4 ms·

the japanification of the usa has been rising in terms of an aging population. maybe this is the rising of herbivore men here too?

fao_ 5y ago
The idea that single people, or people who earn less, don't eat meat is not just a non-sequitur, it is also factually wrong. Poor people consume more fast food, which has an order of magnitude less preparation time (thus saving time when you're overworked with your several extremely high-stress high-stakes job), and an order of magnitude more calories per dollar[1], and the majority of fast foods on the market contain meat. [1] https://www.brookings.edu/research/weight-and-social-mobility-taking-the-long-view-on-childhood-obesity/ https://www.brookings.edu/research/weight-and-social-mobilit...
- ThrowawayR2 5y ago
  "Herbivore men" doesn't refer to vegans; it's a translation of the Japanese term 草食男子, the definition of which varies but which largely seems to refer to men who have no interest in romance or getting married. For more nuance, refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbivore_men https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbivore_men
- StatFallacieSuk 5y ago
  The other commentor has already pointed out how the phrase has went over your head, so I'll be picking apart your stats argument, to beat a dead horse. You're going to have to qualify why "poor people" are relevant. Do you have a definition for poor people? Is it the federal (imo wrong) definition of some >$20k/yr income? Or perhaps one with more detail like people that work dead-end jobs, live paycheck-to-paycheck, and are saddled in debt? Second, I'm not going to lambaste you for posting a journalistic summary of research (which in-and-of-itself is just a biased interpretation of many studies, which themselves are similarly biased interpretations of data -- hell, it's like a derivative), but I will lambaste you for picking an article that doesn't have any significant mention (at all) about food choices, much less what these "poors" actually eat. Or even the simple "fact" that I cannot find anything in that article about "calories" or "dollar" or anything more than a single sentence saying, paraphrased, "poors are more likely to be fat because healthy food is expensive." And third, you're just conjecturing and jumping from point to point, without any real evidece. Here's my take: poors eat a lot of processed food, because it feels good, saves time, and -- on the surface -- seems cheaper. Do poors eat less meat, or no meat at all? I have known only a couple of poors to eat any significant portion of meat, and only because they were in the physical trades, where protein and creatine intake matter. The poors with less physical occupations simply subsist on processed foods rich in carbohydrates. t. a former poor

fao_ 5y ago

The idea that single people, or people who earn less, don't eat meat is not just a non-sequitur, it is also factually wrong. Poor people consume more fast food, which has an order of magnitude less preparation time (thus saving time when you're overworked with your several extremely high-stress high-stakes job), and an order of magnitude more calories per dollar[1], and the majority of fast foods on the market contain meat. [1] https://www.brookings.edu/research/weight-and-social-mobility-taking-the-long-view-on-childhood-obesity/ https://www.brookings.edu/research/weight-and-social-mobilit...

ThrowawayR2 5y ago
"Herbivore men" doesn't refer to vegans; it's a translation of the Japanese term 草食男子, the definition of which varies but which largely seems to refer to men who have no interest in romance or getting married. For more nuance, refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbivore_men https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbivore_men
StatFallacieSuk 5y ago
The other commentor has already pointed out how the phrase has went over your head, so I'll be picking apart your stats argument, to beat a dead horse. You're going to have to qualify why "poor people" are relevant. Do you have a definition for poor people? Is it the federal (imo wrong) definition of some >$20k/yr income? Or perhaps one with more detail like people that work dead-end jobs, live paycheck-to-paycheck, and are saddled in debt? Second, I'm not going to lambaste you for posting a journalistic summary of research (which in-and-of-itself is just a biased interpretation of many studies, which themselves are similarly biased interpretations of data -- hell, it's like a derivative), but I will lambaste you for picking an article that doesn't have any significant mention (at all) about food choices, much less what these "poors" actually eat. Or even the simple "fact" that I cannot find anything in that article about "calories" or "dollar" or anything more than a single sentence saying, paraphrased, "poors are more likely to be fat because healthy food is expensive." And third, you're just conjecturing and jumping from point to point, without any real evidece. Here's my take: poors eat a lot of processed food, because it feels good, saves time, and -- on the surface -- seems cheaper. Do poors eat less meat, or no meat at all? I have known only a couple of poors to eat any significant portion of meat, and only because they were in the physical trades, where protein and creatine intake matter. The poors with less physical occupations simply subsist on processed foods rich in carbohydrates. t. a former poor