Who needs vegetarian meat substitutes?
Apparently, vegetarians need meat replacements.
I can understand that meat is a source of certain nutrients that we need in order to stay healthy. And that you have to procure those nutrients from other food sources if you decide to refrain from eating meat. You won’t hear me argumenting against a varied and complete diet. That’s a given. And in that sense, meat replacement certainly is a necessity. But I think the “replacement” concept is being misinterpreted by the food industry. There is no need to replace “meat” as such, you simply need alternative sources for nutrients provided by meat.
However, when I look at the vegetarian section in the supermarkets I frequently shop at, those sections seems to be all about meat. Not that they have actual meat products for sale, but all of the products available in some way directly refer to meat. The vegetarian section is also invariably located right alongside the meat products, as an extension of the meat section. And it contains all the shapes and forms the meat section has: vegetarian burgers, schnitzels, minced vegetarian “meat”, and even vegetarian salami for filling your sandwich. They all look like meat products, or at least they try their best to pose as meat products. And the vegetarian salami even tries very hard to taste like its meat alter ego (unsuccesfully – I tried it).
But do we really need fake meat?
Aren’t meat lookalikes sending the wrong message? Because they imply that meat actually is a necessity. That if you don’t eat meat you should eat something meat-like. That a meal can’t be complete without something that at least looks like meat, and preferably also tastes like it. In the worst interpretation, this is giving an anti-vegetarian message, implying that vegetarians have to “make up” for not eating meat by eating something closely resembling it.
Presumably meat substitutes are aimed at meat-eaters, trying to lure them into vegetarianism by offering a meat “alternative”. But that is not going to work, and is even counter-productive. Because vegetarian “meat” simply isn’t meat – it doesn’t taste like it at all (and it shouldn’t). But presenting it as such is bound to trigger a comparison reflex in people trying it out. When you say “this vegetarian burger replaces your hamburger” anyone who tries it out is going to compare it to a hamburger. And because they expect a hamburger, they will invariably dislike the taste of the vegetarian “burger”.
The problem is that the whole “meat substitute” concept keeps their minds firmly engrained in a meat-centered food paradigm. It promotes the idea that vegetarianism is about replacing meat with something else. Which triggers a comparison. And because the comparison is going to fail (it’s not meat), people will shy away from vegetarianism, reinforcing the idea that vegetarian food tastes “dull”, because the meat substitutes do not taste like meat.
But the whole idea of vegetarianism of course is to move away from a meat centered food paradigm. It’s not about meat substitutes at all. It’s about … vegetarianism (duh). So meat lookalikes are truly counter-productive because they perpetuate the idea that a “complete” meal contains (something close to) meat. The focus on meat replacements promotes the idea that something is “missing” in a vegetarian diet that needs to be replaced by a substitute. That a vegetarian diet is somehow “less” than a meat-centered diet.
And that is not a very effective strategy for promoting vegetarianism.
Yes, a vegetarian diet tastes differently from a meat-centered diet. Of course it does: there’s no meat in it. But that isn’t a bad thing. Meat is an acquired taste. You’ll get over it 
There’s plenty of subtle and exquisite tastes available in the vegetarian world.
And you don’t even need meat substitutes at all to have a complete and filling meal containing all the nutrients your body requires. All the nutrients you get from meat are plentiful available in other food sources besides meat substitutes. You can have a healthy wholesome great-tasting meal without anything even remotely resembling meat.
That is the right message for promoting vegetarianism.
Vegetarianism should not be presented as the lesser brother of a meat-centered diet. It is perfectly capable of walking on it’s own feet. Even more, it has many advantages over a meat-centered diet, so in the broader context it is “more”, not “less” at all.
