Listen to this article:

Recently, the Bihar government banned the open sale of meat and fish near schools and religious sites, citing concerns over child violence, public health, and social harmony. Deputy chief minister Vijay Kumar Sinha clarified that the state has no objection to anyone’s food habits but stressed that “sentiments associated with sanctity must not be hurt.” The move is quite concerning as it reflects a growing trend across India wherein food is becoming political, and meat is increasingly treated as a public problem. In fact, across the country, authorities have repeatedly restricted where meat can be sold or seen: near schools, temples, or crowded public spaces.

The usual reasons given, such as hygiene, harmony, and protecting children, may sound neutral on the surface. But beneath it, the underlying message that is widely understood is that vegetarianism is civil and pure, whereas meat is disruptive and morally suspect.

The rhetorical shift that has occurred today is also quite striking. Earlier, such restrictions were justified in openly religious terms. Now, they are often framed in quasi-scientific language, with claims that meat triggers aggression or disturbs children’s moral growth. God knows where these studies were done or by whom? One can’t help but think of the ‘research paper’ that validated the elimination of coronavirus by banging on plates.

Nevertheless, such claims lend cultural preference an appearance of evidence, but obviously, they don’t hold up to scrutiny. In fact, behavioural science finds no credible link between meat consumption and violence. On the contrary, it has been proven that aggression in children stems from poverty, trauma, family conflict, and social stress, not diet. Longitudinal studies consistently identify........

© The Wire