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.
News Network
November 23,2024

congkarnataka_0.jpg

Bengaluru: In a boost to the ruling Congress in Karnataka, the party on Saturday swept the by-polls to three Assembly segments, causing a major setback to the BJP-JD(S) alliance in the state.

The Congress has retained Sandur, the seat considered to be its strong hold, and has also bagged Shiggaon and Channapatna segments, which were earlier held by BJP and JD(S) respectively.

The November 13 by-polls to Sandur, Shiggaon and Channapatna Assembly segments had witnessed a fierce fight between the ruling Congress and a combative BJP-JD(S) alliance.

The by-polls to Sandur, Shiggaon and Channapatna were necessitated as the seats fell vacant following the election of their respective representatives -- E Tukaram of Congress, former CM Basavaraj Bommai of BJP, and Union Minister Kumaraswamy of JD(S) to Lok Sabha in May elections.

The by-polls witnessed a straight fight between the ruling Congress and BJP in Sandur and Shiggaon segments, while in Channapatna, JD(S) which is part of the NDA alliance took on the grand old party.

Congress' C P Yogeeshwara won the Channapatna segment, defeating JD(S) candidate and Kumaraswamy's son Nikhil Kumaraswamy, by a margin of 25,413 votes.

Former CM Basavaraj Bommai's son Bharath Bommai of BJP faced defeat against Congress' Yasir Ahmed Khan Pathan in Shiggaon Assembly segment by a margin of 13,448 votes.

In Sandur, Congress candidate E Annapoorna, the wife of Bellary MP E Tukaram, won the seat vacated by her husband, by a margin of 9,649 votes.

Congress' win in the by-poll is seen as an endorsement of both Chief Minister Siddaramaiah and his deputy D K Shivakumar's leadership, and the government's programmes, especially the five guarantee schemes.

Nikhil Kumaraswamy and Bharath Bommai, the third generation of Gowda and Bommai family respectively, who contested this bypolls, have lost. Their fathers and grandfathers had served as Karnataka's Chief Ministers in the past.

While for Bharath Bommai this was his electoral debut, for Nikhil it was his third electoral loss.

Among the three segments, Channapatna was considered to be a high profile battle, where the contest was between C P Yogeeshwara and actor-turned-politician Nikhil Kumaraswamy.

A five-time MLA from the segment and a former Minister, Yogeeshwara had joined the Congress after quitting BJP ahead of nomination.

There were plans to field Yogeeshwara on a JD(S) ticket, but he was not interested in it, and instead wanted Kumaraswamy to support him as BJP candidate. This was not acceptable to Kumaraswamy and his party, following which Yogeeshwara jumped ship.

However, Kumaraswamy had subsequently said he had agreed to Yogeeshwara contesting from BJP, and despite that he jumped ship to Congress, under the influence of Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar and his brother and former MP D K Suresh.

Nikhil had faced defeat in 2019 Lok Sabha and 2023 Assembly polls. It is seen as a setback for Kumaraswamy too, as he could not ensure son's win from the Channapatna, the seat he had twice represented in the past.

Congress' win is crucial for Shivakumar, who is also the state Congress chief and his brother Suresh to strengthen their position in their home district of Ramanagara, a Vokkaliga heartland.

In Shiggaon, BJP's Bharath Bommai, son of Basavaraj Bommai lost against Congress' Yasir Ahmed Khan Pathan, who had faced defeat against the former Chief Minister in the 2023 Assembly polls.

Initially, former MLA Syed Azeempeer Khadri, a Congress' ticket aspirant, had raised a banner of revolt in Shiggaon, by filing his nomination as an independent, but later withdrew after intervention by party leadership.

In Sandur, Bellary MP Tukaram's wife E Annapurna of Congress won from the seat vacated by her husband, against BJP ST Morcha president Bangaru Hanumanthu, who is considered close to party leader and former mining barron G Janardhan Reddy.

Sandur is a Congress' bastion, and Tukaram had represented it four times.

Congress winning the by-polls is seen as "crucial" for Chief Minister Siddaramaiah to assert himself , amid demands for his resignation following charges against him in the MUDA site allotment case.

There were also behind-the-scenes political activities within the ruling Congress earlier this year, with a few ministers in his Cabinet holding closed door meetings, fueling speculation about leadership change. But such activities came to a halt following instructions from the party high command.

It is equally important for Shivakumar, who has not shied away from openly expressing his Chief Ministerial ambitions, amid speculations over "rotational Chief Minister formula," according to which he will become CM after two-and-half years (in this govt's five years tenure), but they have not been officially confirmed by the party.

The defeat in this by-poll is seen as a setback for state BJP President Vijayendra, who has been facing intense criticism and opposition from a section within the party, who have raised a banner of revolt against his leadership accusing him and his father, veteran leader B S Yediyurappa of "adjustment politics".

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
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

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
November 11,2024

birensingh.jpg

The Manipur Kuki MLAs have released a statement calling out Solicitor General Tushar Mehta's 'lies' in the Supreme Court. In a joint statement, the MLAs, including those from the Bharatiya Janata Party, said they had not had any meeting with the Chief Minister since May 3, 2023, nor did they intend to meet him in the future as “he was the mastermind behind the violence”.

As per the MLAs, the SG lied about state CM N Biren Singh speaking to Kuki MLAs to control the situation there, in order to halt a Supreme Court probe into the leaked tapes which allege that Singh has been complicit in the violence that broke out between Kukis and Meitis there.

"We...clarify that we have never had any meeting with Chief Minister, Shri N. Biren Singh since May 3, 2023, nor have any intention to meet him in future as he is the mastermind behind the violence and ethnic cleansing of our people from the Imphal valley, which is continuing till today, the latest being the brutal killing and burning of Mrs Zosangkim Hmar on November 7, 2024," the letter read, while condemning the recent 'barbaric' killing of the woman there, and noting the SG's assertion is 'tantamount' to misleading the top court.

“We, the undersigned ten MLAs, have come to know that during the Supreme Court hearing held on November 8, 2024, the Solicitor General of India submitted that ‘CM is meeting all Kuki MLAs and trying to bring the situation down to get peace’. In this connection, we hereby categorically state that this submission is a blatant lie and tantamount to misleading the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India,” the statement said.

The Supreme Court, while hearing a petition by a Kuki organisation, asked that it submit audio tapes to substantiate its claim that the Chief Minister was instrumental in inciting and organising violence in the northeastern State.

Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta orally informed the court that the Chief Minister was meeting all the Kuki-Zo MLAs and that peace in the State had come at a huge cost.

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.