[Serious] Why do so many people seem to hate veganism?
Seen a lot of posts on Lemmy with vegan-adjacent sentiments but the comments are typically very critical of vegan ideas, even when they don't come from vegans themselves. Why is this topic in particular so polarising on the internet? Especially since unlike politics for example, it seems like people don't really get upset by it IRL
333
Comments656
I've been a vegetarian for 15 years. People IRL often do get offended if you tell them you don't eat meat. I try my best to avoid saying it because it often leads to being lectured about proteins. Everyone suddenly becomes a nutritionist when you explain why you don't eat meat.
Yeah. I try not to mention it to people if I can avoid it. I work construction and am surrounded by manly men tring to out man each other. I had one guy offer me bear jerkey and got bent out of shape when I declined. He wouldn't stop. He just kept on me about why I didn't eat meat. After about an hour of him asking again and again why I don't eat meat I said "meat's another word for dick and eating dick is gay". As problematic as it was, it worked.
It never cases to amaze me that a 250pound dude with a 40oz soda in one hand and a mouthfull of gas station pizza thinks he has the responsibility to lecture me about nutrition.
It's both sad and hillarious that this worked. I wonder if you created a new vegetarian as well
Probably not but I like to think it's created a feedback loop going on in his head endlessly. "Meat is manly. Meat is dick.'"
We need to take the small victories
My dad always acts like i'm close to dying because i'm vegan. I work out every day, he eats meat 3 times a day and even his vegetables are unhealthy as fuck. He's so overweight that getting into his car is super exhausting. Pretty weird if someone like that gives you tips on how to eat right.
As a life-long vegetarian, this has been my experience as well.
Why do they believe you only find protein in meat?
Lots of people are really stupid
And we've been (forgive the pun) fed propaganda by the industrial farming and food industry for generations, not to mention the religious right.
You are not wrong. I am vegetarian for about 15 years and I've literally have had a father of a friend yell at me. He was telling vegetarians aren't real and if anybody would actually not eat meat for a couple of months they would die because they would be missing vital nutrients only found in meat. He was yelling at me to stop telling lies and be truthful.
The things he's eating often didn't eat any meat. Hehe.
Generations of marketing.
Some essential amino acids are difficult to find in adequate quantities on a vegan diet. If you don't vary your protein sources or make sure you are getting the right amino acids, then you may develop a deficiency, which can lead to poor health or even be fatal.
I have read that this is largely a myth based on a book from the 70s, and that while there are varying proportions of amino acids in different vegan protein sources, there is still enough of each so that you could easily get everything you need.
I read this in a book years ago that I don't remember the name of, but found a source instantly
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6893534/
Ya, it's probably more correct to say any concerns are overstated. And I probably didn't help by saying "difficult". It's not difficult, just not as simple as eating any meat. And like I mentioned, as long as you're varying your protein sources, you will be fine.
I know plenty of vegans and they're all healthier than average. I don't know any who have had issues with nutrition.
I have a hard time hitting my protein goal and maintaining correct macros even with meat. I have looked at vegetarian options and I don't see how anyone could do it without just slamming multiple protein shakes a day. Which would destroy my digestive system. I'd probably be ok when I'm not bulking but I'd have to do a ton of research and basically forget about fast food options. If someone could lay out a vegetarian diet for me that would work I'd be more than happy to give it a shot but I don't have time to make that effort myself.
I’m what I call “mostly vegetarian“ which means that I choose to not have meat, but will eat small portions on occasion. And boy does that just piss off people like no other. Worse is I get it from both sides, to either commit in full or just give in to my natural instincts and consume more red meat.
Sometimes I just want a salad. Sometimes I want some bacon crumbles on that salad. Sometimes I want 3oz of fish with a plate of veggies. But what I can tell you is 3/4 of my plate will have healthy veggies or fruit.
Just tell them you have alpha-gal, then they’ll leave you alone easier
I did get offended when, after a very successful date, I went to a shawarma place with her and we both had a super awesome shawarma with lots of meat. For the next date I made some pizza rolls with salami and she confessed that she actually doesn't eat meat.
I still tease her about that when I meet her nowadays.
Same works in reverse, far more often than you think.
From what I have seen, it more stems from the activism vegans are engaged in more than the actual veganism.
I think there's nothing wrong with explaining your ideas and why you believe them to those willing to listen, but I can see why pushy activism for any cause can get annoying quickly. There are often Jehovah's witnesses outside my local supermarket, for example, but they only give you a pamphlet if you specifically approach them
It's not just pushy, it's judgemental and vitriolic
Oh, you eat meat, murderer? Your shoes are made from the skins of defenseless creatures. The sugar you're so callously adding to your coffee was processed with ground-up bones, you unredeemable monster.
Even the arguments for veganism that aren't built on animal cruelty still take on an air of moral superiority. Don't you care about the planet and future generations? How dare you trade carbon emissions for the temporary comfort of a bacon cheeseburger!
The vegan movement has always been associated with anger and contempt, even if it is justified.
