"Dear Irked, smug condescension is my middle name. That means we may be long-lost siblings!"
Hmmm... could very well be. I think my dad got around a bit in his youth, but that's neither here nor there.
"the marginalization corrupts the marginalized as well as those doing the marginalization. Only the marginalized take the brunt of it and pay a stiff price. And if this isnt sad, I dont know what is."
I don't agree at all. I don't think that it works that way. Without even going into the suffering of the food animals (who REALLY take the brunt of the burden where meat is concerned) I think you've defined the meat/no-meat decision societally rather than individually -- and it's on the individual level that people make these decisions. It doesn't matter what the underlying motivation, really. One makes a cost/benefit analysis: is eating this meat going to bring me enough pleasure to counteract the negative feelings associated with eating it? How you answer that is completely personal. Yeah, it sucks that my feelings lead me to make a sacrifice that others don't bother to make, and I really think the world would be nicer if everyone agreed with me. That's life. I don't drive an SUV either. My point is, that it would bother me to eat meat more than it would taste good. Whether that's sad or not depends on who you are, but I don't think it's fair to make judgements about other people's decisions. It's like saying that it's sad that some people attend church on Sunday and miss out on sleeping late or watching football. Or it's sad that some silly people scrimp and save to send their kids to college when they could have a nice car or a bigger house instead. It's all a trade-off and everyone has to choose what matters.