New Kind of Ice-cream for Vegans

[adeh]

Still, I'm a bit surprised at the number of objectors, since in this case the women don't seem to be exploited — its a blameless source of extra income from them working from home.

There is a definite yuck factor involved in this though......

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Ben,

Repulsiveness of nutriment.

But how is this, as a utilisation of technical commentarial term, true of breast-milk ice cream any more than it is of say, something like muesli slice.

...and secondly, how does one separate it from the unwholesome mindstate of aversion?

Metta,
Retro.

[Ben]

Greetings Ben,

Repulsiveness of nutriment.

But how is this, as a utilisation of technical commentarial term, true of breast-milk ice cream any more than it is of say, something like muesli slice.

None. human-milk ice-cream is just a more prescient reminder of the repulsiveness of nutriment. It may be a commentarial term, but its in the suttas. Forgive me if I don't provide a reference right now as I am in the thick of it at work.

...and secondly, how does one separate it from the unwholesome mindstate of aversion?

Metta,
Retro.

Repulsiveness of nutriment has nothing to do with aversion and more to do with vipassana "seeing things as they really are".
kind regrds

Ben

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Ben,

Forgive me if I don't provide a reference right now as I am in the thick of it at work.

No worries... I was just keen to understand the context in which you were using the term on the first page, in response to venerable Pesala's post.

repulsiveness of nutriment. It may be a commentarial term, but its in the suttas.

Are you sure?

I thought this was how it was regarded in the suttas...

SN 12.63: Puttamansa Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

"And how is physical food to be regarded? Suppose a couple, husband & wife, taking meager provisions, were to travel through a desert. With them would be their only baby son, dear & appealing. Then the meager provisions of the couple going through the desert would be used up & depleted while there was still a stretch of the desert yet to be crossed. The thought would occur to them, 'Our meager provisions are used up & depleted while there is still a stretch of this desert yet to be crossed. What if we were to kill this only baby son of ours, dear & appealing, and make dried meat & jerky. That way — chewing on the flesh of our son — at least the two of us would make it through this desert. Otherwise, all three of us would perish.' So they would kill their only baby son, loved & endearing, and make dried meat & jerky. Chewing on the flesh of their son, they would make it through the desert. While eating the flesh of their only son, they would beat their breasts, [crying,] 'Where have you gone, our only baby son? Where have you gone, our only baby son?' Now what do you think, monks: Would that couple eat that food playfully or for intoxication, or for putting on bulk, or for beautification?"

"No, lord."

"Wouldn't they eat that food simply for the sake of making it through that desert?"

"Yes, lord."

"In the same way, I tell you, is the nutriment of physical food to be regarded. When physical food is comprehended, passion for the five strings of sensuality is comprehended. When passion for the five strings of sensuality is comprehended, there is no fetter bound by which a disciple of the noble ones would come back again to this world.

I would have thought the focus was more on the functionality of nutriment and dispassion.

Don't feel compelled to rush a response - all in good time. Better to have a good Dhamma conversation than a quick one.

Metta,
Retro.

[imaginos]

I have to retract my support.
I did not read the article but misunderstood that the Ice-cream is one of the new breeds from Trader Joes and Whole foods market.I have just read the entire article.
I don't eat any dessert but even if I eat Ice-cream or dessert, I would not touch it.

[BubbaBuddhist]

Surprised no-one brought up Tofutti as an alternative:



M-4

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

Repulsiveness of nutriment.

All physical food can be contemplated as repulsive, whether it is meat, fish, milk, beans, or rice.
The fact that the idea of ice-cream from human milk is yucky doesn't make it unsuitable for Vegans.

A good Buddhist should be able to see beyond external appearances and habitual perceptions — eating just for the sake of nutrition.

I heard that long ago, when Ajahn Sucitto was the abbot at Harnham Vihāra, the monks were getting too picky about their food, so he instituted "the bucket practice."

All almsfood was mixed in a bucket, stirred up with a wood spatula, and the monks could take as much as they wanted. Rice, curry, cake, ice-cream, whatever, it all went into the bucket.

[Ben]

Repulsiveness of nutriment.

All physical food can be contemplated as repulsive, whether it is meat, fish, milk, beans, or rice.
The fact that the idea of ice-cream from human milk is yucky doesn't make it unsuitable for Vegans.

A good Buddhist should be able to see beyond external appearances and habitual perceptions — eating just for the sake of nutrition.