There’s also the ‘guilt by association’. Look at organisations like PETA: they even complained about things like the treatment of entirely fictional animals in video games, like Palworld. Basically, you can’t even argue that ‘they look like real animals so it encourages real-world mistreatment’ like they usually do.
That does not make you look particularly sane. I’m sure they do good work as well, but that sort of thing isn’t helping their cause.
Saying PETA is representative of vegans is rather like using Antifa as an example of liberals, or Info Wars for conservatives.
Which is exactly what everyone does. At least in the US. And every side is equally wrong about it.
The loudest voices always draw the most attention. And I don’t know any other vegan voice that’s as loud as PETA’s. That’s kind of the problem.
PETA might do something good by accident. They kill 60-70% of the pets they receive for donation, so I guess the lucky 1/3 that don’t get the ax are a good thing.
In my experience, your first sentence sums it up nicely.
They assume a moral high ground because they've adopted a diet that is generally deemed healthier and better for the environment (I don't always agree with this).
But unless they're also doing all the things we could all do better (e.g. not buying new, not upgrading the the latest and greatest, not taking 40 minute showers, not eating out every second day), they're only somewhat less guilty of environmental damage than the average person, but they're taking a generally undeserved "holier than thou" position and then shoving it down your throat. This isn't everyone, and I don't really care what you eat, but these are the vegans that get under my skin.
Eh, I can see it both ways. Like, nobody is, or can be, perfect. That doesn't mean they don't have a valid moral argument for the good choices they make. They're trying to be a better person, and I think it's fair to help other people recognize the poor decisions they are making. Climate change especially affects all of us.
On the other hand, you're 100% correct. Nobody can lay exclusive claim to the high ground, so anybody acting superior is probably an asshole.
Also I would always listen to you, I may not agree or take your advice, but I will listen to you
It would be someone being less of a hypocrite so you would not be seen as as annoying as the other option
PETA was giving away free coloring books one time so I decided to order some for my kids thinking it would be good for them to hear from all sides.
One of the pictures was three people standing over a turkey dinner with the most horrific caricatures you can think of absolutely salivating over how juicy the turkey was going to be.
I shit you not.
I had to trash the sons of bitches.
Really killed that group for me, I always that people were exaggerating about them and how bad they are.
They killed that little piece of me.
In my experience it's usually more like: Them: here have some of this meat thing Me: No thanks Them: why not it's really good try some Me: i don't eat meat Them: but why? Me: to reduce animal cruelty and environmental harm Them: wow how dare you be so judgy
I'm not really sure how I'm supposed to not offend this type of person in this situation and frankly I don't think it's my fault or my problem they're offended. My theory is that that agree with my reasons but rather than change or live with the cognitive dissonance they just lash out at anyone that reminds them they could be living more ethically even if they basically MAKE them say it.
Blaming vegans for that is bullshit, frankly
That isn't the type of behavior that I think most find annoying but I'm sorry that you get that reaction at all.
I think many people are so annoyed with feeling they are attacked for eating meat (and I do eat meat) that when that button gets pressed the anger just rises up.
For me I get a little true guilt. I know I'm not helping in the best possible ways that I can, all the time. I'm not perfect and won't ever pretend that I am, and I also haven't given up on getting better. When I go a day without eating meat, I congratulate myself. With a burger. (No, not really.)
Some people see "to reduce animal cruelty" as judgy because that's just how nature is. The moral superiority comes from you acting like you're somehow above everyone and everything else. It's entirely in your wording and the implications that if you eat meat, you enjoy animal suffering vs seeing it as a natural outcome of nature.
This is completely besides the point, but I personally view factory farming as different than what happens in nature.
This is also beside the point, but you are making some wild logical leaps here. The fact that I personally don't want to support factory farming because I think it is cruel in no way means that I think other people "enjoy animal suffering" and assuming that is arbitrarily assigning thoughts I have never had to me.
None of the above is really relevant because I should be allowed to go about my day without justifying my dietary choices just as people that eat meat should.
Look, you don't deserve the treatment you've described. Everyone here agrees with you on that.
The person you were replying to was trying to explain why what you said might be interpreted as judgemental, even if that's not how you meant it (and we all believe you, even if the people you're talking about don't).
I think the last line sums it up. You don't eat meat, and that's the only explanation you owe anyone.
However, I know that when I'm providing a meal and I learn someone doesn't eat meat, I always ask follow up questions because maybe I cooked the 1rice with chicken stock, or maybe the vegetables were sauteed in butter. If it is a moral choice, I would appreciate a heads up so I can prepare a meal everyone can enjoy. I'm not irritated by the request, because that's the whole reason why you cook food for friends. If it's a healthy choice, you might still eat some of the brown rice, or maybe I sub oil for butter. Those are changes I can make on the fly.
I know I've probably unintentionally offended some vegans by probing for more answers. And I've met some vegans who are every bit as judgemental as you've been assumed to be. We could all do a little bit better at understanding each other.
