Food critic William Sitwell has resigned aseditor of Waitrose’s in-house magazine following a row over his astonishinglyhostile response to a freelance journalist who proposed a series of articles onveganism.

食物评论家威廉·西特韦尔已经辞去了维特罗斯内部杂志主编的职位，他陷入了对一个自由撰稿记者的敌意反应引发的骂战，后者针对素食主义投稿了一系列文章。

（译注：维特罗斯（Waitrose）为英国连锁超市品牌）

A statement from the food retailer saidthat John Brown Media – which produces the Waitrose & Partners FoodMagazine – had announced Sitwell would step down as editor of Waitrose &Partners Food magazine with immediate effect. The statement added:

这家食品零售商的一份声明称，发行《维特罗斯及合伙人食品杂志》的约翰布朗媒体已经宣布西特韦尔将不再担任《维特罗斯及合伙人食品杂志》主编的职务，即刻生效。这份声明还说：

In the light of William’s recent emailremarks, we’ve told John Brown Media that we believe this is the right andproper move - we will be working with them to appoint a new editor for themagazine. We have had a relationship with William for almost 20 years and aregrateful for his contribution to our business over that time.

鉴于威廉最近电子邮件中的评论，我们已经告知约翰布朗媒体，我们相信这是正确且适当的举措，我们将会和他们共同协作，给杂志委派一位新主编。我们与威廉保有合作关系差不多20年了，对于他在这段时间内对我们生意的贡献我们表示感谢。

The row erupted after freelance journalistSelene Nelson pitched a series on “plant-based recipes” to the magazine, giventhe rise in popularity of vegan products in recent years. Waitrose, like manyUK supermarkets, has recently expanded its vegan product range and, asSitwell’s own article in The Times in January 2018 noted – in less thanwelcoming terms – the number of vegan cookbooks available has also grownconsiderably.

由于近年来素食产品越发流行，自由撰稿记者赛琳娜·尼尔森向这份杂志投了一系列关于“植物性食谱”的稿子，之后争吵就爆发了。就像很多英国超市一样，维特罗斯近年来扩大了其素食产品的范围，如同西特韦尔自己于2018年1月（以不那么讨喜的措辞）发表在《泰晤士报》的文章里注意到的那样，触手可及的素食烹调书数量的增长也很是可观。

So Nelson’s proposal seemed pitch-perfect.Sitwell’s response, however, was decidedly off-key:

所以尼尔森的投稿似乎是非常应景的。然而，西特韦尔作出的坚决回应却并不和谐：

How about a series on killing vegans, oneby one. Ways to trap them? How to interrogate them properly? Expose theirhypocrisy? Force-feed them meat? Make them eat steak and drink red wine?

一个接着一个连串地杀掉纯素食主义者如何？用各种方法给他们下套如何？如何恰当地质问他们？暴露他们的伪善？强制喂他们吃肉？逼他们吃牛排饮红酒？

As veganism is ever more routinelyencountered in daily life, hackneyed media stereotypes of vegans no longerresonate as they once did. Anti-vegan media hostility isn’t anything new.Sociological research published in 2011 documented how UK newspapers discreditveganism through ridicule, with vegans variously stereotyped as angry,militant, self-denying, sentimental, faddy, or joyless. As more people tryveganism, meet vegans and encounter vegan-friendly products and practices indaily life, the more tone deaf these stereotypes sound.

由于在日常生活中接触到纯素食主义成了更寻常的事了，媒体对纯素食主义者老生常谈的成见不再能像从前那样得到共鸣了。反纯素食主义媒体的恶意完全不是什么新鲜事了。2011年发表的社会学研究，记录了英国报纸是如何通过讥讽败坏素食主义名声的，以花样编排把素食主义者涂抹成狂躁、好斗、自我否定、多愁善感、好赶时髦、或是沉闷无趣。随着越多的人去尝试纯素食，碰到纯素食者，乃至接触纯素食产品并在日常生活中实践，这些成见听上去越是索然无味。

Sitwell’s vitriol contrasts markedly withthe polite restraint of Nelson’s rejoinder, in which she ironically expressedinterest “in exploring why just the mention of veganism seems to make somepeople so hostile”. The exchange is arguably emblematic of the contemporaryplague of entitled anger that toxifies public discourse whenever entitlement ischallenged, however politely.

