The myth of the Indian vegetarian nation

Soutik Biswas for BBC
April 7, 2018

What are the most common myths and stereotypes about what Indians eat?

The biggest myth, of course, is that India is a largely vegetarian country.

But that's not the case at all. Past "non-serious" estimates have suggested that more than a third of Indians ate vegetarian food.

If you go by three large-scale government surveys, 23%-37% of Indians are estimated to be vegetarian. By itself this is nothing remarkably revelatory.

But new research by US-based anthropologist Balmurli Natrajan and India-based economist Suraj Jacob, points to a heap of evidence that even these are inflated estimations because of "cultural and political pressures". So people under-report eating meat - particularly beef - and over-report eating vegetarian food.

Taking all this into account, say the researchers, only about 20% of Indians are actually vegetarian - much lower than common claims and stereotypes suggest.

Hindus, who make up 80% of the Indian population, are major meat-eaters. Even only a third of the privileged, upper-caste Indians are vegetarian.

The government data shows that vegetarian households have higher income and consumption - are more affluent than meat-eating households. The lower castes, Dalits (formerly known as untouchables) and tribes-people are mainly meat eaters.

Vegetarian cities in India

             Indore: 49%

             Meerut: 36%

             Delhi: 30%

             Nagpur: 22%

             Mumbai: 18%

             Hyderabad: 11%

             Chennai: 6%

             Kolkata: 4%

(Average incidence of vegetarianism. Source: National Family Health Survey)

On the other hand, Dr Natrajan and Dr Jacob find the extent of beef eating is much higher than claims and stereotypes suggest.

At least 7% of Indians eat beef, according to government surveys.

But there is evidence to show that some of the official data is "considerably" under-reported because beef is "caught in cultural political and group identity struggles in India".

Narendra Modi's ruling Hindu nationalist BJP promotes vegetarianism and believes that the cow should be protected, because the country's majority Hindu population considers them holy. More than a dozen states have already banned the slaughter of cattle. And during Mr Modi's rule, vigilante cow protection groups, operating with impunity, have killed people transporting cattle.

The truth is millions of Indians, including Dalits, Muslims and Christians, consume beef. Some 70 communities in Kerala, for example, prefer beef to the more expensive goat meat.

Dr Natrajan and Dr Jacob conclude that in reality, closer to 15% of Indians - or about 180 million people - eat beef. That's a whopping 96% more than the official estimates.

And then there are the stereotypes of Indian food.

Delhi, where only a third of residents are thought to be vegetarian, may well deserve its reputation for being India's butter chicken capital.

But, the stereotype of Chennai as the hub of India's "south Indian vegetarian meal" is completely misplaced. Reason: only 6% of the city's residents are vegetarian, one survey suggests.

Many continue to believe that Punjab is "chicken loving" country. But the truth is that 75% of people in the northern state are vegetarian.

So how has the myth that India is a largely vegetarian country been spread so successfully?

For one, Dr Natrajan and Dr Jacob told me, in a "highly diverse society with food habits and cuisines changing every few kilometres and within social groups, any generalisation about large segments of the population is a function of who speaks for the group".

"This power to represent communities, regions, or even the entire country is what makes the stereotypes."

Also, they say, "the food of the powerful comes to stand in for the food of the people".

"The term non-vegetarian is a good case in point. It signals the social power of vegetarian classes, including their power to classify foods, to create a 'food hierarchy' wherein vegetarian food is the default and is having a higher status than meat. Thus it is akin to the term 'non-whites' coined by 'whites' to capture an incredibly diverse population who they colonised."

Migration

Secondly, the researchers say, some of the stereotype is enabled by migration.

So when south Indians migrate to northern and central India, their food comes to stand in for all south Indian cuisine. This is similarly true for north Indians who migrate to other parts of the country.

Finally, some of the stereotypes are perpetuated by the outsider - north Indians stereotype south Indians just by meeting a few of them without thinking about the diversity of the region and vice versa.

The foreign media, say the researchers, is also complicit "as it seeks to identify societies by a few essential characteristics".

Also, the study shows up the differences in food habits among men and women. More women, for example, say they are vegetarian than men.

The researchers say this could be partly explained by the fact that more men eat outside their homes and with "greater moral impunity than women", although eating out may not by itself result in eating meat.

