Recent widespread calls and strategies for consumers to change and reduce meat consumption position meat as both an environmentally unsustainable and highly desired food. Such change is often understood as an unattractive and difficult process of relinquishment, and that perspective informs interventions designed to lessen the presumed hardship involved. This article troubles such assumptions by reference to a practice theoretical approach and by extending conceptual debates circulating within consumption geographies. The work explores food preferences and tastes generated in what I describe as everyday “mealing” practices, within which meat's relevance may be diminishing, contingent, or negotiable. I draw on go‐along stories about meals‐in‐flux told to me by Australian householders participating in “Meat Free Mondays” and/or consuming meat substitute products. I analyse the practical, material, and sensorial aspects of “mealing‐practice” change and show how the stir‐fry is a meal displacing “meat and three veg.” The work contributes to geographical research increasingly focused on understanding desires and tastes produced through everyday practices. In the process, it complicates understandings of meat consumption reduction as sacrifice and points to possibilities for new research and more effective forms of intervention.

中文翻译：

---

关于澳大利亚家庭减少肉类的社会实践观点：对干预策略的反思

消费者最近广泛呼吁和改变和减少肉类消费的策略使肉类既是环境上不可持续的又是非常需要的食品。这种改变通常被理解为放弃的一个没有吸引力和困难的过程，并且这种观点为旨在减轻所假定的困难的干预措施提供了信息。本文通过参考实践理论方法并扩展了消费地理区域内流传的概念性辩论，为此类假设带来了麻烦。该作品探讨了我所说的日常“进餐”做法所产生的食物偏爱和口味，在这种做法中，与肉类的相关性可能会降低，偶然性或可商议性。我借鉴了参加“无肉星期一”和/或消费肉类替代产品的澳大利亚家庭告诉我的有关大量进餐的故事。我分析了“饮食习惯”变化的实践，材料和感官方面，并展示了炒菜如何取代“肉和三个蔬菜”。这项工作为地理研究做出了贡献，该研究越来越侧重于理解日常实践中产生的欲望和品味。在此过程中，它使人们对减少肉类消费作为一种牺牲变得更加复杂，并指出了开展新研究和采取更有效干预措施的可能性。这项工作为地理研究做出了越来越多的贡献，这些研究越来越侧重于理解日常实践中产生的欲望和品味。在此过程中，它使人们对减少肉类消费作为一种牺牲变得更加复杂，并指出了开展新研究和采取更有效干预措施的可能性。这项工作为地理研究做出了越来越多的贡献，这些研究越来越侧重于理解日常实践中产生的欲望和品味。在此过程中，它使人们对减少肉类消费作为一种牺牲变得更加复杂，并指出了开展新研究和采取更有效干预措施的可能性。