西特韦尔的尖刻与尼尔森礼貌克制的反驳形成了鲜明的对比，在反驳中她讽刺地表达了对于“探究为什么仅仅是提及纯素食主义就会让某些人如此心怀敌意”的兴趣。这场交手可以认为是现下“慷慨一怒”时代病的象征，每当资格和权利受到挑战（不管方式上多么礼貌），这种愤怒就会毒化公共话语。

One aspect of threatened entitlement in anon-vegan society is the presumed right to consume the bodies of other animals.In that context, research has suggested that vegans prompt defensiveness amongnon-vegans by implying a failure to act on a moral issue. Unresolved guiltplays out along a continuum ranging from framing one’s non-vegan practices as“moderate” (“I don’t eat much meat”) to anger and hostility towards vegans(rhetorically shooting the messenger, the way Sitwell appears to have done).The range, style and tone of these defensive responses are wearyingly familiarto vegans.

在一个非纯素食者社会中，被威胁权利中的一个方面就是推定的、吃掉其他动物身体的权利。在那种语境中，研究已经表明：素食主义者通过暗示出非素食主义者无力遵照某个道德议题行事，会在他们中间激起防卫心理。不得疏解的负罪感在连续而统一的区间内发作，范围从把非素食主义者的做法伪饰为“适度的”（“我没有吃很多肉”），到针对素食主义者的愤怒和敌意（似乎就是西特韦尔已经干过的以文辞射杀信使的方式）。这些防御反应的范围、类型和语气是素食主义者熟悉到很厌烦的。

Food practices are socially powerfulmarkers of social and cultural identity, making actual or implied criticism ofthem personally and hurtfully felt. Meat-eating in particular has been closelyimplicated in the construction ofmasculine identity. Challenging the dominance of non-vegan practices threatensthose social and cultural identities that are most closely dependent upon them.

饮食实践在社会上是社会和文化认同的有力标志，对他们个人作出真切的或是暗示性的批判，他们便会感觉到受伤。尤其是吃肉，一直都和男性身份认同的构建有着紧密联系。挑战非素食主义实践的统治地位，会威胁到那些其社会和文化认同最紧密依赖它们的人群。

Poor taste

很差的品位

Criticism of Sitwell’s email led to thewheeling out of a stereotype of vegan humourlessness. We have written elsewhereabout how humour is used in popular culture to retrench oppressive powerrelations. Framing the expression of oppressive power relations as “humour”attempts to insulate it against critique, but we should remain alert to thepotency and power dynamics of such “jokes”.

对西特韦尔电邮的批判导致了纯素食者没有幽默感成见的形成。我们已在别处著述过，幽默是如何在流行文化中被用于减消压迫性权力关系的。把压迫性权力关系涂抹成“幽默”来表达，企图把它同批判隔绝开来，但对于此类“笑话”的效能和权力动态，我们应该保持警惕。

Sitwell’s own initial apology denied theethical basis of veganism itself: “I love and respect people of all appetites,be they vegan, vegetarian or meat eaters – which I show week in week outthrough my writing, editing and broadcasting.” Veganism here is reduced to ataste preference, or consumer disposition – just one dietary option amongseveral – rather than an ethical imperative directed towards eliminating thehuman exploitation of other animals.

西特韦尔最初作出的道歉否认了素食主义本身的伦理基础：“我热爱并尊重饮食嗜好各异的人们，无论是纯素食者、素食者还是食肉者，这一点在我周复一周的写作、编辑和广播中都有所体现。”在这里素食主义被降格为一种口味偏好，或是一种消费者的倾向，即只是若干种饮食选项之中的一种，而非发自伦理，直指消灭人类对其他动物剥削的一种定向需要。

In his initial response, Sitwell says hisprevious “good behaviour” is evidence that this recent episode is notrepresentative of his attitude and he apologises for offence taken by others,rather than his offensive action. But in doing this, he refuses to takeresponsibility for his own behaviour. Moreover, it provides a textbook exampleof a victim-blaming non-apology, in this case by using yet another anti-veganstereotype – over-sensitivity: “I apologise profusely to anyone who has beenoffended or upset by this.” Vegans (the unspecified “anyone”) are implicitlyprimed to take offence, while Sitwell’s own actions are rhetorically positionedas intrinsically innocent (as “innocent” as a “joke”).

