Tasty Throwdown: Green Movement

It wasn’t hard to pick a topic for this week’s Throwdown – in fact, our new weekly feature was inspired by this very article.

Everyone at Tastybaby read Alex Williams’ “Buying Into The Green Movement,” (New York Times, June 30) and promptly started hyperventilating. Since the article directly opposes everything we believe in at Tastybaby – such as balance and a guilt-free approach to environmentalism – it sparked a whole lot of dialogue. We thought we’d share both sides of the debate with you.

Some would argue that "light greens" are the best thing that ever happened to the cause of environmentalism. The moniker was bestowed mockingly on those who fall short of Ed Begley's total-sacrifice brand of conservationism by Alex Williams in his article "Buying Into The Green Movement," but Williams missed the point entirely.

"Light greens" (and I count myself among them) are mainstreaming the cause. Once marginalized to the domain of over-zealous treehuggers, Environmentalism was a restricted-access club. Those of us unable or unwilling to give our lives over to asceticism were turned away at the door. We left scorned and ashamed, convinced the planet's problems were too big for would-be do-gooders who couldn't go all the way.

Any activist has to start somewhere. It's not easy to ask a dyed-in-the-organic-wool fashionista to reduce, reuse and recycle. Some of us need baby steps. Is that enough to stop global-warming? Not likely, but the eco-friendly consumerism which Williams demonizes is a point of entry, and eventually we'll evolve to a less wasteful approach. In the meantime, the least Williams and the Sunday Styles Section can do is embrace our enthusiasm, however pale our shade of green.

Liane Weintraub
CEO & Co-Founder, Tastybaby
Editor-in-Chief, Tastybaby.com

New York Times, Sunday Styles section

Blog Comments

General Message
What's this article REALLY about? Consumerism in general? Then write a story about not buying- PERIOD. But I get the sense we won't be seeing many articles about not buying anything, let alone something frivolous, coming from the Style section. To tell people to buy just one pair of jeans vs. 5 organic cotton jeans is unrealistic because who is waking up one day saying "I need to buy a pair of jeans...oh, let's see...I'll buy FIVE organic pairs instead of just one!". Who shops like that?

If it's about the first 1/3 of the mantra (reduce, reuse, recycle), ok, but I didn't know if it was about these green activists or about the "light greens" or if it was more about the fact that there is this unofficial green gauge. "People considered their trip down the Eco Options aisles at Home Depot a beginning, not an end point. " So what does that mean in the context of the article? How about a story about people's changing mindset and the different levels of green and what it means to people?

Underlying Message
What's most upsetting about this article is the underlying elitist-ness of these extreme green activists who are all about all or nothing. In their world, you have/buy almost nothing. Waste not, want not...I get that. Are these people passing themselves off as the uber green elite because they don't consume? Is someone who thinks they are even greener than these extreme greens going to judge people by saying "why use 5 sheets of recycled toilet paper, when you can use just 1 sheet of regular because it's super absorbent?".

Besides, how about all the millions of Wal-mart buyers who did only ONE thing this year- change their light bulbs. You're telling me they are making not difference and may not have voted for a senator who might be voting on CAFE standards?

Unpatriotic Message
Maybe it's because I read it on the 4th of July, but this article seems to challenge our whole entire democratic and economic foundation. It essentially says that people can't vote with their pocket books and help shift industries and thus, politics. Is it JUST a coincidence that Toyota surpassed GM this year for the top auto maker spot or could it possibly be because the Prius and other green and progressive technologies helped push them to the top? Do these "extreme greens" think that when GM and Ford get their asses kicked by the consumers, that Detroit doesn't influence Washington and vice versa?

Do these people REALLY think that a luxury Lexus consumer is going to really buy a Toyota Yaris? Gimme a break! If someone has the lifestyle that allows them to purchase a $104,000 luxury vehicle, better the 22mpg Lexus than it's 13mpg Mercedes equivalent.

The Style section folks, of all people, understand that we're not in some kind of communist state where you have to wear potato sacks and ride your bike everywhere to be a good citizen...and speaking of, last I look China is so not green right now, they're purple.

- Comment by Delza from Los Angeles, CA - Aug 15, 2007 at 3:49 PM