I'd not see it as judgemental, just trying to inform. These days meatcis just a commodity, completely disasociated from the animals it comes from and without second thougt on how those animals are treated. If I go into detail like this, it's really just to get the info out there in a casual way. The person in question might ignore it, or may think about it. I also needed nudges like this to realize the moral issue and I'm happy for every one of them. I don't really go into detail much, and rarely inform someone about my preferences. But will answer truthfuly when asked
If someone chooses to ignore ot just not see the suffering behind eating meat in this day and age, it is frustrating though to say the least. Especially if simply reducing the meat intake and being more selective about the source of the meat comes a long way. But I get why it is so tough, as I'm not a saint myself and while I reduce meat most of the time, I still have some occasionally even if I feel bad about it.
Well said.
I will go and shoot the next dog I see. You won't judge me for that, right?
Yes, good example. It is precisely that sort of judgemental strawman bullshit that gives vegans a bad rep.
And it's history stems from religious ideology.
Edit: oh you downvoters. Go look it up. A woman had a vision from God that said "don't eat things with faces". Dead serious - that's where it started.
All the sciencey justifications today are post-hoc rationalization.
The UK has a high rate of veganism, and part of that is attributed to the fact that the major vegetarian and vegan organisations in the UK generally recommend persuading people by offering them delicious food that is also vegetarian/vegan and saying it's more ethical. On the other hand, the equivalent organisations in the US tend to lean more towards recommending telling people that eating animal products is unethical, and it's difficult to accuse someone of unethical behaviour without being insulting. It also doesn't help that multibillion-dollar organisations have run successful smear campaigns against groups like PETA - everyone's heard of the time they took someone's pet dog and killed it, but most aren't aware that it happened once and gets reported on as if it's news every few months, or that it was an accident as the dog's collar had come off and it was with a group of strays, and got muddled with another dog, so was put down weeks earlier than it was supposed to be, bypassing the waiting period they had specifically to avoid this kind of mistake.
PETA has a lot more fucked up behavior under its belt than the one time they “accidentally” euthanized a dog they stole from someone, and much of their bad behavior has been very much maliciously intentional. Here just a small sample.
ETA: A few more, because why the hell not? Fuck PETA.
It doesn't strengthen your point to link Fox News and the literal website for the smear campaign I mentioned: https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=PETA_Kills_Animals
As for PETA putting down lots of animals, that's no secret. It's really easy to get people to donate to a no-kill animal shelter, so there are lots of them. However, when you're a no-kill animal shelter, and you're full of animals you can't kill, or are asked to take an animal that can't be ethically be treated with anything other than euthanasia, you have to turn the animal down, and it ends up wherever will take it. Usually, that ends up being a PETA-run shelter. When a PETA-run shelter is being given all the rejects from everywhere else, it's obviously going to end up putting lots of animals down. It'd be better for PR if they didn't, but less ethical, and they prioritise the ethics above the PR.
If you look at one of your more reliable sources, the Snopes article, it backs up what I'm saying, and not what you're saying. It corroborates the story from my original post, lists another incident where PETA staff were accused but not convicted, and then discusses that they put down a lot of animals in their shelters, and how it includes healthy animals. The only controversy there is the definition of adoptable - a healthy stray kitten is theoretically adoptable, but if you get ten times as many kittens in a week as you do people wanting to adopt a kitten, 90% of them won't get adopted, and your shelter will get quickly overcrowded if you insist on ignoring that fact.
I'm no fan of Fox News in general myself, but just because we don't like them doesn't make everything they publish false. And yeah, the PETA kills site clearly has an agenda, but their agenda is to try and save animals from PETA's "love." There's sensationalism on that site, but there are also numbers, many of which come from PETA themselves.
I linked the Snopes article knowing that it supported points from both sides. The point in linking that article is that it's despicable that any of those reports of PETA's disgusting behavior are true at all.
You know what no-kill shelters try to do when they don't have space? Coordinate with local foster programs, coordinate with other shelters to see if they have space. There are other alternatives besides taking in a perfectly healthy animal and dropping it in the euthanasia queue.
I'm quite sure there are quite a few things PETA has been accused but not convicted of. When you're a group of assholes as big as that, you get pretty good at skirting the fine lines of what's legal and what's not. They're hardly the first example of groups like that.
Their agenda's to make PETA look bad so people don't become vegan or demand higher welfare standards from meat producers, and they can continue selling meat to Americans of such low standards that it would be illegal in the rest of the civilised world.
As I said, they can't do that once the foster programs and other shelters are full, too, and then overflow into PETA-run shelters because they're the ones that still have a capability to receive more animals after they're full. There aren't enough shelters to keep every animal in good conditions until it's either adopted or dies of natural causes, and no amount of coordination can magically create extra capacity.
I'm sure PETA shelters would have more capacity if they didn't prefer to see an animal dead than a pet. They have significantly higher kill rates than any other shelters, and have made their stance pretty clear that they're against animals being pets. No wonder they just keep killing them.
Check my comment history about 3 posts back to see my interaction with peta
That's actually not the problem. The problem are those who repeat themselves ever louder, even to people who have expressed disinterest.