在他最初的回应中，西特韦尔说他先前的“良好品行”是最近这段插曲不能代表他态度的证据，而且他是为其他人的动气而道歉，而不是为其自身的行为。但在做这件事情的时候，他拒绝为他自己的行为负责。此外，这也提供了一个教科书式的去指责受害者的非道歉行为的案例，在本案例中是通过利用另一个反素食主义的成见，即过度敏感：“我毫无保留地为任何因此而生气或心烦的人道歉”。纯素食者（即未明确指明的“任何人”）被暗示为一点就炸，而西特韦尔自身的行为被巧言归置于本质上的无辜（和一个“笑话”一样“无辜”）。

The joke has cost Sitwell his editing job.But his outburst has at least opened up the opportunity for some more honestdiscussion about why veganism, like many other progressive social movements,stimulates such aggressive responses.

这个笑话已经让西特韦尔付出了主编工作的代价。但他的爆发至少已经为一些更真诚的讨论创造出了机会，即为什么素食主义，如其他进很多步性的社会运动那样，会激起这种攻击性反应。

（评论区）

1、Nobody really fearsvegans but they do loathe them in the same way that many people loathe thosethat evangelise any kind of cheap and shoddy religion – because that’s whatveganism is; a cheap and shoddy religion for modern elites who are nowstruggling to display their moral superiority in any other way.

没人真的在怕纯素食者，但人们确实嫌弃他们，就和很多人嫌弃那些瞎传一些廉价又粗制滥造的宗教的人一样，因为这就是素食主义的实质，一种廉价的粗制滥造的宗教，是为那些竭尽所能、抓住任何方式来展示他们道德优越感的现代精英们准备的。

Their main problem is that they can nolonger use sexual restraint to display their moral and ethical pre-eminence inthe ways in which they once did; anyone can f*** anyone now and the moreexotic, promiscuous and incontinent one’s sexual behaviour is, the freer andmore liberated one tends to be seen. Consequently, the sublimated religiousurge towards the expression of personal sanctity and purity – particularlyamongst those who feel they’re superior to almost every other class of humanbeing - must be expressed somehow. Consequently, the puritanical, virtuesignalling, anorexic whole- food posturing of vegans is the self-flagellationdu jour for those with more time, money and privilege than is good for them.

他们主要的问题是：他们没法再像过去那样用性克制来显摆他们超群的伦理道德了，如今任何人都可以上任何人了，而且一个人的性行为越是奇异、混乱、无节制，这个人看上去就越有自由和解放的倾向。因此，为表达个体神圣和纯洁的经过升华的宗教冲动必须以某种方式表达出来，在自认为比所有其他人类阶层更优越的群体中尤其如此。因此，纯素食者那清教徒式的、标志着美德的、厌食症范儿的追求天然健康食物的姿态，对于那些拥有更多时间、金钱和特权的人来说，是种当下流行的自我鞭挞，而不是真的对他们有益。

2、I suspected thatcalling veganism a stupid middle class hobby would carry the same blasphemy lawpenalty on here as calling into question liberal climate change orthodoxy orthe widespread practise of murdering the unborn. Maybe the moderators fellasleep? Anyway, I’m off for a bacon sandwich. Catch you later.

我怀疑，在这里把素食主义称为一种愚蠢的中产阶级爱好会被处以渎神的刑罚，就像对自由主义者关于气候变化的正统说法，或是杀死未出生婴儿的通行做法表示异议一样。也许仲裁人都睡着了？不管怎样，我都要去吃培根三明治了。回头再来看。

3、There is a sense inwhich veganism (along with a number of other moral positions) is becoming amarker of social status.

