# Not an issue for a while, but.. (meat related)



## Adaline'sMama (Apr 16, 2010)

*DD is only four months old*

I am vegetarian and plan not to feed DD meat until she is old enough to understand what it is, where it comes from, and can make the decision herself.

DH eats meat and totally agrees with me that our kids will not eat it as infants, toddlers, or until they can make the choice. My parents are also meat eaters and they are supportive in that they think, "She's your kid. Tell us what to feed her and that's what we'll do."

Right now all she gets is breastmilk and the occasional taste of something on the end of my finger (please, lets not have a virgin gut conversation







). I didn't think we would have to even THINK about this meat vs. no meat topic for years. However, I am already having to defend my right to choose her food.

MIL has made the following comments in the past couple of weeks:

"You see Granny's hamburger? You'll have to come to Granny's house to be able to eat hamburgers."

"Yummm...bacon. Bacon is yummy yummy in your tummy, Ada."

"Ooh, we'll have to get you some chicken baby food, you know, the organic kind so Mommy doesn't have a fit."

and to me, when I said (in response to the hamburger comment), "Yeah, maybe when she's 8 or 10. IF its grass fed Kentucky hormone free hamburgers."

"Really, you can't expect us to not give her ANY meat until shes 8 years old"

Actually, I do. I'm not trying to put any sort of age limit on it really. We live in a very rural environment. I figure if we are buying meat from our neighbors, and she knows that its a cow/chicken/goat/ect that she used to be able to see out the window, and she wants to eat it anyway..Im not going to stop her. I'm not trying to make anyone feel bad for eating meat, but I will NEVER feed my kid chicken baby food. (or really, hardly any baby food)

What can I say to these comments if they keep coming?


----------



## lisalu100 (Aug 18, 2008)

"I am serious that I do not want DD to eat meat until I think she is old enough to make her own decision as to whether or not it is humane. I would never leave DD with someone if I thought that they would disrespect my parenting choices. I'm sure you are just joking, but I find it offensive."


----------



## NellieKatz (Jun 19, 2009)

Tell Granny if she expects your DD be left at her house she better not be sneaking her meat and undermining your decisions. That's horrid. I kind of know what you are going through. With us it was high fructose corn syrup and beef hot dogs, stuff like that. It's like our MIL has this blanket trust of corporate-produced food, scarcely ever reading a label or questioning the almighty businesses who are selling us God knows what and putting the label of "food" on it. Whoops I feel a rant coming on.

Good luck to you!!


----------



## peainthepod (Jul 16, 2008)

Wow, your MIL sounds very disrespectful of your parenting choices. How should you respond?

Quote:

"Really, you can't expect us to not give her ANY meat until shes 8 years old"
"Actually, we can and we do and if you're unable to respect that choice, you won't be seeing much of us or DD."

This is really something your DH needs to talk to her about, IMHO. But if he refuses or it doesn't work, then don't be afraid to bluntly put her in her place. She's being catty and passive aggressive and you do NOT have to change your ethics or parenting choices to suit her. I mean, she's practically telling you that she's going to feed your kid(s) meat when you're not around.









She sounds like a bully and I say that as an omnivore. I would be _livid_ if anyone--family member or not--ridiculed such a fundamental parenting choice like that, especially in front of my child, and then all but told me she planned to ignore our wishes! She definitely wouldn't be spending much or any unsupervised time with the children until the children were old enough to let me know if her behavior was inappropriate.


----------



## rightkindofme (Apr 14, 2008)

My husband and I are both rather unrepentant meat eaters, so with that said...

My daughter had zero interest in meat for quite some time. We kind of sort of would offer it and she refused so after a while we stopped offering. During that time period I could not *believe* how many people tried to force her to eat meat. (This was during the baby-toddler stage.) I had to get in somewhat fierce arguments with people about not putting meat in her mouth when she was actively saying no.

I think this is going to be a big issue. I think that your husband is going to need to seriously lay down the law if you want this rule followed. I think you are going to need to supervise visitation until you are ok with her having meat. It really sucks, but if you feel that strongly about this issue you will probably have to enforce it.

At this point my daughter is eating meat because she wants it. You might be surprised at how early children can start to understand "an actual bird died so you can eat this flesh". My daughter is only two and she can describe the process pretty well. I'm very firmly in the camp that if you are a meat eater it's not ok to think that meat comes from the grocery store wrapped in plastic.


----------



## greenmulberry (Jan 11, 2009)

I think you need to say:

"Really, WE DO expect you to not give her ANY meat until shes 8 years old"

And if we think you will not respect how we want to raise our child, we will not have her visiting with you.

For real, what is her problem, talk about rude behavior on the part of your MIL. Sheesh. I would have your DH talk to her as well.


----------



## Adaline'sMama (Apr 16, 2010)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rightkindofme* 
My daughter is only two and she can describe the process pretty well. I'm very firmly in the camp that if you are a meat eater it's not ok to think that meat comes from the grocery store wrapped in plastic.


Agreed. I just want her to know what her food is and where it is coming from.

I also think this is going to wind up being a huge issue. DH has told me that "we'll cross that bridge when we come to it" (we are at it Love!). He thinks that she is just joking and (something Ive heard since childhood) that she says those things to get a rise out of me because I have a tendency to get upset about things pretty easily. I think that saying something to get a rise out of someone one makes you an asshole.

I feel like this, among other issues , will drive me to not want her to watch DD. She will undermine me forever, and I married her son knowing that she was this way. She raised her two children as a single mother and DH has a lot of respect for that. She always had to work and I get to stay home, so I think she has some animosity about that. But, basically my DH is the only man in her life and he has a really hard time being direct with her because she doesn't respond well to thinking of us as adults or as people who are capable of making our own decisions. (for example, when we are supposed to meet her at 9:00 am, she will call Dh's phone at 7:30am just to make sure he's awake , even though he is almost always on time.). He walks on eggshells to make sure that she stays happy, even though she doesnt do the same for him. At any rate, he doesnt want to play go between between me and his mother for the rest of my kids lives, and hes made that very clear.

She does things like buys plastic toys because they are cute or vintage or something she knows we dont think is stupid, and she will present them commenting, "I know they are PLASTIC, but...." So, she acknowledges that she remembered your request, but is failing to respect it.

I am scared that she is going to start feeding my child meat as soon as she's old enough to chew it. Im going to have to find a good way to talk to her about it because there is no way that DH is going to be ok with me just saying no to her wanting to babysit. He really wants to make sure that DD has a good relationship with his mother because she lives all alone and so far DD is the only granddaughter. (DH's sister is only 18, and she is moving out next week)


----------



## ErinYay (Aug 21, 2008)

Is feeding a baby/toddler who is simply not capable of making a sound cognitive choice regarding what to eat meat something that you really are willing to jeopardize your child's relationship with her grandmother over? I ask this without judgement- your relationship with her seems to be strained at best, and if you do indeed disallow one-on-one time between them, over something that Grandmother surely thinks is "silly," this could well impact their future relationship, and/or create a "let's keep things from mommy" dynamic that will grow to cover lots of other areas.

In short- what's worse to you: your child being slipped meat while oblivious to what it is, or your child not developing a relationship with her grandmother? If it's the meat, then I think you should be aware that the worst-case scenario is one where your child lives 8 years essentially without a grandmother.

Good luck to you, in any case!


----------



## spughy (Jun 28, 2005)

Couple of thoughts here. First, pp's are totally right that VERY young children - as young as 2 or 3 - can totally grasp where meat comes from and what is involved in eating it. Children that young are also capable of saying "no". Would your MIL respect it if your DD said no, she didn't want any meat? There's no guarantee she would, of course, but if you explain in simple terms what is involved ethically in eating meat, she might well, especially if Grandma doesn't buy decent meat from a farm. Kids that young can also understand the difference between a CAFO and a good family farm, too.

Alternately, you could buy some ethically raised, pastured chicken and give it to Grandma to give to your DD, as a compromise/peace offering. I did that for the first couple years of my DD's life - any time she went to Grandma's I sent along good food because my MIL believes food comes out a grocery store too. (It's a never-ending bone of contention - it would be NO extra effort on her part to shop from farms as I do - I would do it for her! but she likes things neat and tidy in packages.







) Anyway, if you could somehow explain your stance (as I understand it?) that you don't want your DD to participate in the animal cruelty/environmental harm of CAFOs, but offer Grandma an alternative (which, frankly, would be a good deal for her if she got a whole chicken with which to feed your DD now and then - babies aren't known for their whole-chicken-gobbling ways!) I bet she would go for it. I understand you not wanting to watch or participate, but your DH could go along for the ride and the tasty chicken, and if it makes you feel any better, pasture-raised chicken is full of lots of healthy fat, protein, vitamins and minerals for a growing baby.


----------



## Adaline'sMama (Apr 16, 2010)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ErinYay* 
Is feeding a baby/toddler who is simply not capable of making a sound cognitive choice regarding what to eat meat something that you really are willing to jeopardize your child's relationship with her grandmother over?

No. I stated previously that it would not be ok to just not ever leave the child with her. DH would have huge issues with that, and it would be unfair. However, since my parents are both remarried, she would live 8 years with out 1 of her 3 grandmothers.

The idea of feeding my child meat really grosses me out, and I have every right to tell her not to do it. She DOES NOT COOK. Ever. DH and I have been together for over 8 years and I have seen her cook maybe 3 times. She eats fast food. We arent talking about good, farm raised meat here. We are talking about McDonalds and pureed chicken in a jar. I wouldnt expect anyone to eat purreed meat.

The point really is that I dont know how to respond to this chidding and joking at me about the topic. Im not sure if she will really do it, or where we will be in our desicion at that time. One thing I am sure of is that she will cultivate a "lets keep things from Mommy" dynamic. She has proven this by telling my DH (when he tells her that i dont like something)







ell, what Holly doesnt know wont hurt her,now will it?"

But all in all, she and I are going to have a war if I find out that she fed my (exclusively breastfed) baby chicken out of a jar.


----------



## spughy (Jun 28, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Adaline'sMama* 
But all in all, she and I are going to have a war if I find out that she fed my (exclusively breastfed) baby chicken out of a jar.

Chicken out of a jar isn't a "meat" issue, it's a food quality issue. I am a big fan of meat and encourage my DD to eat it (not that it's hard, she would live happily on fish, meat, eggs and fruit.) But chicken in a jar is just yucky. You could tell grandma she'd have to eat a jar first.









Seriously, though - if this is really important (and it sounds like it is) - play the drama card. Next time MIL says something about feeding your DD McYuk or jarred chicken, burst out into tears. Sob that you are heartbroken because every day you learn more about the horrible chemicals in that stuff and you hate the thought of your perfect baby eating that, but it also breaks your heart to not be able to foster a close a loving relationship between DD & her grandma and you don't want to live through years of worrying about what grandma is going to be feeding her and you want so much to trust Grandma but you feel like nobody is respecting your desire to have a healthy baby. In other words, fight dysfunction and issues with your own kind of dysfunction and issues. She's not playing fair, no reason for you to be reasonable - just do it before your child is old enough to think you're a nutcase when you "lose it".


----------



## ErinYay (Aug 21, 2008)

Thanks for clarifying. It does sound like you're stuck, vis a vis the MIL thing. If she's going to have alone-time with the baby, and you're pretty sure she's going to feed her uber-processed "meat food product" (which makes my stomach turn, too), it also sounds like you're going to have to figure out how to deal with it when the time comes.

As far as the comment, if people are doing it to get a rise out of you, maybe spin your responses a little.

"Bacon is sooooooo yummy, baby. Poor thing, mean old mommy won't let you have any."
"Actually, I served her up a nice suckling pig this morning. She particularly enjoyed eating the eyeballs," said in your sweetest, most matter-of-fact way. The rude person will likely be taken aback by such a response, and when they don't get the satisfaction of your usual response, will clam up.


----------



## Stella_luna (Jan 26, 2006)

Unfortunately, my MIL is like this too, in fact, to the extent that when DD was 6 months old, she started really yelling at me constantly to feed her cow's milk because she was SURE my milk wasn't healthy and "looked disgusting" because I'm vegetarian.

DD is now almost 8 and the ILs have never once babysat her. She's never once been alone with them. (They are toxic anyway, so this is no great sacrifice.) I know that's not what you're looking for, but our stories are so similar I wanted to tell you what we decided. You do have every right to tell MIL to feed or not to feed your child whatever you decide. In our case, I KNEW my MIL and FIL would give DD meat if she was with them. They truly believe a meatless diet is unhealthy.

As for the joking . . . our family is vegan, and they HATE it, and still make comments about it every time we're together and make fun of what we eat. Honestly, it doesn't even bother me anymore, it just makes them look ridiculous to be SO focused on our diets. We usually just go along with it. As in: FIL: "Son. What do you EAT?" DH: "I eat nothing. Just lettuce. That's it." Or: MIL: "Don't you ever want a CHEESESTEAK?" Me: "Well, I ate six of them yesterday. So I'm sick of them now."