Have you heard about our lord and saviour of our sins?
Do-gooder derogation Basically, some people perceive others' moral choices as criticism or as some kind of bragging.
If you accept that there are moral/ethical problems with eating meat (contribution to climate change, health concerns, animals being killed and eaten, whatever), and choose to eat meat anyway, and encounter a vegan, what has to happen?
You can accept that they are making a better choice, but then you have to accept that you're making a worse choice. Most people are cowards and protect the ego at any cost. Rather than shrugging and saying "yeah, i should eat less meat. Good for you taking the high road", which requires accepting that you're not being the best, you can instead grab onto any reasons why no it's really them that sucks. That's easier, more comfortable, and doesn't require any painful introspection or changes.
It's the same mechanism when people get mad at cyclists, pedestrians, people who go to the gym, people who don't shop at Walmart, whatever. They're doing something that makes you feel bad in comparison. Most people are terrible at that and will lash out instead of doing anything productive.
Alternatively, or maybe additionally, people are really tribal, and once they adopt the idea that vegans (or cyclists, or people driving small cars, or people wearing sandals, whatever) are in the outgroup, then they enjoy being hostile to them.
People are ego driven emotional morons. All of us. Me, too. It's terrible.
I've never once in the last decade seen a single vegan post other than recipes. What I do see is constant posts about how "vegans are always throwing it my face/holier than thou", "I'm gonna eat extra meat because vegans make me feel bad". I really don't think vegans are the problem, I think these fools fall for every single piece of beef industry propaganda that comes across their screens.
Holier than thou attitude from new vegans whose world view changed overnight and cognitive dissonance on the part of non vegan with the need to deflect than to make substantial changes.
It's a first world hill to die on, and many of the people who espouse veganism are only able to do so because of their own privilege.
It's a combination of smugness and "I'm better than you" and the lack of awareness that everyone had and continues to benefit from a world that has always used animal products. The Industrial Revolution basically ran on steam engines and leather belts, for example.
I have absolutely no problem with the idea that using fewer animal products and eating less meat is a good idea. I also recognize that feeding the world's growing population is probably going to involve insects being more widely used as a food source.
Vegans literally are suggesting solutions to the growing population because in almost every situation, it is much more efficient by land and water use for people to eat plant-based rather than meat. It's only a "first world hill to die on" if you think poor people can't eat plants. Sorry but I don't think this is a very accurate take...
People also continue to benefit from the work of slaves in the past and even present. What's your point? Do you think slavery is ethical? Is someone choosing to avoid products created from slave labour not a more ethical choice?
What privilege? Meat is the most expensive food out there. Eating rice and beans isn’t really showing privilege
Those aren't the vegans that most people are talking about. Being poor and having to eat vegan is different from being vegan because you want to stand out from everyone else with your vegan black bean soy burger with vegan cheese on a vegan sprouted whole wheat bun. If you can afford the overpriced "vegan" versions of typically non-vegan foods, and complain about your struggles being vegan, that's privilege.
When you're poor, you don't advertise the fact that you're eating vegan. You just make rice and beans because it's the absolute cheapest food available. You'll take meat and non-vegan when it's available. But at the very least, you'll survive on rice and beans. It's generally not something that people are proud of.
This. When I was poor af and regularly using the food bank they'd give venison periodically, and that was my favorite part of the boxes. That and this rice and seasoning meals went together amazingly and would last me like a week of meals.
They explicitly said that he was only judging the people only being vegan to be vegan so they could act like that
The implication is that this is common. I don't think even one vegan is vegan just to show off some kind of privelege. This is just a childish and unrealistic caricature that does not exist in reality.
You’re going to have to quote me what I said, we are too far into the thread.
I don’t doubt what you said, I just don’t know what I said. lol
I didn't say that. I said if you're buying the vegan substitutes and advertising that fact, that makes you privileged. I've seen it many times. There are even some in this post. People that eat vegan because they have limited choices don't advertise it. People that want to feel superior over others will express how much of a vegan they are.
Congratulations, you're finally getting it. They are two different people. There are people that eat vegan because they have no choice. Those people are not privileged. There are people that call themselves vegan and make sure everyone knows they are vegan. Those are the vegans the original comment was talking about, which someone took offense to. That's why I pointed out the difference.
It took a little effort, but at least you got there.
The privilege is being able to choose to eat that way out of a sense of morality or fashion rather for the reason that it's literally all there is to eat. The privilege is being able to turn your nose up at perfectly edible food for no other reason than that it's got a bit of egg, honey, or butter in it without having to worry about starving to death. The privilege is also having access to such an abundance and variety of food that you can maintain a vegan diet year round and not have to fear that you won't meet all the calorie, protein, and vitamin requirements you need to stay alive and healthy while much of the world is in a constant struggle to scrape together enough calories of any kind to stay alive.
that's great, but most vegans you speak to will tell you that we aren't telling the people who lack the privilege we have to go vegan. we're asking our neighbors, our bosses, our friends - people in similar if not the very same life circumstances as us - to walk a couple aisles over from where they buy the meat in the grocery store and buy some beans instead.
people love to bring up the privilege thing, but i would argue that it is entirely irrelevant. the entire point of veganism is to do what is reasonably possible and practicable. not to tell people who don't have the privilege to be so discerning about their diet that they are going to hell or something.