Patriarchy - and politics - might have something to do with it.

"The burden of maintaining a tradition of vegetarianism falls disproportionately on the women," say Dr Natrajan and Dr Jacob.

Couples are meat eaters in about 65% of the surveyed households and vegetarians only in 20%. But in 12% of the cases the husband was a meat eater, while the wife was a vegetarian. Only in 3% cases was the reverse true.

Clearly, the majority of Indians consume some form of meat - chicken and mutton, mainly - regularly or occasionally, and eating vegetarian food is not practiced by the majority.

So why does vegetarianism exert a far greater influence on representations of India and Indians around the world? Does it have to do with "policing" of food choices and perpetuating food stereotypes in a vastly complex and multicultural society?

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
coastaldigest.com news network
April 18,2025

mangaluruulama1.jpg

Mangaluru: On a scorching summer Friday, April 18, the usually quiet locality of Adyar Kannur in Mangaluru transformed into a powerful symbol of resistance and unity. A massive public protest, led by the Karnataka State Ulema Coordination Committee, witnessed an overwhelming turnout of nearly 3,000 people voicing their dissent against the Central Government’s recent amendments to the Waqf Act. 

The protest wasn’t just an outcry—it was a declaration of solidarity, discipline, and deep-rooted concern over the perceived infringement of religious and institutional autonomy.

Organized under the leadership and guidance of the Khazis from Dakshina Kannada and Udupi, the protest drew people from all corners of the region including Udupi, Dakshina Kannada, Chikkamagaluru, and Kodagu districts. The protest venue, Sha Garden in Adyar Kannur, turned into a sea of people as participants gathered from various towns and villages despite the scorching afternoon sun.

From 2 PM onwards, people began arriving in large numbers. The influx of participants led to significant traffic congestion on the adjoining highways, compelling authorities to reroute vehicles to maintain order. Inside the city and surrounding areas, many shops remained closed, partly due to the event and partly as it coincided with the sacred Jumma prayers.

Security was handled with tight coordination—police personnel were stationed at all major junctions, crossings, and strategic points. Alongside them, volunteer marshals maintained decorum at the protest site, managing the crowd efficiently and ensuring cleanliness by removing empty water bottles and litter.

Chants of “Azaadi” (freedom) echoed through the grounds as protesters raised their voices in peaceful opposition to the Waqf Amendment Bill. Despite the emotionally charged atmosphere, the protest remained peaceful. The organizers consistently appealed to the crowd via loudspeakers to maintain harmony and avoid any provocative slogans.

Drone surveillance and videographers were deployed for complete documentation of the event, enhancing both the security and transparency of the protest. However, the sheer number of participants caused temporary network disruptions, affecting mobile communication in the area.

Adding a patriotic touch, several protestors were seen waving the Indian national flag, reinforcing that the movement was deeply rooted in constitutional values and democratic expression.

Among the dignitaries present were UK Abdul Azeez Darami Chokkabettu, Dr. M S M Zaini Kamil, Abdul Khader Darami Kukkila, Kasim Darami Kinya, Aboobakkar Siddique Montugoli, Mehboob Sakafi Kinya, and Ashraf Kinara. Their presence underlined the seriousness of the gathering and provided moral and spiritual guidance to the demonstrators.

The peaceful protest stood as a clear, disciplined, and democratic expression of the Muslim community’s concern, sending a strong message to the authorities: religious rights and institutional independence are not to be tampered with.

mangaluruulama4.jpg

mangaluruulama3.jpg

mangaluruulama2.jpg

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 17,2025

VPcourt.jpg

In a controversial statement that has sparked alarm among legal experts and constitutional scholars, Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar criticized the judiciary for allegedly overstepping its bounds, particularly targeting the Supreme Court’s recent verdict that set deadlines for the President and Governors to act on Bills.

“We cannot have a situation where courts direct the President,” Mr. Dhankhar said, suggesting that the judiciary is interfering with the powers of the executive. He further described Article 142 of the Constitution — which empowers the Supreme Court to pass orders necessary to do "complete justice" — as a “nuclear missile against democratic forces, available to the judiciary 24x7.”