----------



## no5no5 (Feb 4, 2008)

It might not be what you want to hear, but I wouldn't leave my DD alone with someone who jokes about sneaking her meat behind my back. I wouldn't leave her alone with someone who jokes about doing _anything_ secret with her behind my back. That is totally unacceptable--it is unacceptable to joke about, unacceptable to do, and unacceptable for DD to hear. My own sister won't be left alone with DD for exactly that reason. This is the language of disrespect and abuse, and I will not tolerate it.

I would talk to my DH, tell him my concerns, and that the comments are making me very uncomfortable, etc., and have him bring it up with MIL. If he supports your decision, he should make it clear to MIL that it is not _just_ your decision, but his as well, and that he, as well as you, will be extremely upset if the joking does not stop (or if meat is fed). A marriage is about a partnership, and he needs to portray that. He needs to take your side over his mother's.

If he can't do that...well...I'd suggest counseling. Seriously. What you describe sounds like a very unhealthy, passive-aggressive relationship between mother and son, and it's going to come between you for the rest of your marriage if you don't put an end to it. You should also keep in mind that the kind of relationship he has with his mother is likely to be the kind of relationship your DD will eventually have with Grandma. He needs to be modeling a healthy way of dealing with her.

I know that the above sounds kind of harsh, but I've been dealing with this sort of MIL for over a decade now. I could not have handled it without DH sticking up for me. He made it clear to her from the very beginning that my decisions were his decisions and that he would always side with me in a fight. Because of that, MIL has chosen _not_ to fight with me--she can see that she would lose. In this case, losing means that DH would not call her (ever), she wouldn't get pictures of her granddaughter, etc. Instead, we have a pretty good relationship, because she doesn't push me and I don't push her.

You might get some more BTDT advice in the Vegetarian forum, or in Parents as Partners.


----------



## Nicole730 (Feb 27, 2009)

There is no way I'd let my MIL alone with my child if she said something like that (heck, I don't let her alone with my child as it is!) If your child not eating meat, or being asked if she wants it before you think she is ready to make an educated decision is important to you - then follow through! Make sure your husband is on board and make it clear to MIL that it's not acceptable.

Funny thing on the opposite side- my mom told my son that eggs are baby chickens. Now everytime I get out the eggs, he says, Babies! I don't eat meat and my son doesn't either, but we do eat eggs.


----------



## grumpybear (Oct 5, 2006)

We are unrepentant meat eaters as well but I believe that every family has a certain set of philosophies that each live by and that grandparents should be able to respect whether they subscribe to it or not. Something especially as sensitive and as important as what goes in your/our children's bodies is definitely at the top of my priority list in the inflexible category.

If someone insisted on feeding my children something that I am vehemently opposed to, that someone would not be with my children. Period. End of story.

As far as your MIL being passive aggressive by those comments of feeding your DD meat, I think that is something that your DH needs to address with his mom.


----------



## greenemami (Nov 1, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Adaline'sMama* 
No. I stated previously that it would not be ok to just not ever leave the child with her. DH would have huge issues with that, and it would be unfair. However, since my parents are both remarried, she would live 8 years with out 1 of her 3 grandmothers.

The idea of feeding my child meat really grosses me out, and I have every right to tell her not to do it. She DOES NOT COOK. Ever. DH and I have been together for over 8 years and I have seen her cook maybe 3 times. She eats fast food. We arent talking about good, farm raised meat here. We are talking about McDonalds and pureed chicken in a jar. I wouldnt expect anyone to eat purreed meat.

The point really is that I dont know how to respond to this chidding and joking at me about the topic. Im not sure if she will really do it, or where we will be in our desicion at that time. One thing I am sure of is that she will cultivate a "lets keep things from Mommy" dynamic. She has proven this by telling my DH (when he tells her that i dont like something)







ell, what Holly doesnt know wont hurt her,now will it?"

But all in all, she and I are going to have a war if I find out that she fed my (exclusively breastfed) baby chicken out of a jar.

I'm sorry-this is totally obnoxious. I too am a vegetarian surrounded by carnivores and I have taken some "friendly" abuse because I won't let dd or ds eat meat until they can decide for themselves. My parents would NEVER feed her meat on the sly-thank goodness!-so I do trust them fully not to do that, but I do have to put up with the comments-i.e. my parents and dp were all eating sausage at the table with us and dd commented that it was pig (lol-clearly we have had discussions about meat before) and they had to make it a big joke until my mom started snorting like a pig and talking about how delicious it was-it just verges on offensive, you know? Luckily I am super close to my mom, so I was able to tell her to quit it without worrying about how it came out. I hope you find a way to make yourself clear to your MIL. I would be so uncomfortable having to worry about what my child was eating while I wasn't there in that situation. I agree with the the pp to just provide food that you want her to have, but that won't help if you don't trust your MIL to feed your dd that food and not anything else. Good luck!


----------



## St. Margaret (May 19, 2006)

I agree, she's breaking your ability to trust her, so it's reasonable to not leave DD with her, watch her when you're all eating, etc. My MIL knows how we feel about food and plastic/commercial toys and screen time, and yet DD has begun telling us stories... we ask if they are from books gma read her... no, turns out gma is showing her tv. And suddenly, each day a new plastic disney toy showed up at her house. SIGH. Luckily for me, DH is just as annoyed and said he will speak to her. In her case, she's just clueless, truely. And VERY scared of drama/offending, which makes it very hard to deal with her b/c I feel like I'm SCARY








when I'm really not, I swear. But DH has got my back. Anyway, just going along with her doing things against our values is NOT a good thing-- it's not like a hill I'd die on but it's definitely way more damaging for our relationship than just talking about it and working it out. And if she suddenly said she refused or acted like she'd just go behind our backs... well, we would know anyway. But THEN you're darn tooting I'd keep DD away from someone who couldn't respect our parenting decisions (grandma likes to see DD multiple times per week-- if it were even montly visits, I'd be SO okay with crazy TV and toys, no big deal then). Anyway, I think it's better for relationships to talk it out. Just letting it go (in the past few weeks as this has emerged) makes me much more resentful.

I would be seriously annoyed with that kind of joking and lack of trustworthiness. I would have DH make it gently clear that she can stop or not get to see grandbaby as much.


----------



## Smokering (Sep 5, 2007)

It isn't a choice between "no relationship with Grandma" and "DD eating things Mum finds unethical". It's a choice between "DD having a _supervised_ relationship with Grandma" and "DD eating things Mum finds unethical". Just don't leave them alone together. There's no absolute need for your DD to go to Grandma's house unsupervised (although I realise babysitting is handy!). I don't remember staying at Grandma's house without Mum when I was little, and we have a perfectly nice relationship.

I feel your pain, BTW. Not with meat, but MIL and FIL don't quite get modern baby nutrition. They tried to feed DD ice cream when she was four months old - stuff like that. And recently they took DD and their other grandbaby - a 7-month-old with dairy allergies - out together, and DD fed the baby a spoonful of her ice cream. I felt really guilty, but of course she didn't know any better, and after talking to SIL it seems like they thought it was funny and didn't try to stop her. They just don't seem to believe in food allergies.

So basically I didn't let DD stay with them - she would have screamed anyway! - until she was older. Now she goes to visit, because there's nothing she abolutely can't eat and it's fairly infrequent. At my parents' house, I draw the line at Coke and soft drinks, because my father's a bit clueless and would never think "Hmm, I wonder if she's allowed this?".


----------



## meemee (Mar 30, 2005)

OP -- OFF TOPIC -- how do you guys plan to do this? do you guys cook meat at home?

is dh going to stop eating meat in front of your dd?

if dh is going to continue eating meat in front of her and she wants to have some what will you say?


----------



## vegemamato (Jul 4, 2007)

I would not leave my child with someone if I thought that they might disrespect my parenting choices.. If I were you, I would be ask my partner to speak with his mother and if he failed, I would very bluntly explain that I do NOT want my kid to eat meat and if she can't support me then my child won't be left in her care. Hopefully all will work out- your MIL sounds like a handful


----------



## crunchy_mommy (Mar 29, 2009)

My inlaws make lots of jokes like that about feeding DS meat but I don't think they'd actually do it. I have no intention of leaving DS with them pretty much EVER so I don't really worry about it, I'm always right there supervising so I could stop them if they ever forced it. Even though DH eats meat he agrees that DS will not. I think in your situation if you do plan on leaving your LO with them you need to make clear starting now that this is a non-negotiable rule, that you don't want them taunting/tempting your child to eat meat, etc.


----------



## 2goingon2 (Feb 8, 2007)

I haven't read all the responses so forgive me if I'm repeating.

I would very calmly look her in the eye the next time she said something like that. Pause long enough for your gaze to have an affect and then state: "I know you find that funny but quite frankly it has grown old. When and if we decide she's ready to eat any meat, you'll be the first to know. Until then, I would appreciate no more jokes".

My first husband and I were vegetarians for many years when our first child was born. We went through the same thing. Good luck - you will continue to come across people who will always be willing to share their opinions or say...poor little thing. It does get old. It's worse when it's close family and when they.just.won't.stop.


----------



## Quinalla (May 23, 2005)

Maybe to get your DH more on board, you need to find an issue that he cares more about that your MIL will try to disregard you on. Because to me, this isn't a vegetarian issue, this is a "I don't respect you as a parent" issue. How does she feel about carseats? Discipline? Allergies? This is not going to stop without some measures being taken, she is going to keep disrespecting you in areas when she doesn't agree. And while normally I am all for some give and take and letting grandparents do some special things with their grandchildren, this to me seems like a small piece of a much larger problem of lack of respect.

And maybe she is just joking? I too would probably respond really strongly one time and just see if you could figure out if she is just joking or not. While it is totally rude to try and get a rise out of someone just for fun, a lot of people do it unfortunately.


----------



## Adaline'sMama (Apr 16, 2010)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *meemee* 
OP -- OFF TOPIC -- how do you guys plan to do this? do you guys cook meat at home?

is dh going to stop eating meat in front of your dd?

if dh is going to continue eating meat in front of her and she wants to have some what will you say?

I am a former chef, so even though I don't eat meat, I have quite a bit of experience cooking it. It doesnt really bother me to cook meat in my home (we have seperate cooking dishes for this). I cook meat for DH about once a week. He eats meat, but he does not eat meat every day, nor does he really eat a lot of processed meat. Most of the meat we buy comes from local farmers.

He will continue eating meat, and if she wants to have some then we will have to make a trip to a local farm and then to Boone's slaughterhouse first. Obviously, they dont really let you watch while they are slaughtering, but Mr.Boone is nice and will surely give us a tour.


----------



## Adaline'sMama (Apr 16, 2010)

Sorry, I have been gone for most of the day. Thanks to everyone for their advice. I really appreciate all of your help.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *no5no5* 

I would talk to my DH, tell him my concerns, and that the comments are making me very uncomfortable, etc., and have him bring it up with MIL. If he supports your decision, he should make it clear to MIL that it is not _just_ your decision, but his as well, and that he, as well as you, will be extremely upset if the joking does not stop (or if meat is fed). A marriage is about a partnership, and he needs to portray that. He needs to take your side over his mother's.

If he can't do that...well...I'd suggest counseling. Seriously. What you describe sounds like a very unhealthy, passive-aggressive relationship between mother and son, and it's going to come between you for the rest of your marriage if you don't put an end to it. You should also keep in mind that the kind of relationship he has with his mother is likely to be the kind of relationship your DD will eventually have with Grandma. He needs to be modeling a healthy way of dealing with her.

This has been an issue for years. I have tried to work on it several times and I have pretty much been told that he does not have any intrest in going back and forth between me and his mother. He does not take my side, and he doesnt take hers (which in my opionion, IS taking her side). He's not interested in counseling for this issue because he doesnt thinks that is important to be loyal to his mother, regardless of his marriage.He will take my side if he sees something as being a big issue, or if he doesnt think that I am "blowing it out of proportion". I love him and married him knowing that this was an issue, so I know that I will have to compete with her for the next few years (until shes senile...shes pretty old and doesnt take care of herself at all)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *spughy* 
Chicken out of a jar isn't a "meat" issue, it's a food quality issue. I am a big fan of meat and encourage my DD to eat it (not that it's hard, she would live happily on fish, meat, eggs and fruit.) But chicken in a jar is just yucky. You could tell grandma she'd have to eat a jar first.









yep. I think maybe Ill ask her to eat a jar. I think it is totally gross, and Id love to see her explain to me why my child should eat it even though she cant.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2goingon2* 
I would very calmly look her in the eye the next time she said something like that. Pause long enough for your gaze to have an affect and then state: "I know you find that funny but quite frankly it has grown old. When and if we decide she's ready to eat any meat, you'll be the first to know. Until then, I would appreciate no more jokes".

I feel like this would actually be a good way to deal with her. I feel like she responds well to seriousness. The next time she makes a joke, maybe Ill say this and she will feel inclined to have an actual conversation about it, where I can explain why weve chosen to go this route.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quinalla* 
Maybe to get your DH more on board, you need to find an issue that he cares more about that your MIL will try to disregard you on. Because to me, this isn't a vegetarian issue, this is a "I don't respect you as a parent" issue. How does she feel about carseats? Discipline? Allergies? This is not going to stop without some measures being taken, she is going to keep disrespecting you in areas when she doesn't agree. And while normally I am all for some give and take and letting grandparents do some special things with their grandchildren, this to me seems like a small piece of a much larger problem of lack of respect.

