Guilt Free Pleasures: An Analysis of Fraser's Why I stopped being a Vegetarian - Essay Example

Guilt Free Pleasures: An Analysis of Fraser's “ Why I stopped being a Vegetarian”. Nutritionists often describe vegetarianism as the practice of consuming a diet free of fish, beef, and chicken. Most vegetarians eat fruits and vegetables, or whole-wheat cereals (Hayman et al 129). As a result, a majority of meat-eaters assume vegetarians are abnormal compared to the rest of society. However, some people become a vegetarian to lead a healthier lifestyle. In Laura Fraser's article, “Why I stopped being a Vegetarian”, the author effectively uses ethos, to assert her reasons. She tells her personal story in a bit not only to inform but also to entertain her audience. Her aim was to gain the reader’s attention especially through his funny descriptions of her life. She does this by producing an essay that is not jaded, and this is an added advantage. Since Fraser was at one time one person with different ambitions and preferences and then another, this gives her credibility of knowing what she really wants to put across (Hayman et al 82). This paper would analyze why Laura became a vegetarian, how difficult it was to become one, and why she is no longer a vegetarian. To begin with, Fraser's claim to ethos is apparent through a personal narrative to demonstrate the inconveniences of attempting to become a vegetarian. For example, in the beginning of the article she states, “I had been a Vegetarian for fifteen years” (Fraser). As an individual with, over a decade of experience, she is able to build credibility for being a vegetarian in a culture that perceives vegetarianism being beneficial to one's health and being. In addition, Fraser is genuine and realistic. She explains the choices that lead her to become a vegetarian. According to the author, her journey began in college (Hayman et al 65). She admits the first motivating factor was due, in part, because she was a poor student. She states, “Meat was more important than lentils, and I was broke, or broke enough to choose to spend my limited budget on other classes of ingestible” (Fraser). Fraser's admission of the ambiguity of her own choices is ethical and allows her to connect with the readers. Moreover, through her narrator, Laura claims that she was living her life as mega carnivore and thus to her it was fundamental and interesting to see how the other side of life without meat would turn out to be. Chiefly, she says ‘…I thought it would be interesting to see how the other side ‘lives’’ (Fraser). Laura is just being practical (Hayman et al 81). In this statement, what she insinuates is that she was not that strict vegetarian. She would not eat chicken but would have a taste of fish and some spices of dairy products. One would believe that her desire to hop into the other side of meat world could not leave her meditation since probably she would make sumptuous and great dinners without even having a test, a life that would seem so good and tempting. Therefore, her push to the other side was a valid reason in trying to express how difficult it was to be a vegetarian. As prove to this hopping into the meat world, Laura was by the time in College. In her school, meat was too expensive compared to those who ate vegetable food products. This made her, probably, make that moral choice and stay a vegetarian while in school a reason why she is now coming back to the eating meat. Best of this choice is that she attained a healthy lifestyle. In addition, Laura’s article is an attempt to inform the reader on how it is not bad if one eats meat and how it can be of benefit to a person without seeming cannibalistic. As an illustration, she explains how her friend silenced her deep vegetarian questioning (Hayman et al 104). She says ‘…one day a friend of mine ordered roasted rosemary chicken for two. I thought I would try just a bite’ (Fraser). In her completely vegetarian philosophies, Laura claims that she out rightly devoured the chicken, ripping it apart like a starving hyena. It is this experiment that she proclaims that roasted meat is not all that bad for consumption even though one is a vegetarian. She realized chicken was wonderful. Humorously, Laura asserts her claim by prophesying the advances of nutritionist who advise patients to listen to their body. She justifies her switch to eating meat as guided by the feel of her body, which was at the moment shouting meat. As ridiculous as it may seem, she says that in her body there was those bass note playing in her body ‘…to balance out all those soprano carbohydrates’ (Fraser). Laura claims that one can move from his/her situation into another by the virtue that he seeks body satisfaction, a reason not all bad for vegetarians (Hayman et al 69). It is not all about claiming the low-cholesterol accolades but balancing one’s bodily desire through one’s habits of eating. In addition, Laura claims that her life a vegetarian had cut her off from something she truly enjoys. For example, she says ‘I had been anti-social’ (Fraser). She reminisces the many times she made hostesses uncomfortable during cocktails and dinner parties. She claims that his habits proved to be costly to colleagues and friends as they had to go extra mile to prepare something that would fit her apart from meat. She refers as anti-social to this life and being selfish. She cannot pretend the dissatisfaction she caused to her Italians friends when a special local sausage brought to her to get returned. This led to the mortification of her Italian friends. Therefore, Laura’s message is that if eating food is socially conscious act, then a person should be conscious of the society with which he/she stays. This includes animals. This was her justification of going back to eating meat in order to rub off the forlorn face of her boyfriend who kept on wishing ‘If only I had a girlfriend who ate meat?’ In conclusion, Fraser becoming a vegetarian was not an overt thing, but it was something that she had to do. She at times explains how she grew up as a white girl with nothing to differentiate her. Her other reason at the time was to prove she was not a lesbian. At this point, she acknowledges the fallacy in her argument by choosing the most radical lifestyle as she was growing up. Instead of being a guy, she chose to be a vegetarian. Just the same way of shifting back into eating meat, the change and being something different from your former gave her confidence in that society. The author's tone really adds up to Laura’s descriptive. Her descriptions are easy to relate to making readers feel as though talking to a friend. This helps her get her point of view across through such a personal story hence helps readers understand where she is coming from and why she needed a change (Hayman et al 78). Work cited Fraser, Laura. Why I Stopped being a vegetarian. Jan 7, 2000. Web. 26 Nov. 2013. Hayman, Laura L, Margaret M. Mahon, and J R. Turner. Health and Behavior in Childhood and Adolescence. New York: Springer Pub, 2002. Internet resource. Read More