Yes Bhante, I believe that is consistent with what I was saying.

I heard that long ago, when Ajahn Sucitto was the abbot at Harnham Vihāra, the monks were getting too picky about their food, so he instituted "the bucket practice."

All almsfood was mixed in a bucket, stirred up with a wood spatula, and the monks could take as much as they wanted. Rice, curry, cake, ice-cream, whatever, it all went into the bucket.

Yes, we have a very similar meal here at the Outdoor Education campus where I work. For the Year 8 programs, one lunch is a 'bucket lunch', into which everything is tipped and mixed. Perhaps because of the physical nature of the program and that most of the kids don't see what goes into it, the kids love it.

I would have thought the focus was more on the functionality of nutriment and dispassion.
Don't feel compelled to rush a response - all in good time. Better to have a good Dhamma conversation than a quick one.

Absolutely. Unfortunately, very busy at our annual working bee and ironically, catering. Currently taking a break in a very busy weekend schedule.
Repulsiveness of nutriment, which does allow practitioners to develop wisdom into the reality of food for what it is, free from the overlay of our own craving and aversion-fuelled perceptions and sankharas, does also has the effect of causing one to utilise food for its functional value and the development dispassion. Dispassion is a product of vipassana.
Anyway, back to the cooking...

[cooran]

Surprised no-one brought up Tofutti as an alternative:

M-4

Hello Metta-4,

The discussion is about human female's breast milk and our opinions of its being 'harvested' and sold as flavoured ice-cream.
(I think we're all aware of non-milk alternatives).

What do you think?

with metta
Chris

[octathlon]

It certainly evokes a feeling of disgust in me. Kind of has a "cannibalistic" touch to it.

[BubbaBuddhist]

Surprised no-one brought up Tofutti as an alternative:

M-4

Hello Metta-4,

The discussion is about human female's breast milk and our opinions of its being 'harvested' and sold as flavoured ice-cream.
(I think we're all aware of non-milk alternatives).

What do you think?

with metta
Chris

I think I wouldn't touch it with a ten-foot biscotti. Hence the suggested alternative, which, oddly enough, many people have told me the thought of tofu ice cream is repulsive.

M-4

[silentone]

There are so many babies that could benefit from this.

Its beyond decadent and grotesque. Its just the newest fad of "morbid" to enter our public sphere. Using another person's body for sustenance... is just so wrong.

Mothers and babies enjoy a "sacred" bond. To corrupt that in such a ... supremely selfish manner... is just... wrong.

I'm shocked its been allowed to go on this long.

I'm wondering what the long term effects on the women would be ? Osteoporosis ?

Having a baby and producing milk drains a women's calcium reserves, even when she is getting enough... to prolong this process after the development of the child for the enjoyment of an adult that does not need it is just ... sick.

[silentone]

one of the women in my church (growing up) had really really bad osteoporosis. I remember seeing her horribly distorted back and the women in the church would tell the children in private that it was because she had too many children without taking calcium supplements. during that period in American history, families were large, and nutrition was poor. she had a lot of children ... fourteen i believe.

How long would you really have to give milk before it would mimic the effects of multiple pregnancies? 5 years of doing this would be like having five children? If these women have already had several children (and some appear to have grey hair in the photo) then they could be putting themselves at a serious risk for long term health risks with their bones. Watching my own female family members suffer with bone problems makes me reflect on the sacrifice they made to bring me into this world. All of them... my great grand mother, down to (now my own mother) have had bone issues. Part of that is a result of the extraordinary calcium and nutrient input that goes into milk production. As I understand it these women were poor peasants living in very rural areas. It seems like its taking advantage of them and putting them at risk needlessly... just for the sake of decadence.

The focus did not seem to be on helping them. If people were willing to buy ice cream these women made with their own bodies.. then they certainly could have given them money for cows milk instead. If the emphasis were on helping the women, then another means could have been constructed to enrich them without harming their bodies. Instead though, I feel that THEY are being turned into the product. Their bodily fluids are being equated to that of a farm animal. Literally, the women's milk was being priced against other available forms of milk - all farm raised. I really am uncomfortable putting women in a category that allows a bodily fluid to be farmed.

From my perspective (and I know nothing of their hardships), I cannot fathom how the women are better off for the handful of cash they made off this.

If I'm being judgemental though, please explain. I'm often quick to judge.