有一种观点认为：素食主义者（连同很多其他的道德立场）正在变成一种社会地位的标签。

And of course no one likes being moralisedat, especially if it comes packaged with a sense of social superiority, and ispractised by the more privileged members of society - or those who seek toidentify with them.

而且显然没人喜欢说教，尤其是当它夹带一种社会优越感并且社会中更有特权的阶层或是那些东施效颦之徒在实践它的情况下。

4、I have met theoccasional cranky vegan, the sort who seek to guilt trip, but they are far fromtypical unless you seek them out on line. Why would anyone do that, Gert?

我时不时碰到过一些脾气很臭的纯素食者，追求内疚感之旅的那种，但他们没有什么代表性，除非你在网上把他们搜出来。不过为啥会有人去干这种事呢？

Most vegans and vegetarians are live andlet live people. I respect their concern for animals while I continue to eatmeat occasionally. And there is noescaping:

大部分纯素食者和素食者是与己方便也与人方便的人。我尊重他们对动物的关切，与此同时我继续时不时吃点肉。而没法逃避的是：

1) That among the factors contributing tothe destruction of forests at a time when we need them to absorb CO2 is thedemand for beef and produce to fatten livestock
2) Cattle are a major source of methane, agas that is worse for global warming than CO2.

1）当我们需要森林吸收二氧化碳时，导致森林毁灭的因素之一便是对牛肉和用来养肥家畜的农产品的需求

2）牛只是甲烷的重要来源，在导致全球变暖方面，它比二氧化碳更糟糕。

5、Veganisim has becomethe moral vanity of a cultural elite who seek to demonstrate that their wealth and overconsumption of resources isnot an environmental problem. By framing the problem of environmental damage asan individual choice, their denying their collective responsibility for contributing to the tragedy of the commons. Rejecting meat won’t keep coal in the ground, it alsowon’t do anything about the poverty thatforces people to damage the environment.It will leave you dependent onmanufactured fortified food

素食主义已然变成了一个文化精英的道德虚荣心，他们想要证明的是他们的财富以及对资源的过度消耗，而不再是一个环境问题。通过把损害环境的问题操弄成一种个人选择，他们也就否认了自己促成共业所背负的共同责任。拒绝肉食并不能把煤炭扣留在地上，对于驱使人们去损害环境的贫穷也是无所作为。这会让你依赖加工出来的强化食品。

6、Everyone makespersonal choices about what they eat - sometimes economic, sometimeshealth-related, sometimes religious, sometimes for a principle. Why pick on oneof these groups or, indeed, on any of them? And where does all the vitriol comefrom? It doesn’t seem to be based on any evidence.

关于吃什么，每个人都会作出个人的选择，有时出于经济考虑，有时关乎健康，有时因为宗教，有时是为了某种原则。说真的，为什么要去刁难这些群体中的某一个，或者任何一个呢？所有这些尖酸刻薄都是从哪儿冒出来的？似乎这并不是基于任何证据。

Mr Sitwell’s comments were definitely notfunny but rather were extremely odd. I assume that the Waitrose Food magazineis aimed at Waitrose shoppers and Mr Sitwell’s apparent refusal to cater forthe tastes of a substantial proportion of these may have had something to dowith his dismissal.

西特韦尔先生的评论绝对不好笑，反而是极端的怪异。我猜维特罗斯食品杂志针对的是顾客，而西特韦尔先生显而易见的拒绝迎合这些顾客中相当一部分人的口味，也许和他被解雇有关。

If he had the foresight to be a member ofthe NUJ, they may be able to negotiate his exit from the job more favourablybut it would seem that he more or less resigned with his bons mots.
如果他有先见之明，去成为（英国）全国记者协会的成员，他们可能还会更友好地协商他的退职，但是看起来，他被解职或多或少是因为他的珠玑妙语。

7、Of course vegans are‘nice’ people; I never said they weren’t. Indeed, I’d argue that veganism isthe very apogee of late-capitalist, neurotic, bourgeois niceness. Although,I’ve noticed, it does tend to morph into passive aggressive truculence and thenoutright hostility as soon as one questions the dogmatic orthodoxies of the veganreligion.

