I need some assistance with these assignment. guilt free pleasures: an analysis of fraser’s why i stopped being a vegetarian Thank you in advance for the help! However, some people become a vegetarian to lead a healthier lifestyle. In Laura Fraser’s article, “Why I stopped being a Vegetarian”, the author effectively uses ethos, to assert her reasons. She tells her personal story in a bit not only to inform but also to entertain her audience. Her aim was to gain the reader’s attention especially through his funny descriptions of her life. She does this by producing an essay that is not jaded, and this is an added advantage. Since Fraser was at one time one person with different ambitions and preferences and then another, this gives her credibility of knowing what she really wants to put across (Hayman et al 82). This paper would analyze why Laura became a vegetarian, how difficult it was to become one, and why she is no longer a vegetarian.

To begin with, Fraser’s claim to ethos is apparent through a personal narrative to demonstrate the inconveniences of attempting to become a vegetarian. For example, in the beginning of the article she states, “I had been a Vegetarian for fifteen years” (Fraser). As an individual with, over a decade of experience, she is able to build credibility for being a vegetarian in a culture that perceives vegetarianism being beneficial to one’s health and being. In addition, Fraser is genuine and realistic. She explains the choices that lead her to become a vegetarian. According to the author, her journey began in college (Hayman et al 65). She admits the first motivating factor was due, in part, because she was a poor student. She states, “Meat was more important than lentils, and I was broke, or broke enough to choose to spend my limited budget on other classes of ingestible” (Fraser). Fraser’s admission of the ambiguity of her own choices is ethical and allows her to connect with the readers. Moreover, through her narrator, Laura claims that she was living her life as mega carnivore and thus to her it was fundamental and interesting to see how the other side of life without meat would turn out to be. Chiefly, she says ‘…I thought it would be interesting to see how the other side ‘lives’’ (Fraser). Laura is just being practical (Hayman et al 81). In this statement, what she insinuates is that she was not that strict vegetarian. She would not eat chicken but would have a taste of fish and some spices of dairy products. One would believe that her desire to hop into the other side of meat world could not leave her meditation since probably she would make sumptuous and great dinners without even having a test, a life that would seem so good and tempting. Therefore, her push to the other side was a valid reason in trying to express how difficult it was to be a vegetarian. As prove to this hopping into the meat world, Laura was by the time in College. In her school, meat was too expensive compared to those who ate vegetable food products. This made her, probably, make that moral choice and stay a vegetarian while in school a reason why she is now coming back to the eating meat. Best of this choice is that she attained a healthy lifestyle. In addition, Laura’s article is an attempt to inform the reader on how it is not bad if one eats meat and how it can be of benefit to a person without seeming cannibalistic. As an illustration, she explains how her friend silenced her deep vegetarian questioning (Hayman et al 104). She says ‘…one day a friend of mine ordered roasted rosemary chicken for two. I thought I would try just a bite’ (Fraser). In her completely vegetarian philosophies, Laura claims that she out rightly devoured the chicken, ripping it apart like a starving hyena.