There has been one time when DH got really upset with her and kind of chewed her out. She kept referring to DD as a preemie when she was about 10 days old and DH told her, "That will be the last time you refer to my child as premature. She was not premature and she has no health problems. The fact that you refer to her as a preemie is both offensive to us and to people to ACTUALLY have children who are premature."

I plan to talk to Dh about this issue this weekend. Hopefully I can make him understand that this is a big enough issue to talk to her about. I know he would be mad if it actually happened.


----------



## Holiztic (Oct 10, 2005)

If this was an issue about vegetarian toddlers/children I would have plenty to say (ethical omnivore here), but this is an issue about respect and your MIL needs to respect your choices unless she legitimately believes your daughter is in danger of malnourishment.


----------



## lovepiggie (May 10, 2009)

I didn't have a chance to read all the previous comments, but... I just wanted to say, I'm in a similar boat! Everyone talks about feeding DS meat and dairy (I'm a vegan) behind his back, and it really frustrates me. Especially since veganis isn't just a diet for me, it is a lifestyle, and my moral and ethical compass.

I've made it very clear to all of my family that DS will not be fed anything that isn't vegan. If they decide to go against my wishes, I will not be leaving DS unsupervised around them. I will have no problem with him visiting them - but he won't be out of my sight.

Can you compromise by bringing your MIL some things she can feed him? Maybe she just thinks of meat as THE meal, and doesn't want to just give her 'sides', or worries that your DD won't be getting enough protein or something? Make sure she knows you are giving DD lots of lentils, beans, and such... and maybe get your doctor to tell you that you can raise a healthy vegetarian baby, so you can pass it on to her! (Not that you need to be told, but so you can say 'My doctor said...'


----------



## VisionaryMom (Feb 20, 2007)

A few thoughts...

First, I think you're greatly underestimating a child's understanding of food. I grew up on a farm. We had crops & raised various animals. I don't remember a time when I didn't understand that. My 3YO just determined she's going to become a vegetarian, and we *don't* live in a place where my children confront the animals that we eat. So I think you need to determine what your intentions are. Is your goal to set a time when you permit your dd to make that decision? If she asks for a hamburger at 2, are you going to let her have it? How, exactly, will you decide when she "knows enough" to make the decision for herself?

Separate the age/knowledge issue from a meat quality issue. They're two different issues. You will need to investigate the quality of the meats she's likely to want to try eventually (let's face it, one parent eats meat, so chances are that she'll at least try it), but you need to be prepared for that when it happens. Do that research now.

Does your MIL know what to feed a child who is vegetarian? We went through this being CF, and that is because of a food allergy. My MIL was truly stumped on altering her meals. Does your MIL know what your dd should get in terms of protein? Are you a well-informed vegetarian? (I don't ask that to be mean. I just know plenty of vegetarians - just like omnivores - who are unhealthy.) Are veggie alternatives readily available, so that if your MIL plans a cookout for the family, she can pick up veggie burgers easily? If not, are you willing to provide them?


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

In all honesty? I do not micromanage what the grandparents on either side do while caring for my children. There are not rules about TV. There are not rules about food. I provide guidance in car seat purchasing, appropriate diapers and changes of clothing, and I back off. My children's grandparents are not teenage babysitters for me to order around. They are OUR PARENTS who raised me and my husband to healthy, happy adulthood. They deserve my respect and deference whenever it's reasonable to give it, and I feel they've earned the right to set the standard of behavior in their own homes.

(It's probably obvious from the above that my kids' grandparents are not toxic or irresponsible, and that my children have no serious food sensitivities.)

OP, it's unfortunate that your MIL and you don't eat the same things. But I think you lose more than you gain if you try to control every single aspect of your daughter's life to the point where you're in a constant power struggle with her grandma over things like McNuggets. The human body is a remarkably resilient organism - it can endure the occasional McNugget and cartoon. You don't have to change how YOU live or what YOU believe, but much as you think it's crazy now, that 4 month old who's literally attached to you most hours of the night and day is going to be a 4 year old with her own agendas, preferences and relationships almost before you know it. There will be room in her brain to respect your choices AND grandma's choices, and to understand that different households have different central values, all of which should be graciously tolerated even when they clash with your own. Not a bad life lesson, that.

BTW, my older kids know all about meat, milk and egg production, and have since toddlerhood. Farm visits and all. It's really not a hard lesson to teach, no matter what your ethical stance. If you are calm about the slaughtering aspect, then your kids will be calm about it (even you all turn out to be opposed to it).


----------



## limabean (Aug 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
In all honesty? I do not micromanage what the grandparents on either side do while caring for my children. There are not rules about TV. There are not rules about food. I provide guidance in car seat purchasing, appropriate diapers and changes of clothing, and I back off. My children's grandparents are not teenage babysitters for me to order around. They are OUR PARENTS who raised me and my husband to healthy, happy adulthood. They deserve my respect and deference whenever it's reasonable to give it, and I feel they've earned the right to set the standard of behavior in their own homes.

Maybe the meat issue isn't one that would cause conflict for you (it wouldn't for me either), but for some people it would and I can understand that. When I read threads like this that I can't directly relate to, I imagine how I would react if the issue were one that _would_ cause conflict for me.

For example, say that one grandmother insisted that cry-it-out was perfectly acceptable and would teach a baby to soothe himself, and that we were overindulging our baby by picking him up when he cried. Say that that grandmother made jokes about how "overprotective" mommy was, and implied that she would leave the baby to CIO if she were left in charge of him. In a situation like that, she would simply never be left in charge of my baby. We could visit however often she'd like, but she'd never be given the opportunity to leave him to CIO.

Anyway, my point is that some issues are more important than others, and that different people have different barometers for that kind of stuff. For the OP, this is an important issue and I respect that.


----------



## dakotablue (Jun 21, 2009)

I am so sorry. It sounds like your dealing with the larger issue, as I am, of Grandma wanting an inappropriate relationship with DH and DC. My Dh took a while to come to my side and still falters to stand strong. This has led to his family thinking he doesn't want to be with me, then that I _changed_ him (in to what?







)

For me Dh not standing in the Gap for me was a big issue and a deal breaker. He is my husband when all the world is against me he is the one I need to be able to rely on. When I portrayed my self as...well myself damsel in distress needed assistance (even though I 'can' take care of my self) I need him. This helped him become more vocal and he does not stand for any back talking.

I think this will just be a symptom of a larger issue after issue after issue that will arise until you and Dh get some boundaries in place. When I post about MIL someone suggested that book (boundaries) and it helped me a LOT. (situation still sucks but not the life out of me KWIM?)


----------



## EarthMamaToBe (Feb 19, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rightkindofme* 
My husband and I are both rather unrepentant meat eaters, so with that said...

My daughter had zero interest in meat for quite some time. We kind of sort of would offer it and she refused so after a while we stopped offering. During that time period I could not *believe* how many people tried to force her to eat meat. (This was during the baby-toddler stage.) I had to get in somewhat fierce arguments with people about not putting meat in her mouth when she was actively saying no.

I think this is going to be a big issue. I think that your husband is going to need to seriously lay down the law if you want this rule followed. I think you are going to need to supervise visitation until you are ok with her having meat. It really sucks, but if you feel that strongly about this issue you will probably have to enforce it.

At this point my daughter is eating meat because she wants it. You might be surprised at how early children can start to understand "an actual bird died so you can eat this flesh". My daughter is only two and she can describe the process pretty well. I'm very firmly in the camp that if you are a meat eater it's not ok to think that meat comes from the grocery store wrapped in plastic.

I almost cried when I saw this post just to know I am not the only non-vegetarian who feels this way!

I don't eat a lot of meat (have never liked it) but DH is a carnivore all the way. Neither of us want our baby to have meat. ESPECIALLY not that nasty jarred "meat" eeeeeeewwwwwww.

I don't trust my MIL not to feed my child a happy meal. She happily tells a story about how she used to take my DH's cousins (raised vegetarian) to McDonald's every chance she got because "kids NEED meat" and "All that vegetarian stuff is just nonsense, people are supposed to eat meat" . She then instructed the kids to keep it a secret from Mom and Dad







. I don't THINK so.


----------



## lawmama1984 (Mar 17, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *limabean* 
Maybe the meat issue isn't one that would cause conflict for you (it wouldn't for me either), but for some people it would and I can understand that. When I read threads like this that I can't directly relate to, I imagine how I would react if the issue were one that _would_ cause conflict for me.

Anyway, my point is that some issues are more important than others, and that different people have different barometers for that kind of stuff. For the OP, this is an important issue and I respect that.











Thank you for this very well thought out post. You nailed how I (and I'm sure OP and other vegetarians/vegans) feel about this subject.


----------



## crunchy_mommy (Mar 29, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
In all honesty? I do not micromanage what the grandparents on either side do while caring for my children. There are not rules about TV. There are not rules about food. I provide guidance in car seat purchasing, appropriate diapers and changes of clothing, and I back off. My children's grandparents are not teenage babysitters for me to order around. They are OUR PARENTS who raised me and my husband to healthy, happy adulthood. They deserve my respect and deference whenever it's reasonable to give it, and I feel they've earned the right to set the standard of behavior in their own homes.

(It's probably obvious from the above that my kids' grandparents are not toxic or irresponsible, and that my children have no serious food sensitivities.)

OP, it's unfortunate that your MIL and you don't eat the same things. But I think you lose more than you gain if you try to control every single aspect of your daughter's life to the point where you're in a constant power struggle with her grandma over things like McNuggets. The human body is a remarkably resilient organism - it can endure the occasional McNugget and cartoon. You don't have to change how YOU live or what YOU believe, but much as you think it's crazy now, that 4 month old who's literally attached to you most hours of the night and day is going to be a 4 year old with her own agendas, preferences and relationships almost before you know it. There will be room in her brain to respect your choices AND grandma's choices, and to understand that different households have different central values, all of which should be graciously tolerated even when they clash with your own. Not a bad life lesson, that.

This goes beyond different diets... For many (I might even say MOST) vegetarians, it's not just a different diet -- it's a serious moral and/or health choice. There are some things that IMO are non-negotiable. My child will not be left to CIO. My child will not play with (real) guns. My child will be raised Catholic & attend Mass each week. My child will ride in a car seat. My child will not be physically disciplined. My child will not eat meat. Health/safety/moral issues are not something I'm willing to back off on, and I think many of us feel this way. No, grandparents are not teenage babysitters, but they also aren't my child's parents. As his parents, I feel it's my responsibility to raise him within these guidelines & make sure others respect them as well. This is not about grandparents giving the kid an extra cookie or letting them watch an extra hour of TV or stay up late. IMO, it's a much more serious issue.


----------



## no5no5 (Feb 4, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *crunchy_mommy* 
This is not about grandparents giving the kid an extra cookie or letting them watch an extra hour of TV or stay up late. IMO, it's a much more serious issue.

That's right. And, as serious as that may be, it's not even really about whether the kid eats meat. It's about whether OP's MIL respects her choices as a parent. She clearly does not. She's making fun of OP's choices and laughing about sneaking around behind OP's back in order to break OP's rules _in front of OP's child_. That's wildly inappropriate. Talk about teaching a child to disrespect her own mother.









Micromanagement has absolutely nothing to do with the OP's situation, and I can't understand why anyone would think that it does.


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

So far, I've seen several potential issues mentioned in this thread that some people consider trivial and some people consider vital:

* Happy Meals (junk food in general)
* Meat (ethically ambiguous foods in general)
* TV (an extra hour thereof, any at all)

and then some issues that most of us consider vital:

* don't hit the kids
* don't let the kids CIO
* don't drive the kids around without properly restraining them

The OP feels she has an issue with her MIL being disrespectful. That may well be true. The MIL seems to feel that the OP is hypersensitive in the matter of a child's hypothetical future diet. *That* may well be true, and MIL may feel disrespected by that, depending on how it's expressed in social situations. Since the child in question is only four months old, probably all involved are going to find their positions shifting and changing in the next few years. The fact that it's even being discussed at this point lets me know that both the OP and the MIL are not dealing with their difference in the friendliest, most respectful way possible. I have no problem following food rules when I babysit a child, but a first-time mom of a 4 month old who is listing out her Cast In Stone beliefs about what her child should/will/can eat a year or two or three from now? I think that person is in for a reality check about the level of control that one person (even a mom) can usefully and healthily wield over what is chewed and swallowed by another person (even a toddler. _Especially_ a toddler.).

OP, you need to decide if it's more important to have dietary and other non-safety-related restrictions respected, or for your child to spend time alone with Grandma. (I can see either answer being the right one for you, depending on your specific beliefs about food, family ties etc.). Then you need to ask your husband what HE thinks, and then the two of you need to arrive at a compromise you can both live with. If he wants his mother to quit the passive-aggressive spiel, then he should tell her that. If he wants his wife to show some deference to his mother in non-life-or-death stuff, then he should express that as well. You can't begin to work out a solution among parents until both of you are being really honest with each other about your priorities. And you certainly can't deal with a MIL issue until both of you are on board with a solution and presenting a united front.