纯素食者当然是“好相处”的人；我从没说过他们不是。我真的主张素食主义正是晚期资本主义、神经质、布尔乔亚式美好的最高峰。然而我已经注意到的是，一旦有人质疑纯素食宗教教条主义的正统观念，它确实容易演变成被动攻击型的好斗乃至直截了当的敌意。

The idea that a vanishingly tiny minorityof wealthy, self-righteous westerners are going to have any impact on theplanetary ecosystem, and the sustainability of the food chain, by only eatingplants is preposterous. Infact the word ‘preposterous’ doesn’t quite captureit.

认为只有难以察觉的极少数富裕、自诩正义的西方人会对地球的生态系统以及食物链的可持续性产生任何影响的想法是荒谬的。事实上，“荒谬”这个词都无法完全概括。

As I said, veganism is a psychological posture,a neurotic defence mechanism if you like, to assuage the guilt of refusing torelinquish privilege; the privilege afforded to those living in the verysocieties that are largely responsible for the environmental problems we nowface. As I said before, veganism also provides a means for the socialexpression of sanctity and purity now that sexual continence can no longerfunction in that way.

如我所说，素食主义是一种心理上的姿态，如果你喜欢的话也可以说成是一种神经质的防卫机制，为的是减轻拒绝放弃特权带来的罪恶感；那些生活在这个社会中的人有能力负担得起的特权，很大程度上要为我们如今面对的环境问题负责。就像我从前说过的，素食主义也为面向社会表现神圣和纯洁提供了一种方法，既然节欲不再能以过去的那种方式起作用。

In short, if folks want to eat plants, tothe exclusion of any other food group, they can knock themselves out as far asI’m concerned. But, let’s be clear, they do it for a range of personalpsychological reasons not because it’s going to make one jot of difference tothe world we actually live in.

简而言之，如果人们为了拒绝其他任何食物群类，而想去食用植物，据我所知他们会精疲力尽的。但是让我们说清楚，他们是出于一系列个人心理原因而去这么干的，可不是因为这会对我们真正生活的世界带来一点点的改变。

8、I don’t thinkveganism is a sham - I think the basic moral impulse behind it is easilyunderstood - but I do fear that it is part of a new “bourgeois” morality basedon hypersensitivity to suffering which includes: trigger warnings, safe spaces,Microaggressions, political correctness, suppression of speech which might makepeople uncomfortable and the rest.

我不认为素食主义是骗人的，我认为其背后基本的道德冲动很容易就能理解，但我确实很害怕它会是一种新的“布尔乔亚”道德的一部分，它基于的是对苦难的过敏症，其中包括：触发警报、安全空间、微侵略、政治正确、压制那些可能会让人们不适的言论等等。

（译注：微侵略（Microaggression）指人们透过肢体语言或肢体，排挤或贬低不同人种、性别和弱势群体的现象）

Worse, those who lack this hypersensitivity(truth be told, who cannot afford to be so sensitive!) are excluded as thedeplorable poor.

更糟的是，那些没有患上这种过敏症的人（老实说就是那些没有能力为如此敏感买单的群体！）作为悲惨的穷人被排斥。

9、Fear and loathing?ROFL.
Nope. Indifference mostly.

恐惧和嫌弃？笑到打滚。
并不是。多半是不鸟他们。

10、Loathing, clearly -but fear, not proven

嫌弃是很明显了，至于恐惧，证据不足。

11、I’m with Steve hereI really do not care too much what people choose to eat or not eat. I just wishthe wouldn’t pontificate about their choice and criticise me for mine. I certainly do not feel ‘ffearand loathing’. That extreme language is what causes problems. What we eat isvery influenced by what is available and the years of agricultural and culturaldevelopment in the societies where we live. My personal choice is ‘something ofeverything and not too much of anything’ but then my childhood years were thepost war period and choice and amount were very limited. My other choice as anadult is to eat locally produced food and organic when possible made easier byhaving access in a local market.

