There is a hipster civil war a brewing. You need to look no further than the recent antics around Antler restaurant for proof. In recent weeks, the vegan movement has come head to head with knife wielding carnivores who’s expression comes more from what they make look pretty on a plate. This battle has received widespread media attention and has polarized the otherwise unified youth movement. In a nutshell, Antler has been scrutinized about their claims regarding the ethical treatment of animals. Farmed game meats and the abhorrent appearance of fois gras on the menu seems in stark contrast to the restaurant’s statement. As a result, on some of the busiest dining nights of the week, protesters have periodically riddled the streets in front of Antler donning signs and chanting sayings defending our four-legged friends. In retaliation, owner Michael Hunter (I mean with the name Hunter can you blame him???) decided to first take one of those friends and demonstrate his butchery through the front window, cook it up and down it in front of the crowd using the same medium. Understandably, the vegan protesters “were in shock”. The subsequent social media comments have been as polar as opinions towards Trump. Some are posting that they are planning to make a reservation ASAP while others are speaking out and calling for a full out ban of the Dundas St. eatery. I can’t confirm whose winning the battle other than noting that blogTo reports that reservations have soared in the days following the latest standoff. Personally, although I’m off meat at the moment, I’m tempted to book one myself.
The clash between those trying to save animals and those who would rather grave them is nothing new. Humanity’s position on the food chain has always been up for much interpretation. This situation, however, goes well beyond this argument alone. In other words, the ongoing battle is more than just the fundamental rights of an individual to behave and function within societal laws; it’s the morality around why they do it.
I’m not sure where I sit on this issue. Do we have the right to disrupt a legal business because we don’t like their philosophy? On the flip side, do businesses have the right to brand themselves using, in the eyes of some, ethical pretenses? Finally, regardless of the action, was the owner justified in his actions given they occurred within his own establishment? To me, it’s not an argument about meat;it’s merely the scape”goat” (God..that joke was baaaad) or maybe more appropriately, the catalyst which accelerated the aforementioned hipster civil war. You see, what we have here if a battle between two entitled groups who believe their own righteous philosophies trump the other. I can’t say it’s much different that the American civil war…minus the guns and widespread fatalities of course. Instead, Antler may in fact be the Fort Sumter of this millennial battle, with placards, tweets and deer limb replacing muskets and knives. Perhaps entrepreneurial carnivores are deemed the south in the sense that they support slavery; but in this case that of our avian, mammalian and piscine friends.
So how do we end the standoff? Perhaps we can halt the mean-natured posts and public displays of gluttony by drafting a constitution of hipster behaviour. It would outline acceptable behavior yet have room for amendments based on the ever changing trends of a millennial’s world. This document could be posted on facebook, reddit or other social media channels and come complete with amendment suggestions from the likes of @dontmeatmefordinner or @nosetotailneverfails. Here are a few ideas to get the ball rolling:
- The right to bear meat. Conditions would include the right to carry concealed meat but public displays would be reserved for grocery stores, butcher shops or display windows along Spadina avenue. Otherwise, animal foodstuffs could be displayed in private spaces providing the windows are opaque or have sufficient glare during dinner hours.
- The right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses, papers, and effects, restaurants against unreasonable searches and seizuresprotesters and placards shall not be violated, and no Warrantsreally mean social media posts shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oathinstagram or affirmationtwitter, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.challenged.
- Just don’t lie about shit including claims about ethical treatment of anything or things like GMOs, free range, fair trade, farm to table, organic, natural, sugar-free, gluten free, omega-3, air-chilled, low carb, high carb or no carb. Also, no absurd claims about cocktails (ie that vodka martinis are better than gin ones or that old fashioneds should be made out of rye instead of bourbon) should be made.
Regarding the Antler situation, I think I’ll exercise my constitutional right and plead the fifth. I see both sides of the story but will stick to the fact that this issue is bigger than the safety and welfare of animals. It’s an egotistical battle fueled by self-righteousness and entitlement on both sides. It will be interesting to see how this one “pans” out…but perhaps the affected parties can sit down and resolve it over a plate of GMO-free gnocchi in an agreed upon neutral restaurant which is not owned by a conglomerate of course.