Thank you for saying this in a way I was unable to muster.
Maybe they mean privilege wrt education? As i understand it, it takes a non-zero amount of knowledge about nutrition to substitute meat completely and not be deficient in something. But I'm a life-long omnivore so I may be wrong
Well, that's getting into the difference between veganism and vegetarianism.
That aside, although meat is expensive from a cost and input perspective, it is a very efficient and dense source of calories and protein.
Outside of a first world or industrial agricultural setting, they also have the advantage of being able to convert food sources humans cannot eat into one we can, while to a great degree being able to tend to themselves.
Goats, sheep and chickens can have large numbers managed by a few children with sticks, and also produce non-vegan animal byproducts which can be sold for cash.
This is also before hunting is considered.
While vegetarianism and veganism can be practiced outside of a first world context, and indeed have been for thousands of years, they do come with sacrifices that are significantly easier to make with more money or in a post agricultural region.
Eschewing cheese, eggs and honey is not a difficult thing to do for me if I wanted, but there are places where that's just leaving good food uneaten, or money unearned.
That's I believe what's being referred to when it's called a privilege.
Except meat is the least efficient protein source. You need land to grow animal feed, which largely could be used to grow crops to feed humans. You put in like 100 calories to get 1 calorie out.
Not all land is suitable for crop cultivation, which was the point I was making. In subsistence or low tech farming areas, animals forage on land unsuitable for crop production and eat food unsuitable for human consumption. They're not eating feed, they're eating wild weeds and grass we can't. They're eating insects, miscellaneous seeds, small plants and whatever they find.
Do you think that if you're farming to have enough food to feed your family and maybe some leftovers to sell, that you're going to choose to produce something markedly inefficient in comparison to other options?
Subsistence farmers today aren't stupid. They're not wasting 90% of their food because they want a hamburger. They raise goats and chickens because they feed themselves and you let your kid who's too young to do heavy work follow them with a stick to keep them from wandering off. They raise cattle and donkeys because they can forage, and what they can't forage is more than made up for by using them to work the land or as beasts of burden.
There's a reason we domesticated animals. We didn't just immediately start giving them feed corn and locking them in cages.
It's a privilege to be able to ignore a readily available source of food.
It's a privilege to live in a society where we set aside land to grow huge amounts of food to feed our food.
It's a privilege to not have to know specifically where your food is coming from.
It's kind of ignorant to think that people who don't have those privileges must be foolish enough to choose what you think is an inefficient option, and to not consider why they would make that choice.
Vegan: no animal products. No butter, no eggs, having to be well-informed (as others have stated) and know about the content of every bit of everything you buy, and making choices on that basis instead of on cost.
Even then, how many of the products you buy and use every day have depended on animal products for their manufacture? I'm willing to bet that a fair amount of human labor consumes and uses animal products to sustain themselves, even if there are no animal products in the thing you're buying. I don't think it's fair to compartmentalize that away from purchasing decisions. The people who put your flat pack MDF furniture in a box, did they have a chicken sandwich on their lunch break? The people who are paving the roads and maintain the rails on which the products you ultimately buy, are they wearing leather boots?
Everyone depends, to some degree or another, on the use of animal products, either as food or for some other purpose. Even vegans.
Edit: Like I said above, reducing dependence on animal products is probably a good idea, but people who believe they have eliminated their dependence on animal products are patting themselves on the back for something they simply cannot accomplish.
Congratulations on synthesizing truly the dumbest argument I have ever seen in my entire life.
Can you explain what's wrong with this argument? As a relatively disinterested observer it seems reasonable to me.
Being Vegan is a choice for yourself so it's a fallacy to argue that others are not Vegan, and saying it doesn't help to try to make a difference unless everybody does it is also a fallacy.
So the argument is based on no less than 2 obvious fallacies. This should be pretty obvious, so question is if you are just a troll?
I'll say that this reaction does nothing to make me think you are approaching this with any objectivity.
The argument, to me, seems to be that it's impossible in the modern world as things stand to actually totally avoid animal products. That would seem like an issue that Veganism should be concerned with.
I see your point, I think, about it being an individual choice. But though I have heard of things like vegan shoes, I can see how saying those are vegan when you may not control all the inputs seems problematic.
Regardless, your response was so unpleasant that I don't think I'm much interested in continuing.
Yeah no reason to go to the moon if we can't visit other planets yet. That's the kind of logic you are arguing.
The vegan argument is to not contribute to animal suffering, you can't control what other people do.
And avoiding suffering doesn't help because there will still be suffering is about as stupid as it gets.
If you're okay with compartmentalizing that out of the production of goods and services you use, that's a you thing.
Veganism is not about completely eliminating every use of animal products no matter what. It's about reducing animal suffering and their exploitation as long as it's possible and practicable.