我真的没那么在乎人们选什么或不选什么来吃。我只是希望对于他们的选择他们不要好为人师，并因为我的选择而批判我。我当然没感觉到‘恐惧和嫌弃’。造成问题的是极端的话语。我们吃的东西，受可获得的东西和我们所生活社会中多年来的农业和文化发展的影响很大。我的个人选择是‘什么都来一点，什么都别太多’，但我的童年岁月是在战后时期，那时的选择和数量都是非常有限的。作为一个成年人，我的另一个选择是吃本地生产的食物，可能的话选择有机的，借由本地超市事情就变得简单了。

12、He had to go -Waitrose’s vegan lines have grown 70% in the past year.

他必须走人，去年一年维特罗斯超市的纯素食货架排已经增长了70%。

13、We are HUMAN, theworld’s top predator. A human vegan is like a carnivore cow, it doesn’t makebiochemical or anthropological sense.

我们是人类，这个世界上的顶级掠食者。一个纯素食的人类，就如同一头食肉的奶牛。这在生物化学或人类学角度上都是讲不通的。

MDs and nutritionists will also tell you itis impossible to have a balanced diet without supplementation. That in itselfis proof the vegan diet is not a healthy one, for humans. If you are a cow (whoshouldn’t be considered vegan, due to all the insects they eat while consuminggrasses), with a GI tract designed for a high fiber diet, eating veggies makessense.

医学博士和营养学家们也会告诉你，没有补充是不可能有平衡的饮食的。这本身就证明了对于人类来说，纯素食并不是一种健康的饮食。如果你是一头奶牛（由于它们吃草的时候会吃进去各种昆虫，也不应该视其为纯素食者），有着本就为高纤维饮食设计的消化道，吃全素才是合理的。

Form follows function, it is as simple asthat.

功能决定形态，就这么简单。

Respect mother nature: Humans NEED to eatmeat. It isn’t a choice, it is a biological necessity.

请尊重自然母亲：人类需要吃肉。这不是一种选择，这是一种生物上的必然。

14、Top predator? Howmany animals have you killed for your food lately? (Or did you just browse theaisles of Tesco’s?)

顶级掠食者？你最近为了你的食物杀了多少动物？（还是说你只是浏览乐购的货架通道？）

The age of animal agriculture is well onits way out, and not a moment too soon. We can’t call ourselves a civilisedsociety while supporting the abuse and deaths of over 56 billion animals peryear. Thankfully the world is waking up to that

畜牧业的时代即将灭亡，这一刻不会太久了。当我们一边支持着虐待和杀害动物达到每年560多亿（只），我们是没法称呼自己为文明社会的。谢天谢地这个世界正在对此觉醒。

Urges are different from biological need.You can’t be vegan and be healthy at the same time. It is basic biology. After5-7 years on a vegan diet you will be depleted of many B Vitamins. This is whyso many vegans suffer from anxiety and other neurological disorders relating tobrain inflammation (high homocysteine and low B12). Later in life, as thisdepletion progresses, it can manifest as movement disorders like Parkinsons.

冲动和生理需要是不同的。你不可能成为一个纯素食者的同时又保持着健康。这是基本的生物学。经过5至7年的纯素饮食后，你将会耗尽许多维生素B。这就是为什么如此多的纯素食者遭受着焦虑和其他与大脑炎症有关的脑神经失调（高同型半胱氨酸和低B12）之苦。在之后的生活中，随着这种损耗的不断发展，它可能会表现为运动障碍，比如帕金森病。

15、But, moreimportantly, the Independent says that Vegans are younger and so have lowermortality rates. They are trumpeting “veganism is good for you” by comparingmortality rates of well-off 30-year-olds with the average omnivore population.If they are trying to sell veganism by telling lies ….

但更重要的是，《独立报》声称纯素食者更加年轻，所以死亡率更低。他们鼓吹着“素食主义对你有好处”，方法是比较30几岁富裕人口的死亡率和不偏食人口的平均死亡率。如果他们是靠扯谎来尝试推销素食主义的话...