I feel like this comes off as me not supporting you in eating vegetarian yourself and in feeding your child vegetarian foods. I DO support that. But you are the only vegetarian adult in her life, and if you want other adults to have important caregiving roles, then you may want to consider letting go of the control a bit. I'd be saying the exact same thing if you were the only TV-free adult in your child's life. I happen to be the only adult Jew among my children's local family caregivers, and you know what? They watch Rudolph. With my MIL.









Letting go of a bit of control doesn't mean - "fine, give her meat, I condone it." It might mean "fries and chocolate milk are OK, but no Nuggets please." In the nearer term, it might mean buying some non-meat Gerber with a high protein level listed on the label and bringing it along in the diaper bag when Grandma babysits. Show that you, too, care about protein









If your husband was happy and loved and safe in his mother's house, your child can be too. It might be best to stop counting the years until she "goes senile" and be grateful that she's still got it together and your children will have good memories of her. You don't have to like her. But your husband loves and respects her, and his children should as well. Right now, before your child is old enough to notice any friction, is the time to figure out how you can engender that without making yourself miserable. I don't know waht your answer will be, but I *do* know that your resentment level is sky-high right now, and that something needs to change.


----------



## limabean (Aug 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
I have no problem following food rules when I babysit a child, but a first-time mom of a 4 month old who is listing out her Cast In Stone beliefs about what her child should/will/can eat a year or two or three from now? I think that person is in for a reality check about the level of control that one person (even a mom) can usefully and healthily wield over what is chewed and swallowed by another person (even a toddler. _Especially_ a toddler.).

You make some good points in your post, but what if a family's food habits were associated with their religion? Would you think it was unrealistic for them to expect to "control" their child's adherence to those religious-based food values, at least through toddlerhood?

I know a family in which the mom is Jewish and the dad isn't really religious, but treif isn't served in their house (although the dad will sometimes order bacon or something at a restaurant). And their kids weren't given any of those foods when they were babies, toddlers, or young children. Now that the kids are older (5 and 8) they're curious about it, and the 5yo just asked her mom last week if she could try pepperoni pizza and the mom said yes, but no one accused that mother of needing a reality check when her kids were babies and she voiced her beliefs about food and planned to raise her kids with those beliefs, at least for the first few years of their lives.


----------



## texmati (Oct 19, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *crunchy_mommy* 
This goes beyond different diets... For many (I might even say MOST) vegetarians, it's not just a different diet -- it's a serious moral and/or health choice.

I agree. It's a matter of priorities.

OP, my parents are both vegetarians, and so is most of my extended family. But when I was younger, my parents would let me "choose", when we were out what to eat, more out of wanting to fit in than anything else. Hot dogs, ect, I stopped on my own by the time I entered elementary. I wish that they hadn't, and I won't be giving my son the same choice before he know what he is choosing. Your MIL should respect your choices about food just as much-- if not more, than your 'rules' about car seats.

I personally would be more angry if my mom gave my son a teeny piece of meat than if she took him for a 5 minute ride in the car without his seat.


----------



## lawmama1984 (Mar 17, 2009)

ITA, limabean. I was once the first time mother of a 4 month old, and am now the first time mother of a 26 month old who has never had any meat. I don't understand why, on this particular issue, some people (and not just here but IRL as well) expect that it's something that parents can/should compromise on--especially when to a lot of us it is a lifestyle choice based on moral or ethical considerations, as stated previously.


----------



## no5no5 (Feb 4, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
I feel like this comes off as me not supporting you in eating vegetarian yourself and in feeding your child vegetarian foods. I DO support that. But you are the only vegetarian adult in her life, and if you want other adults to have important caregiving roles, then you may want to consider letting go of the control a bit.

Yeah, it does come off in that way. If you were the only GD person in your child's life, would that make it inappropriate to insist that the child not be hit? If you were the only pro-breastfeeding person in your child's life, would that make it inappropriate to insist that the child not be fed formula? As the mother of this child, OP has the right to set her own priorities and have those priorities be respected. As a first time mother, of course she may change her mind at some point. But her decisions should still be respected, and if MIL disagrees with them she should raise that issue in a respectful way.


----------



## mama2mygirl (Dec 14, 2005)

We are not vegetarians but we seldom have meat because I only let my children eat organic meat and we are, well, poor. And we don't feed our babies any meat at all. My MIL has a problem with this but the no meat thing was dh's idea so there's that.
I do know a few people in real life who are vegetarian but their partners aren't. In all the cases that I know, the kids aren't vegetarian yet. I think that there's a good chance that they will be later.


----------



## ErinYay (Aug 21, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *texmati* 
I personally would be more angry if my mom gave my son a teeny piece of meat than if she took him for a 5 minute ride in the car without his seat.

Really? Even though most car accidents happen within minutes from home?

I think when you elevate philosophical issues (food, toys, tv, etc) over actual safety issues, those around you are going to not only be disdainful of your philosophies, but ignore everything else you say, too.

This is what picking your battles is all about- put the stuff that will kill your kid on the top of the list, then stuff that will injure your kid, then stuff that will emotionally harm your kid, then everything else goes below that.

Saying that you'd rather have your child put in direct physical danger over your child getting meat/ a Disney toy/ an hour of TV calls all of your choices into question by those who don't agree with your every choice.


----------



## TulsiLeaf (Nov 23, 2009)

Husband and I are religious vegetarians and so is our daughter.

All our family members know this and respect this.

I feel like this.

It goes so far beyond dietary wants. If I were Jewish and my mother who was say Mormon came in and started telling my child not to believe what we believe I would hit the roof.

For many of us, eating meat is direct violation of our spiritual beliefs.
If my mother or MIL ever acted like the OP's my daughter would never be unsupervised with her. Thank god they respect my choices.


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

"... but what if a family's food habits were associated with their religion? Would you think it was unrealistic for them to expect to "control" their child's adherence to those religious-based food values, at least through toddlerhood?"

I think it totally depends on the nature and extent of the dietary laws, whether or not it's a two-parent or one-parent religious conviction, and whether or not you have access to caregivers/schools/activities where your preferences will be accommodated. Where I live, only the Chabadniks keep glatt kosher and it's a huge ongoing effort. In Boro Park, *I* could keep glatt kosher with very minimal effort and who knows, I just might!

Again, the OP may have a conviction here that rises to the level of a religious conviction, in which case having the rule followed is more important that facilitating relationships with extended family who she doesn't trust to 100% follow the rule. But if her DH doesn't share that conviction, then she and he need to hash it out, arrive at a position and present a united front. I do not believe I could get my husband to support me in something like this, not because he's a bad guy or picks my mom over me, but because he doesn't have any dietary convictions. But if his mom was saying the n-word or something around the kids, that would be both of our hill to die on. That would be worth curtailing the relationship. Everybody has their hill to die on. I just want the OP to do some hard thinking about whether this is hers, whether she and her spouse are in accord, and whether resentment of other, unrelated MIL issues is bringing her to a fever pitch over a hypothetical.


----------



## junipermuse (Nov 1, 2006)

My guess is that the mil's issue (right or wrong) with not giving the baby meat is that the baby's daddy (her son) is not a vegetarian and so she probably views keeping meat from the baby as the DIL being overly-controlling. I'm not saying that's the case but it's probably hard for her to see it as solely an ethical choice when one parent does indeed eat meat.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Ugh, I am not sure you will ever be able to avoid the comments.

My children can't have pork. Luckily, political correctness prevents most people (I assume) from commenting, but yes, we do intend to control that until they can decide themselves whether they want to be in their father's religion.

I agree fully that both parents need to be united in this.

And in my experience, the vast majority of vegetarians are vegetarians for the same reason most of us don't eat people. Now, I'm a specist, and I'm happy to eat a goat. Nonetheless, I think most people of GenX and younger understand this.

I do not think that older generations see it that way and I have only sympathy for the OP.

All I can suggest is that hopefully by three your child will be able to recognize meat, more or less, and you can explain to her that it is an animal that was once alive, so does she want to eat that?

My three-year-old seems to have stopped eating most recognizeable meat after I explained what it was. I don't mind as we eat a lot of legumes anyway. But there is a chance your own child will be able to make that decision long before eight.

(Oh, and FWIW, it's my husband's religion, Islam, that doesn't allow pork, and I choose to respect that and ask my children do as well. I do not see that as controlling. He doesn't force. He never had to ask.)


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

"I think when you elevate philosophical issues (food, toys, tv, etc) over actual safety issues, those around you are going to not only be disdainful of your philosophies, but ignore everything else you say, too.

This is what picking your battles is all about- put the stuff that will kill your kid on the top of the list, then stuff that will injure your kid, then stuff that will emotionally harm your kid, then everything else goes below that. "










Improper car seat use or inadequate supervision - life threatening. Spanking, CIO - emotionally damaging. Being told that mommy's going to hell because she doesn't worship Jesus - emotionally damaging.

Sharing what you eat, what do for recreation, what you believe about God with your grandchildren - for me, the benefits of all that stuff outweigh any downside. The relationship developed in that exchange is more important than maintaining absolute control over the foods, images and ideas that my toddlers take in. And the example I give of showing respect for Grandma's values is also very important.

(Again, nontoxic nonfundie safety-conscious grandparents here! And they are very respectful of any suggestions and requests I might make! That most definitely influences my viewpoint!)


----------



## lawmama1984 (Mar 17, 2009)

OP--from the responses, you can see that you are not alone in your feelings and that your frustrations and concerns are validated by many of us who have the same/similar lifestyle choice and a couple others who do not, but can put themselves in your position. I think you have gotten some really great advice from certain posters. Have you consider x-posting this in the vegetarian/vegan forum?


----------



## crunchy_mommy (Mar 29, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
Sharing what you eat, what do for recreation, what you believe about God with your grandchildren - for me, the benefits of all that stuff outweigh any downside. The relationship developed in that exchange is more important than maintaining absolute control over the foods, images and ideas that my toddlers take in. And the example I give of showing respect for Grandma's values is also very important.

I would never put food, recreation, & religion in all the same category.
Beliefs about God are of primary importance to us and I won't go into that further since it's kind of OT. But as for food -- OK for ex., my inlaws eat almost exclusively heavily-processed-artificial-devoid of nutrient-foods. I see absolutely no reason for my DS to be exposed to kool-aid & hot dogs. What is the benefit to that? We eat food for nourishment & there's no nourishment in there... and I certainly don't want chemicals, dyes, etc. fed to my child. And yes, we 'eat' vegan (I won't say we 'are' vegan here because we aren't ethical vegans, I won't get into it but anyway...) and that's a lifestyle choice we make that we view on par with GD, no CIO, etc. My DH does eat meat but eats 100% vegan at home and is actually considering not eating meat anymore because he doesn't want to have a negative influence on our DS (though I don't think he's ready to quit altogether, he does enjoy meat quite a bit). Even though he eats meat, he feels it's very very important that DS grow up without eating meat, until he can make a fully-informed choice on the ethical & physical (health) ramifications of eating it. Sorry I am rambling... I don't understand why it's being overly controlling to say my DS can't have meat, or that he can't eat artificial colors, or whatever. I want my DS to be healthy & I want him to be raised with our beliefs, because they are vitally important to our family. We can still show respect for Grandma's values... we don't openly criticize or ridicule her food (or religion or choices etc.). We don't serve Grandma broccoli & a veggie burger, or say we're going to feed her carrots when she's not looking. We have a lot of respect for others, and *part of that respect is not forcing our values on them*. Doesn't the OP deserve the same respect, that MIL doesn't force her 'values' (i.e. eating meat) on her grandchild?


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

"I would never put food, recreation, & religion in all the same category."

I take it you are not Jewish









"I see absolutely no reason for my DS to be exposed to kool-aid & hot dogs. What is the benefit to that?"

If you don't see a benefit to your in-laws spending time with ds, preparing meals, eating together, alone without you and dh "supervising," then our values are so wildly divergent that I don't think either of us can appreciate where the other is coming from. I would sooner slap my mother or MIL across the face than tell her that the food she had prepared was not good enough for my kids. The emotional effect would probably be about the same, too, although they'd both forgive a slap a lot faster.


----------



## limabean (Aug 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
I would sooner slap my mother or MIL across the face than tell her that the food she had prepared was not good enough for my kids.

But telling certain grandparents that CIO is unacceptable and will not be permitted would be like a slap in the face too -- they'd get defensive and say that's how they raised their kids and they turned out perfectly fine thankyouverymuch. And some parents who are on the fence about CIO might even say, "Oh, the occasional CIO isn't going to have any lasting damage. Isn't it more important to have a good relationship with the GPs than to stand firm on this issue?"

In our house, we eat everything including junk food, and like you, all of my kids' GPs' values are close enough to ours that we've never had to have a conflict about anything and they're all welcome to spend time alone with our kids, but I have no trouble understanding that for some people, food really is _that_ important.


----------



## texmati (Oct 19, 2004)

Smithie, and I mean this very gently, but I think you can have a good relationship with your inlaws and have them respect your parenting choices as well. I really don't see why the two have to be mutally exclusive.

