: what *ever*, dude.
> I agree that LBOsters interaction with vegetarians is
> limited to the NY/SF/etc varieties, but I am not sure how
> they can then limit the conclusions they draw about
> vegetarianism as a whole.
I doubt highly that anyone expressing frustration here with vegetarians are talking about "vegetarianism as a whole" -- I can speak for myself that I'm only talking about the annoying parts of the movement :-)
> If and when you meet me, you will realise I am not a person much into
> eating ;-).
So perhaps you are part of the other group then ("borderline eating disorder")?
/jordan