16、No sensible farmerabuses his/her animals.
More vegan lies

没有任何一个明事理的农夫会去虐待他/她的动物。
又是纯素食者的谎言。

17、Even the NHS wasposting today (World Vegan Day) about how you can get all the nutrients youneed from a vegan diet. Both the American and British Dietetic Associationshave issued position statements that vegan diets are safe and healthy at allstages of life. I’ve been vegan for 11 years and my bloods are as healthy ifnot more so than they were before I was vegan. Do some vegans encounter diet relatedhealth problems? I’m sure they do, but that’s not because they’re eating avegan diet, it’s because they’re eating an unhealthy vegan diet.

甚至英国国家医疗服务系统今天（10月1日，世界素食日）都发了帖，讲的是你如何通过纯素饮食得到你需要的所有营养。美国和英国饮食协会都发表了立场声明，声称纯素饮食在生命的所有阶段都是安全健康的。我作为一个纯素食者已经11年了，我的血液如果没有比我成为纯素食者之前更加健康，也至少同等的健康。一些个纯素食者会碰到和饮食相关的健康问题吗？我肯定他们会的，但这不是因为他们吃全素，而是因为他们吃全素吃得不健康。

18、The reason whyvegans have lower mortality is that they are richer (poor people cannot affordto be Vegan), and as richer people are less obese that is why they are lessobese.

为什么纯素食者的死亡率更低是因为他们更富有（做纯素食者是穷人负担不起的），而作为更富有的人他们没那么肥胖，这就是他们不那么肥胖的原因。

That you can find three men out of amillion geniuses/near-geniuses who were vegetarians and none who were vegansimplies that meat-eaters are disproportionately more intelligent than vegans.

你在一百万个天才/准天才中只能找出三个素食主义者，而且其中纯素食者一个也没有，这表明了在心智方面，食肉者比纯素食者更高，且不成比例。

19、As an occasionalvegetarian, I admire the choice made by vegans. Clods like Sitwell shouldn’tlose their jobs simply because of the power of Twittermobs but they should facethe reality of what a billion more Asian consumers adopting Western-stylemeat-heavy diets means for all of us after we have eaten every animal on theplanet.

作为一个偶尔为之的素食主义者，我钦佩纯素食者作出的选择。西特韦尔这样的棒槌们不应该丢掉他们的工作，仅仅因为推特上那些暴民的能量，但他们应该面对这样一个现实：在我们已经吃遍了这个星球上所有的动物后，十亿多的亚洲消费者采用了西式的以肉为主食的饮食，这对我们所有人意味着什么。

20、If non-vegans feelguilty, there’s a chance that’s because vegans have made them feel as such:non-vegans least favourite thing about vegans is their proselytising andassumption that their choices and values place them on a higher moral planethan primitive carnivores (usually expressed in tones of disappointment, andthe cultish attitude that everyone is on a teleological progression toenlightenment — that is, abstention from consuming animal products). Certainlyit’s a minority’s of vegans that do so, but I guess it’s so annoying that itreally sticks in people’s minds.

如果非素食者感觉到了内疚，那就有可能是纯素食者让他们这样去感觉的：非素食者最不喜欢纯素食者的点就是他们的传教行为，以及假定他们的选择和价值观，相较于原始的食肉动物，把他们推上了道德的高地（通常是以一种失望的语气在表达，以及狂热的态度，俨然每个人都处在等着被启蒙的进程中，即戒吃动物制品）。当然了只有少部分的纯素食者会这么做，但我猜这实在太烦人了，以至于这档子破事儿真的杵在了人们的脑瓜里。

21、Veganism is a fad /a fashion like so many other food trends. Publishers and retailers leap uponthis hoping to profit. Go to any second hand bookshop and see the previous foodtrends that have withered or, to be fair, become incorporated in mainstreamfood culture. Step outside the university campuses and you will find thatveganism has not really gained traction.