I grew up in a large, close extended family (3-4 families in the same zipcode, and more in the same city)

I am an aunt, and older cousin to 12, an older sister, a daughter, a neice and a wife. Not exactly a grandma, but I still have great relationships with most people in my family; because I respect them, and their views, even if I don't agree with them. That means that I know that my aunt #1 kids can have chocolate, but my aunt #2's can't. And that aunt #1 follows a strict schedule, but no one else in the family. When I was a kiddo being cared for by my grandma, my same age cousins could have tea, but not me, because my dad didn't like us having caffine. My mom routinely makes special food for DS, even though I bring my own, because she respects me.

It's not difficult, it's not hard, or mean, or rude (or a slap in the face!) It's having relationships with someone based on respect-- especially with that which is most dear to them (there kids!). I say if OP's MIL values her relationship with her grandkids, she needs to start respecting her DIL's role as a mother.


----------



## texmati (Oct 19, 2004)

Oh-- and i just want to add that my family is not very sophisticated or formal. This approximates the family dynamic that I've seen in most successful joint family(more than one brother, wife and children living together)/multigenerational households.


----------



## lawmama1984 (Mar 17, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *texmati* 
Smithie, and I mean this very gently, but I think you can have a good relationship with your inlaws and have them respect your parenting choices as well. I really don't see why the two have to be mutally exclusive.

I grew up in a large, close extended family (3-4 families in the same zipcode, and more in the same city)

I am an aunt, and older cousin to 12, an older sister, a daughter, a neice and a wife. Not exactly a grandma, but I still have great relationships with most people in my family; because I respect them, and their views, even if I don't agree with them. That means that I know that my aunt #1 kids can have chocolate, but my aunt #2's can't. And that aunt #1 follows a strict schedule, but no one else in the family. When I was a kiddo being cared for by my grandma, my same age cousins could have tea, but not me, because my dad didn't like us having caffine. My mom routinely makes special food for DS, even though I bring my own, because she respects me.

It's not difficult, it's not hard, or mean, or rude (or a slap in the face!) It's having relationships with someone based on respect-- especially with that which is most dear to them (there kids!). I say if OP's MIL values her relationship with her grandkids, she needs to start respecting her DIL's role as a mother.











I seriously am having the hardest time comprehending why certain posters are fighting so hard for the MIL to be able to feed the child meat. This is seriously beyond me. How on Earth does it affect the MIL if her GD is vegetarian? The fact of the matter is, it doesn't. If it is so difficult for the MIL to prepare foods w/o meat, I am sure the OP will be more than happy to send along prepared meals. I suppose I don't have adults (presumably in their late 40s or early 50s) in my life for whom this would be that big of a deal--it's not like OP is asking her to make CF, GF, vegan etc meals (which, btw, would also be fine, my point with that it just might be more difficult for the MIL). But seriously, it is of absolutely no consequence to the MIL to not feed the child meat. Period. And it is seriously annoying to me, and others I'm sure, to have our feelings on something so important poo poed by others.

Fine, some people don't understand it. The good thing is, you don't have to understand it. I think there are enough of us here who do that OP has gotten some really good, valid advice and won't feel invalidated, despite some PP's comments.


----------



## crunchy_mommy (Mar 29, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
If you don't see a benefit to your in-laws spending time with ds, preparing meals, eating together, alone without you and dh "supervising," then our values are so wildly divergent that I don't think either of us can appreciate where the other is coming from.

Well I didn't say that -- DS is only 1.5 but already both sets of grandparents know what foods they can make for him. My mom is figuring out vegan ingredients so she can bake cookies with him when he's older. She & I cook veggies etc. together while DS 'helps'... He doesn't yet spend time alone with them but that's not because of the food issue. I don't have a need to 'supervise' meals as long as I can trust them not to feed him 'non-approved' foods. If they don't want to respect our family's lifestyle, they don't have to, but then no, DS wouldn't be spending time with them unsupervised. I also wouldn't let him stay with anyone who won't bring him to church on Sundays, or someone who would let him watch R-rated movies.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
I would sooner slap my mother or MIL across the face than tell her that the food she had prepared was not good enough for my kids. The emotional effect would probably be about the same, too, although they'd both forgive a slap a lot faster.

In some ways this makes me think that food is a lot more important in your family than it is in mine. I have been vegetarian for 15 years and it has never once interfered with me having a great relationship with my (omnivore) parents or in-laws... or my grandparents, for that matter.


----------



## CatsCradle (May 7, 2007)

Quote:

I am an aunt, and older cousin to 12, an older sister, a daughter, a neice and a wife. Not exactly a grandma, but I still have great relationships with most people in my family; because I respect them, and their views, even if I don't agree with them. That means that I know that my aunt #1 kids can have chocolate, but my aunt #2's can't. And that aunt #1 follows a strict schedule, but no one else in the family. When I was a kiddo being cared for by my grandma, my same age cousins could have tea, but not me, because my dad didn't like us having caffine. My mom routinely makes special food for DS, even though I bring my own, because she respects me.

It's not difficult, it's not hard, or mean, or rude (or a slap in the face!) It's having relationships with someone based on respect-- especially with that which is most dear to them (there kids!). I say if OP's MIL values her relationship with her grandkids, she needs to start respecting her DIL's role as a mother.
I could have written something very similar to this! And yes, respect is a two-way street. I have a hard time wrapping my mind around the concept that it isn't. I also come from a family (both direct and extended) where food plays a huge role, and although we are chided occasionally for our choices, I have not had one family member (either direct or extended) who have disrespected our choices. The same standard applies to me as well: I was more than glad to let my mother cook a turkey in our house when we hosted Thanksgiving. The same mother, my mother, brought about six vegan dishes that she had prepared beforehand so her "poor daughter's family could have something to eat!" I can't describe how much that meant to me! (considering that my family is so unbending in so many other respects).

The point is, my family recognizes that there are certain choices that are important to us (whether they agree with them or not), and I too must make an effort to respect their choices. That, however, doesn't mean that either has to compromise the very core of beliefs. To me, it boils down to a meeting of the minds of how one approaches certain situations. A meeting of the minds doesn't necessarily mean doing anything objectionable. It means coming to terms with the others' choices, and working around them.


----------



## no5no5 (Feb 4, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *crunchy_mommy* 
In some ways this makes me think that food is a lot more important in your family than it is in mine.









If my mom made something I or DD or DH couldn't eat, she'd say, "Oh well," (and mean it) and we'd go scrounge for something else. It'd be such a tiny thing. In fact, it has happened, more than once. Sometimes because we're veggie, and sometimes because of food allergies. You must have a very odd family dynamic if you'd rather hit someone than refuse to eat the food they'd prepared.


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

"You must have a very odd family dynamic if you'd rather hit someone than refuse to eat the food they'd prepared."

I don't think the tone of judgement is necessary, but yes, I suppose that I'm coming from a place where gratitude and respect and important and expressed through eating mama/grandma's cooking at the communal table with the whole family. I can't be the only person here with an Italian MIL. To refuse her the right to choose the foods to lay out on her table would hurt her. Badly. It would call into question her competency in an area of life that she greatly values. I would eat veal before I would do that. (And I am NOT a person who eats veal.)

I don't think it's important for the OP to "allow" her child to someday eat meat, with Grandma or not, but I do think it's important for her to take the time to understand and empathize with her MILs feelings about/around food, and her husband's feelings about/around food, and her _own_ feelings about/around food. Chicken nuggets may be a hill to die on. Are French fries? Industrially produced milk? Candy? Baked goods made with white flour? It's good to know what your issues truly are, where the line is, and whether it's YOUR issue singular or something on which the other parent supports you.

Food's an emotionally loaded commodity, is what I'm saying. It can communicate acceptance and rejection very powerfully.


----------



## lawmama1984 (Mar 17, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
I would eat veal before I would do that. (And I am NOT a person who eats veal.)


Yes but _why_ don't you eat veal? Is it the taste, texture or some other reason? Surely it's not b/c of a philosophical or moral objection, so this antecdote is inappropriate to the issue.

I think you're giving OP's MIL a little bit too much credit. I think it's pretty clear that she, specifically, isn't interested in feeding the daughter meat (or preparing some special, much labored over meal that contains meat) out of some great sense of love or wanting to express her love through food. It is quite clearly a power struggle. Otherwise, she wouldn't be snarky and would approach the issue in a mature fashion.


----------



## CatsCradle (May 7, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
"You must have a very odd family dynamic if you'd rather hit someone than refuse to eat the food they'd prepared."

I don't think the tone of judgement is necessary, but yes, I suppose that I'm coming from a place where gratitude and respect and important and expressed through eating mama/grandma's cooking at the communal table with the whole family. I can't be the only person here with an Italian MIL. To refuse her the right to choose the foods to lay out on her table would hurt her. Badly. It would call into question her competency in an area of life that she greatly values. I would eat veal before I would do that. (And I am NOT a person who eats veal.)

I don't think it's important for the OP to "allow" her child to someday eat meat, with Grandma or not, but I do think it's important for her to take the time to understand and empathize with her MILs feelings about/around food, and her husband's feelings about/around food, and her _own_ feelings about/around food. Chicken nuggets may be a hill to die on. Are French fries? Industrially produced milk? Candy? Baked goods made with white flour? It's good to know what your issues truly are, where the line is, and whether it's YOUR issue singular or something on which the other parent supports you.

Food's an emotionally loaded commodity, is what I'm saying. It can communicate acceptance and rejection very powerfully.

Smithie: please first understand that I totally know where you are coming from. I have a Jewish/German background and I live in an area of Brooklyn that is, let's say, predominately Italian, Greek, Lebanese, Jewish, Russian, Polish, Egyptian and everything in between (which is only possible in Brooklyn!). I have never encountered, either neighbors or friends or family, who have exhibited any distress in the area of food choices. In fact, most of my contacts, either familial or non-direct, celebrate food in a much different way. Food, while important, is secondary to the celebration. While it is food that brings us together, it is the experience of being together that is paramount. Now, on the other hand, there is the issue of healthy appetite and cleaning one's plate. To snub a good pasta dish, well, that's a different story.


----------



## no5no5 (Feb 4, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
I don't think the tone of judgement is necessary, but yes, I suppose that I'm coming from a place where gratitude and respect and important and expressed through eating mama/grandma's cooking at the communal table with the whole family.

No judgment. Heaven only knows I've got my fair share of dysfunctional family dynamics. I do think that you need to recognize that if indeed this is such an important issue for your family, that is not true for all/most families. I think that most people are able to recognize that others may have varying tastes, preferences, allergies, and other dietary restrictions. In most families people express their gratitude and respect in other ways, and I didn't see anything in OP's posts indicating that her MIL is coming from this perspective.


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

"Yes but why don't you eat veal? Is it the taste, texture or some other reason? Surely it's not b/c of a philosophical or moral objection, so this antecdote is inappropriate to the issue."

Actually, I DO have a moral objection to veal. It's just that I have a greater moral objection to criticizing the food laid out in front of me, or teaching my children that such criticism is socially acceptable. I'd never force a child to eat anything offered to them in another house (family or not), but I also wouldn't interpose myself between hostess and child for anything less than an allergy. I am not invested in controlling what my children ingest when they are being served by somebody other than myself. And I don't think that's dysfunctional - I think it is HIGHLY functional and saves everybody involved a good deal of hassle. Me most of all.

But that's not the ONLY functional approach, which is why I suggested that the OP "take the time to understand and empathize with her MILs feelings about/around food, and her husband's feelings about/around food, and her own feelings about/around food. Chicken nuggets may be a hill to die on. Are French fries? Industrially produced milk? Candy? Baked goods made with white flour? It's good to know what your issues truly are, where the line is, and whether it's YOUR issue singular or something on which the other parent supports you."

You can't GET what you want, until you really KNOW what you want and what the other parties involved want and how that can all be pulled together into a negotiated truce. We're assuming that MIL is an ogre, DH is ineffective in dealing with her and the OP is a beleaguered saint. That approach helps no one, and certainly doesn't help the OP's dd, who deserves to have a strong relationship with her father's loved-and-respected mother. That's only going to happen in OP and her husband change how THEY are acting. MIL, as some have already pointed out, is not a parent and is not ultimately in charge - which sort of limits her ability to take the lead in establishing a healthy family food culture, which I'm going to broadly define as "not having an ongoing power struggle over food."

Several PPs have pointed out that they are part of healthy family food cultures where they are able to impose dietary restrictions without giving offense or being circumvented. It's certainly possible, but I'm sure that if you're starting from a place where your relatives just.doesn't.get.it., there's some work to be done to get there. It's work that's worth doing IMNSHO, so that a baby today isn't a toddler getting negative, conflicting messages about food a few years from now.


