Whitman is an outdoorsy kind of place.   I can dig that; when it’s sunny, it’s fun to be outside.   On the other hand, carabineers, rope and snowboards aren’t free.   Neither are fancy waterproof coats and Vegan cookbooks.   One thing that has always struck me as particularly odd about rich people is how much they seem to love organic food.  

My point is that the consumption of organic food and the ideology of vegetarian/veganism/outdoorsyism may be cultivated because of taste, environmental concern or a host of other reasons, but it also is part of a privileged lifestyle.

No one is born with a scientific understanding of how their body functions.   I never received any information about nutrition or the biological functioning of my body till I sought it out on my own.   Not everyone has the opportunity or the resources to do so.
Vegetarian and vegan cuisine is also out of the price range of most people.   This may seem odd: vegetables seem comparably inexpensive, but the costs add up: Wendys instead of McDonalds, stir fry instead of hamburger, etc.   Not to mention the increased expense of organic food.

One would think that with all the advances in scientific technology and computers and nanotech and whatnot that the privileged would much prefer pesticide and herbicide-laden food.   Then I realized why wealthy people like expensive things: not everyone can afford them

I’m sure there’s something to be said for the “data” that says organic food is healthier and prettier and smells better and gets you laid more when you cook with it, but its increased expense puts it out of the range of affordability for most people.
I’m a pretty privileged person myself, so the inequality aspect, while important, isn’t my main concern.   Mostly I’m concerned with the cultural implications of this kind of consumption.

The ethical argument for vegetarianism de-legitimizes other cultural interpretations of meat consumption.   This is the kind of ideology used to deny people like the Makaw the right to whale.

More than just telling people they’re unethical for diets they’ve enjoyed for thousands of years, it also requires massive cultural change in the present.   While that may be okay for some, it’s a personal choice.   One that I think we should be wary of.

In my mind, the most progressive development of the vegetarianism movement is the public advocacy of learning to live with less.   A life of conspicuous consumption and overt materialism may seem fun in the short term, but it’s not accessible for everyone, and can often create barriers to dialogic interaction with others, something I think is critically important for an ethics that respects difference.
Learning to live with less is probably a good idea, I’m just not sure that forgoing delicious, culturally relevant meats have to be a part of that.