同其他很多饮食趋势一样，素食主义是一时的狂热/一种风尚。出版商和零售商跳上了这艘船，希望能够获利。去任何一家二手书店，看看从前那些已经凉透了的饮食趋势，公平起见，也可以看看那些慢慢融入主流饮食文化的。走出大学校园你就会发现，纯素食主义还没有获得真正的牵引力。

22、If you don’t likeliving creatures being killed, I think a better target for your wrath would bethe armed forces and weapons manufacturers/exporters, all of whom are in thebusiness of killing people. I find this far more repugnant than killing animalswhich (in the vast majority of cases) would never have come into existence ifthey were not going to be eaten.

如果你不喜欢看到活的东西被杀掉，那我认为你那些愤怒更好的去处是武装力量和武器制造商/出口商，他们从事的都是杀人这一行。我觉得这个要远比杀动物（在绝大多数情况下）来的让人反感，这些动物要不是会被吃掉，从一开始就不会存在。

23、I don’t feel anyguilt about eating meat because I am a member of a group (the human race)designed to eat meat as part of our diet.

我不会因为吃肉而感觉到内疚，是因为我是一个族群（人族）的一员，而这个族群的先天设计就是以吃肉作为我们饮食的一部分。

A large number of vegetarians and veganslie about the impact on the environment of a balanced diet since they ignorethe unfitness of three-quarters of UK farmland for arable farming which is muchmore profitable than animal husbandry and pretend that the US feedlots outsideChicago are typical of all cattle-rearing throughout the beat’s life everywhereacross the planet.

大量的素食主义者和纯素食者在均衡饮食对环境的影响这件事情上撒谎，因为他们无视了四分之三的英国农田不适合耕作，而这要比畜牧业有利可图得多，还假装芝加哥以外的美国饲养场是地球上所有养牛业的典型。

I don’t hate vegans for this: I just findtheir moral posturing based on lies, which are IMO immoral, irritating.

我并不因为这一点而憎恨纯素食者：我发现他们的道德姿态是以谎言为基础的，而这一点依我看就是不道德了，实在让人恼火。

24、While I’m not avegan but knowing some close relatives who are trying to go down the veganismpath, I’ve never found any of them to be ‘privileged’ or to sound ‘morallysuperior’. In any event, I eat meat or fish once or twice a week myself andwhether I or other meat eaters approve of it or not, veganism is clearlyrocketing in popularity and rapidly becoming as mainstream as vegetarianism.I’m in my 70s and years ago I remember vegetarians were regarded as oddballs(hence the early vegetarian restaurant chain being named ‘Cranks’). In the Eastof England city near me just a few months ago there were no vegan restaurantsat all. Now there are three. You can’t hold back the tide of change that issweeping the eating habits of this country. Mr Sitwell’s suggestion of “killingvegans one by one” is more likely to draw people towards an interest inveganism than if he’d put forward cogent, reasoned arguments supporting hisviews. Ah well, as he loves food and wine it may be the odd wording of hisemail is more to do with a particularly good vintage claret he’d discovered.

虽然我不是纯素食者，但认识的一些近亲正尝试在素食主义的路上走下去，我从未发现他们中有任何一人‘享有特权’或是听上去有‘道德优越感’。不管怎样，我自己每周都会吃一两次肉或鱼，而无论我或其他食肉者是否赞同它，很明显纯素食主义正在大众中急速上升，并且迅速变得和素食主义一样主流。我已经70多岁了，我还记得在很多年前，素食主义者被认为是怪胎（因此早期的素食连锁餐厅被命名为‘怪人（Cranks）’）。在我附近的英格兰东部城市，几个月前还没完全没有纯素食馆子。如今有了三家。相比西特韦尔先生拿出令人信服、合乎逻辑的论证来支持他的观点，他那个“一个接着一个杀掉纯素食者”的建议，更有可能拉近人们对纯素食主义的兴趣。好吧，由于他热爱食物和红酒，他电邮中的古怪措辞，更大的可能是和他发现的一款年份特别好的红酒有关。

【龙腾网】素食主义者在食肉者群体中激发了恐惧和嫌弃情绪？