M.E.A.T. Club Responds to Angry Vegans

If you scroll through the posts for the last few months you’ll notice that one called “Eeat M.E.A.T.” has 26 comments–more than any other. That’s because a group of outraged vegans has found a new and innovative use for the Wesleying comments section: starting turf wars.

In reaction to the then upcoming Mankind Eating Animals Together (M.E.A.T) barbecue, several upperclassmen who wish to remain anonymous formed a group called the Vegan Deth Squad (VDS) and threatened to sabotage the event.

“PLAN ON ME SHOWING UP WITH A CAN OF RED PAINT,” one of the members writes in an initial comment.

After a few comments such as “throwing paint at people does not make them eat less meat,” and “the earth will have hir revenge,” Ryan Brill ’10, founder and president of the M.E.A.T. club, responded.

“Are you guys seriously going to hate on the fact that people are eating meat together?” Brill said. “There are two vegetarian clubs on campus, but no one goes up to them and sprays them with red paint, or criticizes them for their choice of food. Please keep an open mind to other people’s diets, and stop criticizing them for a simple lifestyle choice.”

But Brill’s response did not cool things down–comments started getting longer and more ruthless. Here is the VDS’ response to Brill’s comment:

“My all-too-obvious reply: Is slavery simply a lifestyle choice?” they wrote. “The anti-intellectual, anti-critical form of conservatism adopted by the previous poster is eroding our culture as more and more young people choose to simply stop giving a shit, divorcing their ‘abstract’ knowledge of the real world from their daily lives. This ethico-political downward spiral can have no other result besides the continued subjugation of the aforementioned humyns and animals under the myriad forms of slavery we find in Contemporary Amerika, for example…”

Ultimately, the VDS revealed what the problem at hand is: they see the M.E.A.T. club as an unavoidably political statement that disparages vegans and vegetarians.

“This group obviously represents a deliberate attempt to bait the vegetarian/vegan community,” the VDS wrote. “They’re celebrating the fact that meat eaters freely operate everywhere and [they’re] mocking us outright. I dont go into peoples homes and fuck with them when theyre eating dinner, but if a group is explicitly challenging us we arent going to sit idly by.”

Brill responded:

“You guys, I did not start the M.E.A.T. club as ‘a deliberate attempt to bait the vegetarian / vegan community,’ ” he wrote. “I started it because myself and others like eating meat, and I’d like to use that common interest to bring together various groups on the campus. It seems to me that you guys are trying your hardest to vilify us, while we have not made any statements against vegetarianism or veganism…I feel like people should be able to start a cooking club at Wesleyan without a tirade of criticism. Just let us cook.”

Eventually, the Vegan Deth Squad, calmed by Brill’s diplomatic langage, decided to let the grill go on without conflict. But the threat remained.

“The loose network of vegan death squad affiliates talked it over and decided to let this one slide since you’re being so non-confrontational,” they wrote. “[But] if this escalates beyond a bunch of white men eating burgers on the hill and we feel you’ve challenged or provoked us directly then next time the coals won’t burn so hot.”

After the internet hysteria, Brill contacted the VDS and asked to meet with them. In a tense meeting in Fauver Room 107, the VDS made it clear that if the M.E.A.T. club did not change its name, they would have to resort to less diplomatic options.

In response, the M.E.A.T. club has now changed it’s name to (drum roll): The Mankind Eating Everything Together (M.E.E.T) Club.

“The existence of the M.E.A.T. (Mankind Eating Animals Together) club was construed by some to be a political statement against vegetarianism and veganism,” Brill writes on the group’s facebook page. “Making such a statement was not the intent of our club, so we have changed the name to M.E.E.T. (Mankind Eating Everything Together) club. This name is more fitting to the true purpose of the club, which is to bring people from different social groups together over a common activity. I also like the name better.”

The M.E.E.T. club will grill from 1-5 today, Friday, on Foss Hill. Though there won’t be any veggie burgers for sale, you can always bring your own, Brill says. If you’re interested in reading the entire controversial comments section, go here: http://wesleying.blogspot.com/2007/04/eat-meat.html

(Visited 14 times, 1 visits today)

80 thoughts on “M.E.A.T. Club Responds to Angry Vegans

  1. Anonymous

    god is dead.and the last thing ze said to me was “i hated you all anyways.”VDS is the way of the future. VDS knows history is a swift and brutal force in these times of crisis.You do not join the VDS, you are either fighting with us, or you are not.–VDS

  2. Anonymous

    god is dead.
    and the last thing ze said to me was “i hated you all anyways.”