From https://www.vegansociety.com/go-vegan/definition-veganism
Found it interesting to discover that the money here in the UK is made from animal parts - I think certain notes contain tallow? Definitely seems like it is impossible to fully exclude animal products from your daily life unless you go off the grid and try to be an entirely self sufficient vegan homesteader, which, while extremely difficult and likely dangerous is still an option open to those preaching a vegan lifestyle. Vegans often do not actually practise their philosophy as far as is practical and possible, they all draw the line somewhere so far as how willing they are to sacrifice their comfort and convenience. Like there are no fully vegan cars - the glue is animal based, even if you opt out of a leather interior. Public transport or taking a job you can walk to are alternatives in the UK if you actually cared about benefitting from animals as little as possible, but few vegans will make sacrifices which are actually inconvenient once you get down to the nitty gritty
Imo being a vegan so far as diet and basic lifestyle changes goes is fairly easy for some people (they don't really like meat to begin with, know how to cook and enjoy it, no real health issues, disposable income) but the real test of how much they actually believe in these ideas is in if they consistently give up more niche forms of animal exploitation wherever they can
I think "the money is made from animal parts and there are no fully vegan cars so you're arbitrarily picking and choosing when to be vegan" misses the point of ideological veganism. I'm not a vegan, but I believe the goal for ideological vegans (in contrast with those who are vegan for medical reasons) is to minimize suffering and exploitation within reason for the specific reasons you said. No one can be 100% free of animal parts unless they become an off-the-grid self-sustained homestead.
Vegans know that. But most come to the conclusion that just because you can't live 100% animal free doesn't mean you can't try to get to 80% because you want to live your life in a manner you consider morally and ethically consistent with your collective ideologies. You get as close as you can within reason depending on the various constraints of your individual circumstances. "I am still a vegetarian, and I try to be a vegan, but I occasionally cheat. If there's a cheese pizza on the band bus, I might sneak a piece," to quote Weird Al Yankovic.
I'd say most people, including vegans, have more than one goal in life. The "lines in the sand" you're referring to are at the intersection of their goal to minimize suffering and their goal to, say, keep living. Like if a vegan were told by their doctor, "If you don't start eating meat, you'll die from this weird disease," the vegan likely wouldn't be like, "Well, I might as well indulge in eggs and milk and all other animal products now since I can't be 100% vegan" and chow down. They'd probably eat just the amount prescribed by their doctor, because they still don't like eating meat because its origins bother them.
Because of the trope that vegans are pretentious twats that publicly chastise anyone not vegan.
Like most things it’s one of those situations that’s blown out of proportion and the vast majority of us will never interact with a preachy vegan. I’ve encountered many vegans in the wild and they’ve most all been decent people, and I love picking their brains for decent vegan or vegetarian foods. I don’t mind vegan/vegetarianism, it’s just not easy to do well, so it helps to talk to people who do it for real. That said, I have encountered a few that are on the preachy side, but whatever. They’re no different than the tool who has the “eat tasty animals” bumper sticker and the like.
I don't hate veganism. It's a dietary choice and that's fine. What I hate is vegans. They're always pushy and judgmental and hateful and sometimes even destructive in their activism. They're an annoying group of people and I just don't want to have to deal with them.
The same reason people hate leftists, feminists, trans athletes, "gamer girls", people on welfare, blacks, etc. An image the right cultivated of the group, out of convenient easily-hateable annoying people in it that they could use to create a generalization/stereotype out of. It's something that's able to happen to any group, I could portray any hobbyist or activist in this way the same exact way as these "annoying" groups are portrayed, but the right is particularly willing to just flat out lie, slander, and cheat their way into making countercultural/anti-status-quo groups look as absurd as possible, to the point that the majority of the population falls for it (even those that don't consider themselves to be conservative).
I'll make a comparison. Conservative/"anti-sjw" thumbnails often have a picture of some angry-looking rainbow haired woman, usually the same few, in order to be like "look how irrational and crazy these feminazis are, she must hate men so much" and like 4 out of 5 of those times it's a picture of a woman that was protesting a literal neo-nazi gathering or something, not some sort of radical crazy man-hating feminist. But the internet has conditioned the average person to look at someone like that and immediately think they're an irrational "feminazi", and conservatives showing these pictures everywhere and making 100 videos on the same person makes people subconsciously believe they're rampant and have a massive (and bad) grip on society.
Same kind of thing happens with vegans, you have the same 10 or so internet vegans people use to portray veganism that conditions people to think poorly of the concept "vegan", and when these influencers are confronted about it they say "I don't hate veganism, I just hate the annoying vegans" then they go onto Twitter to complain about the vegans and how they're irrational for not eating meat and their brains must be de-evolving or something. They know what they're doing, but they can hide behind plausible deniability, and the majority of viewers fall for it.
Instead of whimsy anecdotes, how about something with a bit more science behind it: https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Do-gooder_derogation
The meat and dairy industries have been pumping out propaganda for years, mostly aimed at right-wing dudes. It's just kind of part of right-wing culture at this point to kneejerk react to veganism with tired old tropes and stereotypes.
