Natalie Portman is a smart girl. She graduated from Harvard and all.
So you would think she would be smart enough to know that equating people who eat meat to rapists wouldn't work out too well for her.
Yes, we are smart enough to understand that she is attempting to shock people into understanding her point-of-view and doesn't really feel that way, but it is still unsettling.
Natalie submitted an essay to the Huffington Post, discussing her views as a vegan activist and supporter of the radical literature Jonathan Safran Foer's Eating Animals. She goes on the defense of the author's views and her own beliefs, while also digging a hole for herself.
She writes:
"I say that Foer's ethical charge against animal eating is brave because not only is it unpopular, it has also been characterized as unmanly, inconsiderate, and juvenile. But he reminds us that being a man, and a human, takes more thought than just "This is tasty, and that's why I do it." He posits that consideration, as promoted by Michael Pollan in The Omnivore's Dilemma, which has more to do with being polite to your tablemates than sticking to your own ideals, would be absurd if applied to any other belief (e.g., I don't believe in rape, but if it's what it takes to please my dinner hosts, then so be it)."
Dark! Taking things a little too far, if you ask us.
How about from now on, you eat your lettuce and we'll eat our steak and neither one of us brings up rape as a means of comparison?
We think that's the best solution.
CLICK HERE to read the rest of her tirade essay.
What do U guys think about what she wrote?
[Image via WENN.]
Permalink
/
442 comments (RSS)
/
Forward this post
»