----------



## hildare (Jul 6, 2009)

ooh. That situation would burn me up!
I'm not a veg*n, but i have been. we farm, so the meat thing isn't really going to be an issue.
however, to me, it doesn't sound like a meat/veg issue. it sounds like a disrespect and manipulation issue. You make choices for your child. Your mil made choices for her child, and she's done. She needs to listen to you and respect whatever you ask. The bacon-y jibes are over the line, as is the implied secrecy, which only serves to make you uneasy-- i don't see how that sort of comment could be interpreted in any other way except for a passive aggressive way of telling you she intends to do things you disagree with.
I would just straight up say to her that you will not allow unsupervised time with your child if she is unwilling to respect your choices both physically and verbally. Tell her that you expect her to enforce YOUR rules and not hers. Tell her this in such a way that there is no animosity nor any room for argument, just in an A = B sort of way. I wouldn't play those games, because if you open the door to that behavior that's what you will get for the REST of the time.


----------



## no5no5 (Feb 4, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
Several PPs have pointed out that they are part of healthy family food cultures where they are able to impose dietary restrictions without giving offense or being circumvented. It's certainly possible, but I'm sure that if you're starting from a place where your relatives just.doesn't.get.it., there's some work to be done to get there. It's work that's worth doing IMNSHO, so that a baby today isn't a toddler getting negative, conflicting messages about food a few years from now.

ITA. I guess that's precisely why I am so confused by your strategy. I don't get how seeing you eat something that you don't like and that you have a moral objection to for fear of offending another person helps your children to develop healthy attitudes about food.


----------



## texmati (Oct 19, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *no5no5* 
ITA. I guess that's precisely why I am so confused by your strategy. I don't get how seeing you eat something that you don't like and that you have a moral objection to for fear of offending another person helps your children to develop healthy attitudes about food.

or even healthy attitudes about their extended family.

I don't know why I'm so bothered by your posts, Smithie. Honestly, I feel that you are saying that those of us who adhere to food restrictions (or restrictions of any sort) are doing so at the cost of our children's relationship with our parents (or other relatives).

It really hits home, because I very much value extended family relationships. But, I have seen in my own home, what happens when someones role as mother or wife is not respected. It's a recipe for disaster.


----------



## lawmama1984 (Mar 17, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *texmati* 

I don't know why I'm so bothered by your posts, Smithie. Honestly, I feel that you are saying that those of us who adhere to food restrictions (or restrictions of any sort) are doing so at the cost of our children's relationship with our parents (or other relatives). .









to this and no5no5

I'm going to just be done with this thread after this b/c I think OP has gotten enough valuable advice and words of comfort from those of us who have been in similar situations, but I just want to give OP one last







. You are completely justified in your feelings and know that I, too, would not leave my child unsupervised with someone who joked about giving them meat. I think hildare had a great way to deal with it, but if you are uncomfortable being so blunt about it, I would definitely talk to your husband and ask him to speak gently to his mother about how uncomfortable that makes you (hopefully BOTH of you so you don't come off like the "crazy" DIL) and she needs to respect the choices you've made for your family.


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

"I don't know why I'm so bothered by your posts, Smithie. Honestly, I feel that you are saying that those of us who adhere to food restrictions (or restrictions of any sort) are doing so at the cost of our children's relationship with our parents (or other relatives)."

I truly to do think that the OP and her husband are headed down that road, of valuing extremely strict adherence _by their child_ to a lifestyle choice _made by one of them_ over healthy extended family relationships. I think that's a bad idea nine times out of ten. I tend to agree with PPs that this is not really about food. It's about people not valuing each other's roles in the life of the child they all love, and I think that all three members of this triad are doing less than they could be to create a healthy extended family dynamic.

This family has a lot of time and space to work things out before there's any real question of Grandma preparing meals for grandkid, but this enthusiastic chorus of "she is dissing you! Restrict access! You are the parent and The One right Way is for you to make all the choices 100% of the time, present or absent, in your home or in somebody else's home!" bothers ME. I think it fans the flames of a hypothetical conflict between two women who shouldn't be fighting, and disappears the dad, without whom a lasting peace deal cannot be brokered. The OP feels attacked. MIL probably feels attacked, too. Dad feels caught in the middle.

OP can't change MIL's approach, but she CAN change her own approach. That doesn't mean giving up on raising a vegan kid if that's truly where her heart lies, but it DOES mean she needs to start caring about the feelings and perceptions of the other party here, rather than waiting for her to "go senile" so that she won't be bothered by her any more. The woman who did a good job raising your husband is not disposable, even if she is imperfect.

It doesn't concern me that the OP wants veto power every bite that goes into her child's mouth. To each her own. It bothers me that she apparently values that control at 100% and having a good relationship with her husband's mother at 0%, and that nobody but me has suggested that she do the work with her husband and with MIL to get to the point where they have an agreed-up set of standards for child-related issues that everybody can live with. It might not work, but that doesn't mean that it's not the central problem here. I really think it is. She'd be just as happy if MIL ceased to exist tomorrow, and MIL probably feels the same way about her. That's no way to live.


----------



## no5no5 (Feb 4, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
It doesn't concern me that the OP wants veto power every bite that goes into her child's mouth. To each her own. It bothers me that she apparently values that control at 100% and having a good relationship with her husband's mother at 0%, and that nobody but me has suggested that she do the work with her husband and with MIL to get to the point where they have an agreed-up set of standards for child-related issues that everybody can live with. It might not work, but that doesn't mean that it's not the central problem here. I really think it is. She'd be just as happy if MIL ceased to exist tomorrow, and MIL probably feels the same way about her. That's no way to live.

I think you should go back and reread this thread, if that is the impression you got. _I_ got the impression that OP very much wanted MIL to be a part of her child's life and that that was non-negotiable. I read many people's responses, my own included, as advising that she focus on improving the relationship dynamics in her family. Obviously we have different ideas of what constitutes a healthy relationship with the grandparents of one's children, but I don't think that you can fairly take credit for being the only one who recognizes that there is a problem that this family should work on.


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

Fair enough. Maybe I've gotten too hung up on one phrase typed in the heat of anger.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Quote:

I have a greater moral objection to criticizing the food laid out in front of me
What if it was people? Like, a human head?

Because moral vegetarianism is for many based on the belief that all animals deserve the same reverence we accord people, at least with respect to whether or not they may be killed for food.

Do you believe it's wrong for Jews and Muslims to politely decline pork or other non-kosher or non-halal foods? ("Thank you, I do appreciate it, but I really can't. The salad looks fantastic.")

I think that you are really not taking the vegetarian ethic very seriously. You will see that I argue very much for grandparent's rights, even to feed candy, watch TV, etc. but I also think that asking someone to abandon their parent's philosophical beliefs or religion is just not right.

And I do think that is probably where the grandparents here are not getting the point either. They simply do not and can not understand the moral objection to eating meat, that it's not like, "Oh, don't hurt a cow!" when life is full of pain and vegetarians know that.

It's something much different, an entirely different way of looking at animal life.


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

"What if it was people? Like, a human head?"

Actual (Catholic) and symbolic (Protestant) cannibalism is a pretty common thing, actually, and something I don't partake of because I'm not a Christian. Nor do I criticize it. Would I stop my kids from doing it? Probably not - I certainly wouldn't rudely interrupt a religious service to keep them from munching on what I regard as a piece of bread! - but I wouldn't think much of the person who offered the Eucharist to a Jewish six-year-old. It wouldn't bother ME, but it would surely be offensive to the other Christians present!

(I know that isn't what you're talking about, you're thinking more along the lines of a grisly severed head, and I honestly can't tell you how I'd react to that. Nobody has ever served me or my kids a head. But I don't have an inherent moral opposition to eating the dead flesh of any animal. The cannibalism taboo is a cultural more.)

The kosher issue is something that's very much present in my life, and I am strongly opposed to strict kosher observance. I think it promotes insularity and intolerance - once you take it too far, you and your kids literally cannot eat in the home of anybody outside of your own sect - not even other Jews. I don't observe strict kashrut, and I don't accommodate it. Nor do I attempt to force people to eat pork. Not am I forced by others to eat pork.

Anybody who's presenting their veganism the way the Orthodox present their kashrut is going to get a hostile reaction from me. But you know what? In all my years of adult life, I have never met a single vegan who copped that kind of attitude or criticized the food I was serving. It hasn't happened once. Vegans are easy to feed. Half the time they start by bringing their own food, and then once they get to know you enough to trust you not to feed them lard-fried beans, you know THEM well enough to have a short mental list of things you should provide. I don't know how seriously is "seriously enough" to taken veganism, but I certainly take it seriously enough to be able to accommodate it without calling attention to my vegan guest.

OP, we are now ranging widely from your original issue.


----------



## crunchy_mommy (Mar 29, 2009)

Catholics are not cannibals. This is a misunderstanding of the Eucharist & transubstantiation. Out of the scope of this thread but I just wanted to point that out.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
"What if it was people? Like, a human head?"

(I know that isn't what you're talking about,


No, not at all. I'm saying, presumably, you find it ethically repugnant to kill people for food, and vegetarians, in the same way (well, some of them) find it equally repugnant to kill other animals for food.

Quote:


Anybody who's presenting their veganism the way the Orthodox present their kashrut is going to get a hostile reaction from me.

Why? Because you don't view philosophical vegetarianism as a "real" religion like Judaism?

I don't get this. I think you just don't take vegetarians seriously.

What about a Buddhist or Hindu? Would you let THEM raise their kids vegetarians?

You keep going back to "lifestyle". Vegetarianism is not a lifestyle for many. It's a choice based on ethical beliefs about what kind of beings animals are, and how we ought to treat animals and other kinds of sentient beings.

How many tens or hundreds or thousands of years does vegetarianism have to be in the family before you can accept it?

I find your views on philosophical / ethical vegetarianism quite bigoted. Something not need be codified in a major religion to be a serious belief worthy of respect!


----------



## rightkindofme (Apr 14, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EdnaMarie* 
Why? Because you don't view philosophical vegetarianism as a "real" religion like Judaism?

Actually she just said she was very opposed to strictly keeping kosher. So that means that her treating vegetarianism the same way *is* giving it tons of respect. Just not in the way you want her to.


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

"I'm saying, presumably, you find it ethically repugnant to kill people for food, and vegetarians, in the same way (well, some of them) find it equally repugnant to kill other animals for food."

Oh, OK. I didn't get that.

That's an interesting question.

If somebody sat down at a table, saw the roasted haunch of murdered Uncle Fred on the carving platter, and jumped up shrieking "You people are monsters!" I'd be in total sympathy with that. I would also run screaming from the room.

The same scenario with the Thanksgiving turkey? I'd think, "Wow, what a UAV. Who invited that jerk to dinner?" and then I'd eat my turkey.

If that means that I don't respect the beliefs of people who consider animal murder to be the moral equivalent of human murder, OK. But I have NEVER met a vegetarian or vegan who has in any way indicated that they believe that. Ever. EVER. I have, in fact, never been treated with anything but the greatest courtesy by non-meat-eaters who were trying to figure out how to share the social experience of eating with my omnivorous family.


----------



## junipermuse (Nov 1, 2006)

I think comparing ethical vegetarianism to religious dietary restrictions is a bit off base. Making an ethical choice to not eat animals really should be compared to other ethical choices we might make for our children. For example if I chose not to dress my child in clothing made in sweat shops. Or if my child only could have fair trade toys. These are wonderful choices, but would it be worth ruining my and my child's relationship with their grandparent if they continued to buy gifts of clothing and toy that didn't meet my ethical standards. Obviously you don't want to compromise on things that could do emotional or physical harm to your child, but this isn't the case here. Also I think the grandmother is probably pushing on this issue so hard because she feels judged. When someone vehemently argues that her child won't eat meat on moral/ethical grounds, it seems pretty easy to interpret that as "And we are morally superior to you because you have not chosen that path." I'm not saying the OP is being judgmental, but I surely can see how the MIL might interpret it that way. Also it is interesting to me that obviously both parents don't see eye to eye on the moral/ethical implication of eating meat. So it seems odd to me that the path of greatest restriction was taken rather than least restriction. Now in all fairness I'll admit that I don't see dietary issues in absolutes. I try to buy humanely raised meat when we can afford it. I feed my family mostly homecooked healthy food. But my attitude for my kids has always been when in Rome, do as the Romans. So if Nana wants to take my kid for a Happy Meal, big deal. And even if we got to the point where all our food was locally grown/produced and all meat was humanely raised (which is an eventual goal for us) I wouldn't complain about the occasional factory farmed steak that the kids might eat at the grandparents house. I suppose if I really felt that eating animals was on par with eating people or murder in general I might feel different. Of course if I honestly felt it was the moral equivalent of murdering people, than I don't think I would be able to maintain my relationships with non-vegetarians because I know I couldn't be friends with actual murderers.


----------



## no5no5 (Feb 4, 2008)

I see this issue as equivalent to the decision to breastfeed rather than formula feed. I can't imagine anyone on the MDC boards responding with an "Oh, well, when in Rome" to a situation in which a mother who had chosen to exclusively breastfeed was dealing with a MIL who was joking about sneaking her baby a bottle of formula. Sure, the MIL may feel that formula is healthier. Sure, she may feel that the mother is judging her for using formula with her kids. Sure, she may honestly believe that it would be better if the mother just stopped breastfeeding and used formula instead. But none of that can possibly excuse the kind of behavior the OP has posted about.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
I suppose that I'm coming from a place where gratitude and respect and important and expressed through eating mama/grandma's cooking at the communal table with the whole family.