It was worse back in the 90s and early 2000s.
I said this on another thread posted by a very antagonistic vegan: Acting holier-than-thou, smug, and hostile is not a good way to convince people of your arguments. It pushes people away and biases them against you and the argument you're making.
Far too often I see vegans outright shaming and harassing people for choosing to eat meat, or acting smug and superior because they are making "the right moral decision" and everyone else is lessor for thinking otherwise. I often see them call people "stupid" and "lazy" for not making the same choice they did.
Now, if I came here acting the same way, but I was championing eating only meat and shaming others for eating vegetables, I'm sure vegans would be upset for the same reason.
It's gotten bad enough that a lot of people (admittedly myself included) are put off by vegans and their arguments. Not because the arguments don't have merit (they certainly do) but because enough vegans have acted antagonistic or smug that they get shunned for it when the discussion gets brought up, because it's what has become expected.
If you really want people to listen to you, you need to frame it from a friendlier and more down-to-earth position and not come across as hostile. The human mind tends to close itself off immediately when faced with hostility. This doesn't just apply to discussions about veganism, but any discussion in general really.
Speaking as a life-long lacto-ovo vegetarian who did a ten year stint as a vegan (I'm 30), it's because there is a subset of the vegan population that's very gung-ho about their diet and wants to proselytize about it, and no one likes being told what they should eat. When you remark on people's diets, people tend to get annoyed and defensive about it.
I grew up being told that my food looked yucky, how I can't call something meatballs since it doesn't contain meat, how since I don't eat protein I'll die, so on, so forth. It got annoying fast, so now I don't generally discuss my diet unless it makes a contextual sense. e.g. when planning a restaurant outing with people - though to be frank I often just avoid social situations where food plays a role.
I think where the big clashes really happen is when someone has made veganism/eating meat a core part of their identity, having that criticised, however gently that might be, will cause friction and often cause people to double-down on it; even though they may know on some level that the criticism might even be valid. You can see this in the fat pride movement as well.
Bingo!
It's the "identity" thing that fouls up so much today.
"You have to accept everything do because it's my identity".
Um, no, I don't have to "accept" anything about you. Nor do you have to "accept" anything about me. Hell, I figured this out when I was five. Fine, you don't like something about me? Then I won't waste my time with you. Thanks for making it clear.
I don't think we view this quite the same way. I don't see a problem with something being a defining part of someone's identity, because it's not up to me to decide how other people ought identify. We all have identities so on some level everyone identifies with something. Just because say, you and I don't get how diet can be an significant part of someone's identity, doesn't invalidate it being significant for someone else. It just means that we haven't lived the same life and that's fine.
In a way we do have to accept other people's identities, because what else can we do? We can't force change on others, all we can really do is acknowledge the situation and then choose whether or not we want to continue interacting with them.
It doesn't really get problematic until you have someone that does try to force things on others. My mother was one of those militant vegans, and she lost a lot of friends for it. She's the reason I am vegetarian, and the reason I was vegan for a long time. Back then I never had much choice in either regard.
Being vegan wasn't even really a defining part of her identity. Her trying to force it on others was also less about trying to change others, and more about trying to place herself in some sort of morally superior position to them. She pretended to care about their health and the environment - hell on some level maybe she genuinely did care - but it really was more about making herself look and feel better about herself because she was (and is) a deeply insecure person pretending to be otherwise.
As a final aside; what I've written above is what I consciously believe, but I'm obviously not an infallible person. I'm an extremely cynical, nihilistic, and definitely a judgmental person. I try my best not to be, and to see things from the perspective of others, but some days I succeed better than others.
This is so frustrating. People saying "Oh I just don't like those self-righteous vegans". Thing is, it doesn't really matter what vegans say or how reasonable/logically sound it is, the knee-jerk reaction is always the same.
Because I sat at a table for an hour with a work colleague lecturing me on veganism. I couldn't care less if you don't lecture me.
People don’t hate veganism as much as they don’t appreciate being judged for their choices and chastised by other adults for beliefs that they don’t share.
Personally I have no problem respecting the beliefs of people who are vegan due to their personal morals. Until they start disrespecting the beliefs of others who don’t agree with them with regards to meat, then they become annoying.
Eh, it's hard for me to respect someones beliefs when they use those beliefs to justify causing harm. And if someone believes that experiencing a good taste in their mouth justifies killing, I don't respect that at all
Everyone, the answer to the thread is right here.
Not all beliefs are good. Veganism seems to minimize suffering for a group of life on this planet that has traditionally been at the whims of humans.
But as another commenter pointed out, people's egos can't usually take the claims that they are making bad choices and should change. This kind of pressure shows up in exercise, for example.
Animals dying don't care about egos though. On the one hand, entire beings seize to exist, while on the other the top predator remains to exist and satiate their taste buds with a steak or pork chop.
If you are concerned about moral behavior in this world, then you can't not extend that consideration to animals. If you can't, then you're morally inconsistent.
