h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I sometimes wonder if foods are presented the way they are so as people will be more inclined to buy them? Large shiny red apples with no knobbly bits, strawberries the size of grapefruits, potatoes that are 'cleaned'.

Are organic foods simply foods that are 'ugly'? If that's the case, I like my food ugly. The stuff that has had cosmetic surgery really doesn't do anything for me.

I'd be quite happy to buy 'ugly' non-organic stuff. I'm not bothered about having evenly shaped/sized fruit & veg. You might expect that to be cheaper still, if it hasn't had to go through a selection process!

I think that the 'organic' label is intented to attract the fashion-conscious who want to 'do their bit for the environment.'

I think you might be onto something there too A. Oh look at me, I'm buying organic food, aren't I exceptionally eco-friendly, I don't need to feel guilty about driving a rangerover in the innercity or worry if my carbon footprint will end up the size of Tasmania...

The first three replies to this have all missed the point of the original comment... go back and read it again!

The point is that NON-organic food is free from the marks left by pests, because they use pesticides. When people look at organic fruit and veg, they turn their nose up at it because it's got the odd slug-hole. It's the people who care more about the appearance of their shiny red apples than the possible dangers of the pesticides sprayed on them to keep them that way, who are fashion conscious. Hence why the o.p. said: "Are organic foods simply foods that are 'ugly'? If that's the case, I like my food ugly. The stuff that has had cosmetic surgery really doesn't do anything for me."

Perhaps I should re-word my comment then. I don't buy non-organic because it looks better, I'd be happy if it was ugly. I don't disregard organic because it's ugly, rather because of the price.