    VDS is the way of the future.
    VDS knows history is a swift and brutal force in these times of crisis.
    You do not join the VDS, you are either fighting with us, or you are not.

    –VDS

  3. Anonymous

    VEGAN DICTATORSHIP IS THE ONLY SOLUTION. WE NEED A POLICE FORCE TO RUTHLESSLY SUPPRESS PUBLIC OPINION AND CONTROL THE MINDLESS HERD OF FLESH ADDICTS. VDS WILL LEAD US INTO A GLORIOUS FUTURE. START DIGGING THE GRAVES.

  4. Anonymous

    VEGAN DICTATORSHIP IS THE ONLY SOLUTION. WE NEED A POLICE FORCE TO RUTHLESSLY SUPPRESS PUBLIC OPINION AND CONTROL THE MINDLESS HERD OF FLESH ADDICTS.

    VDS WILL LEAD US INTO A GLORIOUS FUTURE. START DIGGING THE GRAVES.

  5. Anonymous

    above poster, people like you should be rounded up put in a hole together. luckily VDS is leading the charge

  6. Anonymous

    above poster, people like you should be rounded up put in a hole together. luckily VDS is leading the charge

  7. Anonymous

    You would think that Peter Singer would be against abortion- especially post-birth abortion- if he were against causing pain for beings that can feel pain… yet he’s not…And yes, I’m glad someone acknowledged the God-given capacity of human morality. Humans are the highest form of life, putting us above animals, whom God put us in charge of. So, you know, it’s up to each individual person to decide which animals he/she would like to keep as pets and which animals he/she would like to have for dinner.<3 Venerial Disease Squad

  8. Anonymous

    You would think that Peter Singer would be against abortion- especially post-birth abortion- if he were against causing pain for beings that can feel pain… yet he’s not…

    And yes, I’m glad someone acknowledged the God-given capacity of human morality. Humans are the highest form of life, putting us above animals, whom God put us in charge of. So, you know, it’s up to each individual person to decide which animals he/she would like to keep as pets and which animals he/she would like to have for dinner.

    <3 Venerial Disease Squad

  9. Anonymous

    convincing people to go vegetarian is a waste of time. its better to just use terrorism and force them to comply<3 VDS

  10. Anonymous

    convincing people to go vegetarian is a waste of time. its better to just use terrorism and force them to comply

    <3 VDS

  11. Anonymous

    A previous comment says:”are you seriously still gonna use the ‘well, other animals eat meat…’ argument?”This is the wrong way to convince people to be vegetarians. But generally, other animals do lots of things humans generally believe to be wrong (like female spiders eating males after reproducing with them. watch planet earth for more examples!)So just because other animals don’t have the capacity for morality doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t either.The other point I wanted to respond to was the one about animals not being human. Singer’s argument is that we shouldn’t cause pain to things that can feel pain, whether human or not. The same way it would be morally wrong to needlessly cause pain to a severely mentally retarded person with the same cognitive abilities as an animal, it is also wrong to cause pain to an animal when you can avoid doing so.-jacob

  12. Anonymous

    A previous comment says:
    “are you seriously still gonna use the ‘well, other animals eat meat…’ argument?”

    This is the wrong way to convince people to be vegetarians.

    But generally, other animals do lots of things humans generally believe to be wrong (like female spiders eating males after reproducing with them. watch planet earth for more examples!)

    So just because other animals don’t have the capacity for morality doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t either.

    The other point I wanted to respond to was the one about animals not being human. Singer’s argument is that we shouldn’t cause pain to things that can feel pain, whether human or not. The same way it would be morally wrong to needlessly cause pain to a severely mentally retarded person with the same cognitive abilities as an animal, it is also wrong to cause pain to an animal when you can avoid doing so.