But, why does only mama/grandma deserve respect? If someone deliberately cooks something for me that he/she _knows_ I don't eat - _especially_ if I don't eat it for ethical or health reasons (ie. not just being "picky"), they're not treating _me_ with any respect. Why on earth would they expect me to show them the "respect" of eating it? This makes no sense to me at all.

The OP's MIL is being really disrespectful of their choices about their parenting and their diet. I don't see any reason why the OP should respect her MIL's disrespect. I also can't see any reason to be grateful for the "I'm going to feed you stuff your parents don't want you to have as soon as I can pull it off behind their backs" type of attitude.

And, I say all this as someone who isn't even remotely vegetarian, has never even considered being vegetarian and whose family eats meat at almost every dinner.


----------



## crunchy_mommy (Mar 29, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *no5no5* 
I see this issue as equivalent to the decision to breastfeed rather than formula feed. I can't imagine anyone on the MDC boards responding with an "Oh, well, when in Rome" to a situation in which a mother who had chosen to exclusively breastfeed was dealing with a MIL who was joking about sneaking her baby a bottle of formula. Sure, the MIL may feel that formula is healthier. Sure, she may feel that the mother is judging her for using formula with her kids. Sure, she may honestly believe that it would be better if the mother just stopped breastfeeding and used formula instead. But none of that can possibly excuse the kind of behavior the OP has posted about.









Smithie (and others) -- I'm curious about your feelings on that?


----------



## CatsCradle (May 7, 2007)

Sorry OP, that this has become such a delicate discussion, but after reading all the posts I'm coming to terms with the fact that there is not going to be a meeting of the minds here because there are wildly opposing levels of value being placed on your particular choice. For some, your choice is about lifestyle, one that is easily bendable. It can be confusing for some meat eaters because vegetarianism is often lumped with lifestyle choices like not eating sugar, or choosing between organic and non-organic. For others, your choice is a moral one. I happen to be in the camp that my dietary choices are moral choices, and I'm not going to do "as they do in Rome" because it is in direct conflict with what I believe is right and wrong. For me, there is no grey area. Does that mean I'm going to be rude and judgmental and a loser to be around? Of course not, in fact I try to avoid conflict. At the same time, however, I don't think that the only way to show "respect" is to compromise your own belief systems in order to avoid conflict or hurting another's feelings. There is no shame in setting your own boundaries. I agree with others that respect runs both ways. Granted, I could present a laundry list of all the things that other people consider moral choices which don't cross my radar. But I need to remind myself that those choices are important to those individuals, and even though I don't particularly agree with the premise of those choices, I should respect them and not purposefully put those individuals in an uncomfortable position.


----------



## hildare (Jul 6, 2009)

you know, the thing is.. whether you agree or not with the dietary choices of the OP, regardless of whether she thinks something that may seem as different to you as her kids need to only eat yellow foods on wednesday while standing on their heads, her mother in law needs to respect her choices. SHE is the parent of the child. Parents of children have the absolute right to make decisions for their own children, and have the right to a reasonable expectation that everyone abide by those choices. period.


----------



## ErinYay (Aug 21, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hildare* 
you know, the thing is.. whether you agree or not with the dietary choices of the OP, regardless of whether she thinks something that may seem as different to you as her kids need to only eat yellow foods on wednesday while standing on their heads, her mother in law needs to respect her choices. SHE is the parent of the child. Parents of children have the absolute right to make decisions for their own children, and *have the right to a reasonable expectation that everyone abide by those choices.* period.

I disagree strongly with the bolded portion. Yes, you have the right to make whatever choices you want for your child, but when those choices are outside of societal norms, you have no reasonable expectation for others to make the same choices. For better or worse, if you think that every other person your child comes into contact with must adhere to your personal codes and ethics 100%, you're going to make yourself infinitely stressed and frustrated at best.

Parents with kids who have life-threatening allergies are often great examples of this. To keep their kids **alive** they assume that people will NOT adhere to their kids' needs, and plan accordingly. Parents of kids who have life-threatening immune issues don't demand the world sanitize itself; they figure out how to co-exist in a filthy, dangerous world while preserving their kids' freedoms and relationships as much as they can.

If parents of kids who literally will **die** if they eat peanuts can figure out how to get through the day with familial relationships intact, surely parents with ethical food issues can, too.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ErinYay* 
If parents of kids who literally will **die** if they eat peanuts can figure out how to get through the day with familial relationships intact, surely parents with ethical food issues can, too.

If my MIL informed me that she _would_ feed my child peanuts, despite a potentially fatal allergy, my interest in keeping that familial relationship intact would be pretty much nil. I realize I have the luxury of having a mom and in-laws who don't make a hobby of disrespecting our parental decisions, but I wouldn't put up with this kind of crap, either.

The issue for this particular relationship isn't meat. The issue is the that MIL is being deliberately and unreasonably disrespectful. There's a _big_ difference between "I'm sorry - I didn't realize you were vegetarian and I gave your dd/ds [fill in meat here] for lunch" and "I think your vegetarianism is ridiculous, so I'm taunting you with my _intent_ to disregard it and feed your ds/dd [fill in meat here]"...huge difference. People with children with food allergies are very watchful, because there's always the possibility of the first...but the second is something else again, and nobody should have to be on guard against close family members choosing to deliberately feed their children against their ethical beliefs or health.

FWIW, my grandmother did the "feed the kids things their mother doesn't agree with". She didn't tell my mom, and actually bribed us not to tell (and painted mom as the bad guy, with "your mother wouldn't let you stay here if she knew", which wasn't even 100% accurate). In the long run, it cost her all semblance of a relationship with me, to the point that my dominant emotion when she died was _relief_. Messing around with children's relationships with their parents isn't benign, no matter how often people pull out the "it's a grandparent's job to spoil their grandchildren" or "family is more important" or any other mantras.


----------



## CatsCradle (May 7, 2007)

Quote:

I disagree strongly with the bolded portion. Yes, you have the right to make whatever choices you want for your child, but when those choices are outside of societal norms, you have no reasonable expectation for others to make the same choices. For better or worse, if you think that every other person your child comes into contact with must adhere to your personal codes and ethics 100%, you're going to make yourself infinitely stressed and frustrated at best.

Parents with kids who have life-threatening allergies are often great examples of this. To keep their kids *alive* they assume that people will NOT adhere to their kids' needs, and plan accordingly. Parents of kids who have life-threatening immune issues don't demand the world sanitize itself; they figure out how to co-exist in a filthy, dangerous world while preserving their kids' freedoms and relationships as much as they can.

If parents of kids who literally will *die* if they eat peanuts can figure out how to get through the day with familial relationships intact, surely parents with ethical food issues can, too.
Hildare can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think she was referring to the idea that the world should automatically adhere to one's personal ethics/codes. I think she was referring to the most recent discussion of respecting others choices/limitations once one has been put on notice of those choices/limitations. I think it is reasonable to expect people to respect your limitations once you put them on notice. For example, I shouldn't be expected to know about a child's allergies unless I'm put on notice, but once put on notice, it would be unreasonable, and even wrong, for me to continue to offer said child nuts or the like. Strange thing is, threatening food allergies are so prevelant now that I will always tell someone that a food item that I prepared has nuts, soy, etc. Or, I refrain from sending any items to school or parties that contain nuts, simply because there is always the risk.

Quote:

...they figure out how to co-exist in a filthy, dangerous world while preserving their kids' freedoms and relationships as much as they can.
That is what many people are suggesting above...learning to co-exist in a world while maintaining freedoms and relationships. Again, co-existence takes effort on both sides, especially when all parties are aware of the issues. It is always prudent to be on the defensive, but it is not unreasonable to expect others to honor your requests to refrain from giving your child something once your limitation is known.


----------



## junipermuse (Nov 1, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *no5no5* 
I see this issue as equivalent to the decision to breastfeed rather than formula feed. I can't imagine anyone on the MDC boards responding with an "Oh, well, when in Rome" to a situation in which a mother who had chosen to exclusively breastfeed was dealing with a MIL who was joking about sneaking her baby a bottle of formula. Sure, the MIL may feel that formula is healthier. Sure, she may feel that the mother is judging her for using formula with her kids. Sure, she may honestly believe that it would be better if the mother just stopped breastfeeding and used formula instead. But none of that can possibly excuse the kind of behavior the OP has posted about.

The difference is that when a child is being exclusively breastfed, the importance lies in the exclusivity of it. I for one would not have cared if my toddler who ate a variety of foods, including breastmilk was given a bottle or more likely a sippy cup of formula by a grandparent. It wouldn't endanger her health and it wouldn't likely hamper our nursing relationship at that point. Yes during the time that my baby was exclusively breastfeeding, I would explain that my concerns are about maintaining a virgin gut and my milk supply as well as preventing nipple confusion. I guess also my own child's desires and relationship with my MIL would factor into this greatly. I know my babies have never been into bottles and certainly never wanted any form of breastmilk substitute (formula, cow's milk, soy milk), but frankly if my kids are hanging out with my MIL or my own mom for the day and they're old enough that they are eating a variety of foods, then the grandparents can feed them whatever they want (assuming they wouldn't feed the kid poison or hard alcohol or something that was truly dangerous) I see it as an issue between my child and the caregiver. If my child were being watched by a grandparent on a much more regular basis (like several times a week, every week) then I would likely set some more specific guidelines, but I really believe that what your child learns from you the parent and sees you do every day has much more influence on their behavior and health in the long run. I guess that even if I believe strongly against something, if I'm prepared to let my child make their own choice about long before they're an adult, than it probably doesn't matter if I give them the freedom to make that choice a bit earlier. I just don't see any one food as so inherently dangerous that a little nibble given by grandma is the end of the world.

All that being said there are some things concerning food that I would put my foot down about because I believe they are emotionally damaging. No using food as punishment or bribe. No tricking my kid into eating something. For example I would be livid if my child was lied to and told she was eating tofu and it was really chicken or something. And no "clean plate club."


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

When my infants were very young, they were exclusively breastfed and on the rare occasions that I left them, they had EBM. I don't know how I would have reacted to a caregiver offering formula without my permission - it never happened that I know of. They were offered formula as older infants, but with my permission.

Now all three of my kids are food-eating people, and I do not seek to have control over the foods (including formula) that they eat outside my house. I feel that it would be alienating to my extended family to insist on that level of control, and I place no value on exercising that level of control. In fact, I think that exercising that level of control has negative emotional and social repercussions, and I'm very very glad that there are no allergies that _force_ me to feed my kid out of a Tupperware at parties and make him skip the birthday cake. Very, very glad.

How does this relate to the OP? While I don't think she needs to share my values around food in order to have a happy family life, I think it would be really great if she is able to clarify her own and her husband's values, and find a way to constructively and effectively get Grandma on board with the long-range nutrition plan. _"I am the MOTHER and I have the POWER and IF YOU DISOBEY ME I CAN PUNISH YOU,"_ while _true_, is maybe not the best starting point. When you want somebody to do things a certain way, you should really be prepared to tell them why.

It's not inherently pathological to be reluctant to order your parents around, and eager to find a way to get what you need that doesn't devolve into threats and power moves over how they do things in their own homes. If the OP's husband is feeling that reluctance, then it's not necessarily a flaw in his parenting. It may, in fact, be an area of strength in his relationship with his mother that he and the OP can leverage. People who are bad at at taking orders can be very gracious about accommodating requests.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rightkindofme* 
Actually she just said she was very opposed to strictly keeping kosher. So that means that her treating vegetarianism the same way *is* giving it tons of respect. Just not in the way you want her to.









Actually, that's not very respectful at all, assuming that ethical and metaphysical beliefs are somehow not as important as other beliefs, unless, presumably, they are her own!

Quote:

The same scenario with the Thanksgiving turkey? I'd think, "Wow, what a UAV. Who invited that jerk to dinner?" and then I'd eat my turkey.

If that means that I don't respect the beliefs of people who consider animal murder to be the moral equivalent of human murder, OK.
Well, at least you know you don't respect them.

I know a NUMBER of vegetarians--and incidentally, in my teens, I was among them--who believed all sentient beings to be morally equivalent to humans.

Simply put, "Do not kill" applies to animals as well as people, for them.

And having considered it very deeply with several ethicists as well as laypeople, I can say it is not as simple as it sounds to explain just why it is you think people are so darn special that they're the only ones you can't eat!

Quote:

I think comparing ethical vegetarianism to religious dietary restrictions is a bit off base. Making an ethical choice to not eat animals really should be compared to other ethical choices we might make for our children.... I suppose if I really felt that eating animals was on par with eating people or murder in general I might feel different. Of course if I honestly felt it was the moral equivalent of murdering people, than I don't think I would be able to maintain my relationships with non-vegetarians because I know I couldn't be friends with actual murderers.
See, I think vegetarianism is for many a very serious ethical choice and not comparable to ethical choices that require a communal effort to be effective (for example, boycotting sweatshop goods). Because there is an easy way not to kill a chicken: just don't eat a chicken. Now with how food is all mixed together, it's a bit harder, but ultimately, gram for gram, if you don't eat meat you will save animal lives.