[tiltbillings]

[tiltbillings]

. . . If I'm being judgemental though, please explain. I'm often quick to judge.

Not at all. Your points are well taken. This ice-cream business is a bit silliness that will likely pass.

[Euclid]

Its beyond decadent and grotesque. Its just the newest fad of "morbid" to enter our public sphere. Using another person's body for sustenance... is just so wrong.

Mothers and babies enjoy a "sacred" bond. To corrupt that in such a ... supremely selfish manner... is just... wrong.

I'm shocked its been allowed to go on this long.

That's a dangerous road you're walking: imposing your own morals on others. It is not 'selfish' of a woman to produce milk and then decide to do something with it, and what she decides to do with it is not really any of your business.

Also, to imply that it shouldn't be allowed to go on this long: seriously? You'd make this practice illegal if it were up to you? What's next, Jehova Witness' telling us blood transfusions are immoral and hence illegal?

[tiltbillings]

Its beyond decadent and grotesque. Its just the newest fad of "morbid" to enter our public sphere. Using another person's body for sustenance... is just so wrong.

Mothers and babies enjoy a "sacred" bond. To corrupt that in such a ... supremely selfish manner... is just... wrong.

I'm shocked its been allowed to go on this long.

That's a dangerous road you're walking: imposing your own morals on others. It is not 'selfish' of a woman to produce milk and then decide to do something with it, and what she decides to do with it is not really any of your business.

Also, to imply that it shouldn't be allowed to go on this long: seriously? You'd make this practice illegal if it were up to you? What's next, Jehova Witness' telling us blood transfusions are immoral and hence illegal?

I don't think she said "illegal." That I would not agree with, but expressing moral outrage has it place.

[Euclid]

Correct, 'illegal' was not the word used but was certainly the word implied. Saying you're shocked some practice has been legal for so long sort of implies you'd rather it wasn't.

As for expressing moral outrage and it having a place, yeah, perhaps. It doesn't have any inherint value though. Just reminds me of the crochety old folk who get up on a podium and blame the decline of moral fabric of society on gays and people working on a sunday.

[tiltbillings]

blame the decline of moral fabric of society on gays and people working on a sunday.

Are you saying that they are not? It must be those Wiccans and Jews, then.

[silentone]

I do think it should be illegal. However, the costs of making it actually safe could be prohibitive regardless. There is the issue of diseases. New classes of retroviruses are being discovered in humans. Even with cow's milk there is (now) a supposed danger with Bovine Leukemia Virus. Several new retroviruses have been identified in humans, and certainly these are possible sources of contamination that could be spread.

What happens in ten years when everybody that went to the ice cream shop gets some weird retrovirus? What happens we find out about other unknown effects? Humans stop drinking baby's milk for a reason.

But I think the source of your original post was that I was somehow attempting to legislate morality. First of all governments come with a set of ethics or morals. You can't have a rules without having reasons for them. Its really that simple. Frankly, as a gay person, I think your comparison is erroneous. I hardly think you can equate orientation (which I believe is a characteristic you are born with), to commodity exchange of bodily fluids.

Additionally, I do not believe corporations have freedoms or morals. They operate for the dollar. If women choose to individually sell their milk, sure let them. I think a private market for this could be an important step for mothers (who are willing) to share their milk with women who are unable to breatfeed (medication or disease), or perhaps even medical patients with some strange dietary requirements. Health exams would be necessary though with regulators to oversee it. Any market however would have to directly line the women up with buyers, and I do think that there should be recommendations and procedures in place to protect the health of the women. The funds should be directly transacted with no middle men and there should be health guidelines and limits placed on the amount that they can give. Even dairy farmers have limits and regulations. Even prostitutes have to submit to health exams. Even if you think that legislating such a practice is legislating morality (if not hygiene) there are still health considerations to be taken into account.

What I object to is a corporate adventure that turns women into commodities. There is no "morality" at stake when curtailing a corporation. They simply aren't people. They don't have morals, or rights. They have financial obligations and that is all. Yes I do think it should be illegal for corporations to control this process and to create a product market aimed at "mass' consumption. Corporations have impacts and effects: economic ones on communities and families. Those I believe we have a moral imperative to place legal limitations on. I think prostitution is horrible and has detrimental effects on women. I still believe it is their right to do what they want with their bodies. Having said that, I still think it should be illegal to having a "WalMart" style brothel. You can imagine the consequences.

Moral outrage here is appropriate, even if legislation is not.