How Labels Shape “Meat”

The very compacted history of meat presented in this chapter demonstrates the complicated role that “meat” as a concept has in the lives of Americans as well as eaters in general.

The development of plant-based meat analogues has also reflected this com­plicated understanding of the term. As seen in the brief history presented through this chapter, the development of such livestock-meat analogues were an attempt to synergize plant-based diets with existing cuisines while comply­ing with external religious, ethical, health-based, or environmental consid­erations. Especially in the modern era, plant-based meat analogues have been marketed as ways for those identified as vegetarians to incorporate those ana­logues into their pre-existing diets with minimal disruption and even for those not identified as vegetarians to reduce their livestock meat consumption.

Cell-cultured meat analogues further these complications by introducing technological developments into the picture. While many livestock meats and

The Legal Definition of Meat 117 plant-based meats were promoted as “natural” or “clean”—with positive values associated with those words—cell-cultured meats may not invoke such conno­tations (of “naturalness” or even “cleanliness,” depending on eaters’ associations with those terms). Yet they may still be associated with positive values as well, along similar lines of ethical, health-based, or environmental considerations.

What does this all mean for how food labels can shape our perception of meat? If cell-cultured, or even plant-based, meat analogues are excluded from our legal definitions of meat, or are at least required to provide some sort of disclaimer, it may mean that these products have less access to the historical values of prestige and standard of living associated with livestock-based meats. Indeed, that appears to be reflected in some of the concerns raised by both the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association regarding the use of the term “meat” by non-livestock-based meats,^[484] as well as some of the concerns raised by plant­based meat producers in their legal challenges.^[485] The converse may be the case if cell-cultured or plant-based meats are allowed access to the same term— “meat”—used by livestock-based meats.

But the complicated history of our cultural understandings of meat sug­gests that the values associated with the term are not static. That is, even were states or the US federal government to exclude or limit plant-based or cell-cultured meat analogues from accessing the term “meat,” such foods may still develop other associational values that appeal to different desires of eaters.^[486] Moreover, promoters of both livestock and plant/cell-based meats appear to gesture towards similar values of virtue, healthfulness, and patriotism.

V.