This incendiary metaphor has drawn backlash for implying that judicial independence — a cornerstone of democracy — is somehow hostile or dangerous. Critics argue that such rhetoric undermines public trust in the judiciary and risks damaging the careful separation of powers between branches of government.

While addressing the sixth batch of Rajya Sabha interns, the Vice President also referred to a serious incident involving a Delhi High Court judge, Yashwant Varma, from whose residence a large amount of cash was allegedly recovered in March. He questioned the delayed disclosure of the incident and criticized the absence of an FIR against the judge.

“An FIR in this country can be registered against anyone, any constitutional functionary, including the one before you... But if it is Judges, FIR cannot be straightaway registered. It has to be approved by the concerned in the Judiciary, but that is not given in the Constitution,” he argued.

He went on to question why judges, unlike the President and Governors, appear to enjoy immunity not explicitly provided in the Constitution.

“If the event had taken place at his house, the speed would have been an electronic rocket. Now it is not even a cattle cart,” he remarked, criticizing the pace of response and investigation.

Why These Remarks Are Dangerous

While scrutiny of public institutions is necessary in a democracy, the Vice President’s remarks are concerning for several reasons:

1.    Undermining Judicial Authority: By calling Article 142 a "nuclear missile," the Vice President risks portraying the judiciary as a threat rather than a guardian of constitutional rights.

2.    Challenging Separation of Powers: The suggestion that courts should not “direct” the President could erode judicial checks on executive inaction or overreach, especially when constitutional responsibilities are being delayed or ignored.

3.    Eroding Public Confidence: As the Vice President of India — also the Chairperson of the Rajya Sabha — such statements carry institutional weight. Attacks on judicial legitimacy can embolden other political actors to disregard court rulings, weakening the rule of law.

4.    Threatening Judicial Independence: Implying that judges should be more easily prosecuted, without proper due process and internal accountability, could be seen as an attempt to intimidate the judiciary.

5.    Fueling Distrust During Sensitive Times: At a moment when public trust in institutions is essential, these remarks may sow unnecessary suspicion and politicize judicial matters that require careful and independent handling.

The Vice President’s speech has ignited a vital conversation about accountability and judicial conduct. However, framing the judiciary as a rogue institution and questioning its constitutional powers without nuance is fraught with danger. Safeguarding democracy requires mutual respect and balance among all pillars of governance — executive, legislature, and judiciary. When this balance is disturbed through political rhetoric, it threatens not just institutions, but the very foundation of constitutional democracy.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 28,2025

sharjah1.jpg

On April 27, 2025, the Consulate General of India in Dubai and the Northern Emirates, in partnership with Ekata (Unity) and Aim India Forum, organized a vital health and financial awareness session at the PAN Gulf Labour Camp in Sharjah, UAE.

This event aimed to educate blue-collar workers on important health and financial matters, providing them with practical information to better manage their well-being and finances. Shaikh Muzaffer, the Founder President of Aim India Forum, expressed his gratitude to Mr. Anshul Gupta, CEO of Pan Gulf International Metals Industries UAE, for facilitating the platform, and to Dr. Satish Krishnan, Neurosurgeon at Al Qasimia Hospital Sharjah and President of the EKATA group, for his excellent coordination of the event.

The Consulate General of India invited the Aim India Forum to conduct informative lectures on various crucial topics, including financial scams, economic crimes, cyber fraud, SIM card fraud, and the dangers posed by fake recruitment agencies. Shaikh Muzaffer from Aim India Forum, alongside BCCI President Mr. Hidayath Addoor, also participated in a focused discussion on SIM card fraud and its risks.

The session concluded with important remarks from Shri Yatin Patel, the Deputy Consul General of India to Dubai. Shri Patel highlighted the significance of timely passport renewals and the need to protect passports as a form of identity. He also cautioned against scammers who target blue-collar workers, exploiting their identities to obtain illegal loans from banks. He urged all workers to remain vigilant and avoid falling prey to such fraudulent activities.

Mr. Deepak Dagar, Vice Consul for Labour and ICWF at the Indian Consulate, was also in attendance, adding valuable insights and contributing to the event’s success. This informative session provided blue-collar workers with essential knowledge to safeguard both their health and financial security in their daily lives.

sharjah3.jpg

sharjah2.jpg

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.