    -jacob

  13. Anonymous

    dear poster above the previous post by brian:despite the abundance of information floating around this forum regarding vegan/vegetarian lifestyle choices, are you seriously still gonna use the “well, other animals eat meat…” argument?at this point it feels like a complete waste of typing to bother explaining the “veg defense” to you.i would not particularly expect you to even bother reading the response.if you’d like more information on this topic,READ STUFF ON TEH INTARNET ITS RITE IN FRONT OF U

  14. Anonymous

    dear poster above the previous post by brian:

    despite the abundance of information floating around this forum regarding vegan/vegetarian lifestyle choices, are you seriously still gonna use the “well, other animals eat meat…” argument?

    at this point it feels like a complete waste of typing to bother explaining the “veg defense” to you.

    i would not particularly expect you to even bother reading the response.

    if you’d like more information on this topic,
    READ STUFF ON TEH INTARNET ITS RITE IN FRONT OF U

  15. Anonymous

    Here are some novel ideas:Q: What qualifies a being as human?A: When the being is the result of sperm from a male homo sapien fertilizing an egg from a female homo sapien.Q: What qualifies a being as not human?A: When the being is not the result of the process mentioned above (e.g. cows, etc.)Thus, because babies are human and cows, etc. are not, meat-eating cannot be turned around and used to justify infanticide.I will continue to eat meat. If eating meat is morally wrong, please protest non-human meat-eaters as well. I encourage you to go yell at a lion eating its prey for instance… maybe pour some red paint on it… try to rescue the animal it’s killing or eating at the moment. Let me know how that goes.

  16. Anonymous

    Here are some novel ideas:
    Q: What qualifies a being as human?
    A: When the being is the result of sperm from a male homo sapien fertilizing an egg from a female homo sapien.
    Q: What qualifies a being as not human?
    A: When the being is not the result of the process mentioned above (e.g. cows, etc.)

    Thus, because babies are human and cows, etc. are not, meat-eating cannot be turned around and used to justify infanticide.

    I will continue to eat meat. If eating meat is morally wrong, please protest non-human meat-eaters as well. I encourage you to go yell at a lion eating its prey for instance… maybe pour some red paint on it… try to rescue the animal it’s killing or eating at the moment. Let me know how that goes.

  17. Anonymous

    Wow, you continue to demonstrate the fact that you are huge moron! Great job!Singer’s point here (and in Animal Liberation) is that any attempt by liberals/humanists to formulate an objective criterion for what qualifies as human (ability to use language, “self-awareness,” ability to form and retain memories) in order to exclude non-humans from ethical consideration will inevitably exclude certain individuals (such as newborns, alzheimer patients, etc.) that liberals/humanists will be uncomfortable deny moral worth. Nowhere does he actually advocate baby-killing; he’s just saying that most defenses of meat-eating could also be turned around and used to justify infanticide.

  18. Anonymous

    Wow, you continue to demonstrate the fact that you are huge moron! Great job!

    Singer’s point here (and in Animal Liberation) is that any attempt by liberals/humanists to formulate an objective criterion for what qualifies as human (ability to use language, “self-awareness,” ability to form and retain memories) in order to exclude non-humans from ethical consideration will inevitably exclude certain individuals (such as newborns, alzheimer patients, etc.) that liberals/humanists will be uncomfortable deny moral worth. Nowhere does he actually advocate baby-killing; he’s just saying that most defenses of meat-eating could also be turned around and used to justify infanticide.

  19. Anonymous

    Wow, my bad… I should have checked out wikipedia, which any person… and probably some non-persons… where biased opinions can write…Singer is brilliant!He considers newborn babies to be less important beings than adults… AND he considers people with Alzheimer’s Disease to be non-humans! I should have thought of this myself.Would anyone like to join me in a crusade to go around the world killing all newborn babies and elderly “non-persons” with Alzheimer’s Disease? Together we can make the world a better place.

  20. Anonymous

    Wow, my bad… I should have checked out wikipedia, which any person… and probably some non-persons… where biased opinions can write…
    Singer is brilliant!
    He considers newborn babies to be less important beings than adults… AND he considers people with Alzheimer’s Disease to be non-humans! I should have thought of this myself.

    Would anyone like to join me in a crusade to go around the world killing all newborn babies and elderly “non-persons” with Alzheimer’s Disease? Together we can make the world a better place.

  21. Anonymous

    I swear to God (not that Ze exists), if I have to hear the “everywhere else this practice goes completely unquestioned so you shouldn’t question it either” argument one more time on this campus, I’m going to take a big shit on the responsible jackass’ head.

  22. Anonymous

    I swear to God (not that Ze exists), if I have to hear the “everywhere else this practice goes completely unquestioned so you shouldn’t question it either” argument one more time on this campus, I’m going to take a big shit on the responsible jackass’ head.

Comments are closed.