Consider the missionary among cannibals (I know there are very, very few truly cannibalistic cultures and that many of those have stopped... bear with me). He can sit among the cannibals and befriend some of them, knowing them to be murderers and cannibals, and eat the other food, but refuse to partake of human flesh (communion notwithstanding







sorry even if you take that literally... that's actually eating God-man... whatever). And just calmly explain, "I'm sorry. I believe human life is sacred and that a person should never take another person's life. I believe this because blah blah blah. Please understand I have the deepest respect for you and your family, but we disagree on this."










I've seen it done. Not about cannibalism, but about other things.

I am ALL FOR compromise with in-laws and heaven knows we've done it, but I really don't like the suggestion that vegetarianism, which has a long, honorable tradition among ethical codes and world religions, is somehow "just" a "lifestyle" "choice". I believe it is a lived virtue that is inseparable from the ethical code from which it springs.

Perhaps reading Albert Schweitzer would be interesting... he was an ethical, religious vegetarian. I mean, beyond, of course, Buddhist vegetarianism or Hindu vegetarianism, which in my opinion should be strongly respected.


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

Anybody who thinks of themselves as the tolerant missionary and me as the cannibal-equivalent is not welcome in my home, let alone at my table. If a person really equates animal murder with human murder, then I don't see how they could form or maintain any kind of emotional bond with meat-eaters.

But again, I've eaten with many vegetarians and vegans and never had a negative experience. I know a lot of people who think that eating animals is WRONG, but there's a whole lot of space between that position and equating a human life with the life of a chicken. Having raised both, I truly have zero respect or tolerance for a person who can't see that the life of a baby and the life of a chick are not morally equal commodities.

But seriously. This theoretical aggressive radical vegan - the one who runs shrieking from the dinner table and ruins Thanksgiving - is a red herring. The OP is certainly not mired in that kind of extremism. She knows that people are more important than poultry. So I'm not sure why we're borrowing that level of trouble here.


----------



## no5no5 (Feb 4, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
I truly have zero respect or tolerance for a person who can't see that the life of a baby and the life of a chick are not morally equal commodities.

Zero, eh? Someone who believes that a widespread practice is immoral typically learns to deal with that by refusing to partake in the practice but not condemning those who do. You'll find that, for instance, that people who are pro-life believe that abortion is murder but generally don't believe that people who have had abortions should be punished as murderers. People who are opposed to the death penalty are able to have civil conversations with those who support it. People who believe in nonviolence can still respect and tolerate soldiers. Throughout history, our standards have changed, because first a few, and then many, people began to see things as immoral.

And standards vary widely across cultures. In some cultures, the norm is that animal lives are viewed as being as important as human lives. Can you really not tolerate that? And what does it mean to not tolerate that? If, for example, you met a Hindu who felt that animals, as reincarnated souls, are morally equal to humans, would you run away screaming like you'd just seen Uncle Fred on the table?


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

"Someone who believes that a widespread practice is immoral typically learns to deal with that by refusing to partake in the practice but not condemning those who do."

I have no problem with that tactic. Nobody who has adopted that tactic runs shrieking from the dinner table. The abortion example is a good one - I know many people who are antichoice, some to a very great degree -but I have never had an issue with an antichoice person of my acquaintance delivering a polemic screed in front of my kids, or during a social or event, _or at all_, actually. That's one big reason why I think the "you people are MURDERERS" dinner-table debacle is a red herring. People do not do that, unless they have some severe emotional and social challenges orthogonal to their vegan ideology.

I think maybe "respect" and "tolerance" aren't completely in alignment here. I can't say that I have any respect the doctrine of male headship, for example - but I tolerate it, in that I don't spend my days protesting outside of Bob Jones University. I won't be picketing PETA, either.

People really do have the right to make their own lifestyle choices, including the adoption of religious and philosophical positions that I find practically untenable and/or morally repugnant. And I don't think that the OP's choices are either! They are fine choices! I hope that her husband agrees and that Grandma can be dealt with in a way that allows for a strong relationship in the long term! I'm sure the OP hopes for that as well!


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
Anybody who thinks of themselves as the tolerant missionary and me as the cannibal-equivalent is not welcome in my home, let alone at my table. If a person really equates animal murder with human murder, then I don't see how they could form or maintain any kind of emotional bond with meat-eaters.

Perhaps because you are so intolerant of vegetarians' beliefs, you find it difficult to imagine other people with very strong beliefs that nonetheless are able to commune with people who don't share them?

Quote:

Having raised both, I truly have zero respect or tolerance for a person who can't see that the life of a baby and the life of a chick are not morally equal commodities.
You have zero tolerance for the person, or the belief?

I am pretty specific in my beliefs but I can tolerate many people, with the understanding that every single person on this earth is mistaken about a heck of a lot, including myself.

I would MUCH rather sit at a table with a tolerant person who believes I'm wrong about eating chicken than with an intolerant person who thinks I'm right about chicken!

I mean, have you ever looked at it from the chicken's point of view? Sure, you're bigger and you THINK the chicken is stupider, but you don't really know that (it's all based on the unproven assumption that brainwaves = intelligence, which has never been proved because that relies on a further assumption, that expression of intelligence = intelligence).

I mean, you don't even know I'm not a computer.

Quote:

But seriously. This theoretical aggressive radical vegan - the one who runs shrieking from the dinner table and ruins Thanksgiving - is a red herring. The OP is certainly not mired in that kind of extremism. She knows that people are more important than poultry. So I'm not sure why we're borrowing that level of trouble here.
Really? She hasn't said so.

And frankly, running screaming from a table is a different issue entirely from asking someone politely to please not feed her children dead animals until they can fully comprehend what they are doing and choose it.

I didn't bring up someone screaming running from a table.

I brought up specific beliefs about animals and humans. Not screaming from a table.

You seem to want to paint people with different beliefs as rude (though rudeness is not inherently connected to beliefs about the sanctity of life, human or otherwise), and you do not tolerate people with different beliefs about the world. Why would you suggest that vegetarians do otherwise?


----------



## junipermuse (Nov 1, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
If a person really equates animal murder with human murder, then I don't see how they could form or maintain any kind of emotional bond with meat-eaters.

This is what I was thinking. I can't imagine being married/partnered/willingly raising a child with someone who practiced some moral equivalent to human murder. Never would happen. Which is why I suggested it be compared to something more like an ethical choice to only buy fair trade or humanely raised meat (I don't think I buy the whole thing about these choices only being beneficial if practiced by whole communities, I think they can have the same effect as one single vegetarian, if I buy 1 humanely raised chicken then that was one less chicken that lived a sad life on a factory farm). I was trying to imagine some situation where my husband and I might not see eye to eye on the moral implications, but where I could still tolerate maintaining a relationship with him. Since the OP is in a (seemingly) loving relationship with a man who eats meat, I made the assumption (based on my own experience) that while she has made the ethical choice not to eat meat, she doesn't see it as the moral equivalent of murder.

Also I have certainly known other people who felt the need to control the interactions between their children and other family members so much that would seek to control things like what kind of presents they received from family members. As much as I personally value things like buying fair trade and such, I wouldn't personally put that value ahead of me and my child's relationship with our family.

Of course every parent has the right to be the ultimate decision maker on what they're child eats, wears, and plays with. That doesn't change the fact that sometimes everyone is happier when the parent chooses to relinquish some of that control. If the choice comes down to letting the child have the *choice* of eating meat when they are with grandma (I say choice because I have never in my life been able to force my child to eat something they didn't want to eat) and severely limiting the child's time with Grandma (of course assuming that aside from the meat issue this would be an otherwise positive relationship), which choice would cause the least amount of trouble and heartache?

All this being said, I do have to agree that the OP's MIL is being passive-aggressive. If it was my MIL making jokes about going behind my back against my parental wishes I would feel hurt and distrustful, and I would probably feel like limiting my child's time with her as well. That doesn't mean though that that is the best way of dealing with the situation.


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

"You have zero tolerance for the person, or the belief?"

The belief. As you say, a person can be deeply mistaken (in my view) about a whole heck of a lot of things still be a decent human being and deserving of my respect. But just as I won't sit still and listen to an explanation about how God intends men to be in charge of women, I wouldn't sit still and listen to an explanation of how a farm animal's life is worth just as much as mine. Both ideologies are inherently degrading and dehumanizing to _me_, and I don't allow other people to degrade me without offering up some kind of protest. I pay them the respect of assuming that they did not mean to offer me a grave insult, and I explain what my boundaries are on the issue.

Again, this has NEVER happened to me when I was interacting with a vegetarian. With ideologically motivated sexists? All the time. PETA has occasionally been incredibly offensive, but no individual vegetarian or vegan that I have ever met has felt the need to dehumanize me and mine in order to prop up their ideology.

junipermoon wrote:

"I can't imagine being married/partnered/willingly raising a child with someone who practiced some moral equivalent to human murder. Never would happen."

I don't think it ever does.


----------



## Forthwith (Aug 6, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Smithie* 
That's one big reason why I think the "you people are MURDERERS" dinner-table debacle is a red herring. People do not do that, unless they have some severe emotional and social challenges orthogonal to their vegan ideology.

Smithie, I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that you are the person who brought up the hypothetical veg*n who screams and flees at Thanksgiving, back in post #77. Why did you even bring it up if you think it's a red herring?


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kelmendi* 
Smithie, I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that you are the person who brought up the hypothetical veg*n who screams and flees at Thanksgiving, back in post #77. Why did you even bring it up if you think it's a red herring?

That's what I was thinking... I mean... I don't really get it.

Quote:

Since the OP is in a (seemingly) loving relationship with a man who eats meat, I made the assumption (based on my own experience) that while she has made the ethical choice not to eat meat, she doesn't see it as the moral equivalent of murder
Possibly not, but she may still feel it's very important and have philosophical beliefs that she holds dearly about it. For example, that it's only morally permissible to eat meat if it's eaten with reverence.

I just think people's beliefs about animals and people and their rights are do not fall under the category of practical considerations about what will eventually make a child a good person.

For example, a grandparent could never spank. However, she may have the right to ask a child not to touch the china. The former is about the child's human rights. The latter is a practical consideration that will affect the child, but in a minor way.

Vegetarianism is for many people about the rights of animals. I really do not think it's fair of people to suggest it's a minor issue.


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

The screaming-from-the-table-bit started when somebody (forget who) asked me how I'd react if I were served a human head. My point was, if the reaction to being served meat were the same as the reaction to being served a human head, then the person who reacted thusly is out of their everlovin' mind and I don't tolerate that level of crazy at my dinner table.

But, I have never heard of a vegetarian or vegan reacting in that manner and I do not believe it is a common problem. I actually socialize with a lot of vegetarians IRL. If I am surrounded by people who think I am the Hitler of chickens, then they are certainly managing to keep quiet about it.


----------



## Adaline'sMama (Apr 16, 2010)

Wow, Thanks for all your comments and input! I feel like I have a pretty good idea about how to deal with this. I had to go out of town to deal with some family issues (my side), so I have kind of abandoned the forum for a couple of weeks. It seems like there were just a couple of issues that I wanted to clear up. I cant quote everyone, so I just want to make a few things little more clear:

*MIL is not concerned with respecting my desicions about food, but she eats cheetos and mustard for dinner on a styrofoam plate at least once a week. So Im dont really feel that she has room to disrespect me.

*DH is not vegetarian, but he was for several years and he was when I married him. His mother has dealt with him being an on again off again veg/vegan for over 10 years. He tries to make ethical choices about the meat he does choose to eat, but he has been known to break down and buy a Wendy's burger every now and then. However, I usually pack his lunch and it us usually vegetarian or with local meat.

*MIL is very controlling. She controls what time we go places, where we go, ect. I have had to push and fight to have Christmas at my house this year (b/c its MY babys first Christmas and I .want. her. at. home. I mentioned it all last year while I was preg and she laughed it off. I demand to be listened to every now and then. (She also gave DH a dog once without asking me...she just has no respect)

*I am not morally opposed to killing animals for meat. I dont really think that humans have the right to treat animals poorly while raising. I am morally opposed to the conditions they are kept in and the gross things they eat, and the nasty hormones and anti biotics that are injected into them. I also think that a person should have to know what they are eating and not have it come in plastic from the grocery store (this pretty much goes for all food, not just meat). Id rather someone hunt and kill their own meat than buy it from the store.

So, UPDATE:

I talked to MIL and to my parents about not giving DD meat until we have told them that it was ok. My parents said ok. MIL said she guessed that would be fine. I made a comment about how much it meant to me and that I would have a hard time leaving DD anywhere where I thought that someone would feed her meat. She said she wouldnt feed her any meat, meat products, or very much dairy until we said it was ok. So, I am going to trust her to respect me in this. I feel like if she does it even one time, DH will respect my desicion not to leave DD with her.

Again, THANKS LADIES! You were all so helpful with this issue. I never thought I would have to deal with it so early in her life, but it's great to know that Im not alone! I ♥ MDC!!!


----------