You are absolutely free to believe that not all beliefs are good or correct according to your own morals, and plenty of people will agree with you. Similar to going to a middle eastern country and telling them that women should have rights and shouldn’t have to cover up, don’t expect to be well liked for telling people that their beliefs are deficient or immoral.
Unfortunately for any minority group that seeks change within a group led by the majority, this is true. Perhaps the vitriol against vegans is part of the game of realizing change: there will always be resistance and tendency from some portion of the population to keep things the same as they always were, regardless of whether those things are good for the population itself.
I will always disrepect the beliefs of others who put animals through unnecessary harm.
Yeah I don't get it either. You do you 🤷🏼♂️
As long as people aren't trying to force their views on me (veganism, religion, what have you), I couldn't care less.
This is my experience as well. People don't hate vegans specifically, they hate evangelists generally.
There in lies the rub, though. Most vegans are vegan for a moral reason that they believe applies to you:
There are more fringe reasons for veganism such as: diet, health, etc. But those aren't relevant to the point I'm making.
"Live and let live" doesn't apply to situations where we're talking about global warming or the abuse of animals. Most vegans are trying to educate others and - yeah - they probably vote for things that would result in more expensive meat or less meat being available in your local markets. I believe most vegans are hoping their efforts will slow global warming and provide better living conditions for livestock.
I'm not trying to sit on a moral podium here and judge. I eat meat too. I'm not vegan. Though I've tried to reduce how much meat I eat in yet another small, feckless, civilian effort to slow global warming. All I'm saying is: I sympathize with people who want to improve the world and I understand why they spend time and effort talking about being vegan.
But meat in america is cheaper than the vegan stuff and definitely tastier. So it's hard for us to meaningfully change.
By vegan stuff do you mean things like meat replacements? My diet is mostly vegetarian, for the same reasons as you stated, and honestly I see zero appeal in things like Beyond products, but I also think they're totally unnecessary. When I've done Veganuary in the past, I tend to eat a lot of whole foods (tofu, legumes, beans, fruit and veg) and here in the UK that is cheaper than eating meat. But, I know the economic model for the US is quite different so I wouldn't be surprised if things like chicken were cheaper than tofu or Seitan
I was talking about meat replacements but I put tofu in that category as well because I don't have a lot of experience with tofu outside of "we have this instead of meat".
Vegan food is cheaper in America, for sure. Beans, veg (some) and rice are cheap. However fruit is expensive.
But the alternatives to meat are not cheap: tofu is like $5/lb compared to chicken which can be as low as $2.99/lb. Steak is expensive in America, but it can be close to the cost of tofu. It's definitely cheaper than the steak-alternatives like beyond meat.
While you might find meat replacements to be unnecessary, most Americans (myself included) struggle. 90% of the meals I used to eat were some variation of: protein (meat/chicken/fish), plus a veggie, plus a carb (rice/bread). That was the basic dinner. It has a nice ratio of protein to carb. It was tasty (to me at least) and the cost wasn't too bad.
I'm guessing I'm not alone, culturally. It's not like you can fry up two slabs of tofu and just call it a day. Tofu is just different. It doesn't cook the same and it doesn't taste the same. I cook tofu at least once a week, but I treat it very differently.
It's just not easy for Americans to justify going vegan. It's culturally very different and - if you want to stay within the culture - it's expensive.
But that's why I always advocate for meat reduction, not replacement. Eat more vegetables. Try other dinners. Etc. But most Americans are remiss to be told what to do.
That's interesting, I suppose meat being so culturally important would definitely make substitutes feel essential, and if they're so much more expensive veganism can quickly feel like a privileged stance
It’s part of a shifting norm and shifting norms are always controversial. Especially norms that involve opening up bodily autonomy, dignity, or respect to previously excluded groups.
Usually it’s not veganism, itself. Rather, it’s the vegans.
Specifically the annoyingly loud, self-righteous, insists-everyone-must-join-them vegans.
Unfortunately, most people only really see this sort of vegan- rather than the more common, average sort of person who happens to also be vegan.
My personal experience has actually been quite whew opposite of everyone here apparently. Of the 3 vegans I've spent time with, not one of them has ever brought it up to preach or to sound smug. It only ever comes up because I ask for a recipe they served and they say something along the lines of "now, this is a vegan recipe, but you should be able to substitute 'x' with 'y' if you wanna avoid that." It's never preachy, it's always in the "don't let this being vegan ruin it for you" kind of way.
My low stakes conspiracy is that vegan hate on the internet is like people that don't like the word moist. They either watched friends and decided to adopt that as a personality trait, or they look up to someone that did just that. They hate veganism because they watched a comedian quip about it and agreed or they saw someone that watched a comedian and agreed. It's all too consistent to not be feeding from the same bowl.
I'm an ex vegan (about 5 years) so I've been on both sides if it. Here's my opinion.
When I was a vegan it was very much a part of my identity. It was something that I thought about 2-3 times (at least) per day when I ate, and any time I went to buy food. I remember being actually insufferable about it for a long time and I'm pretty sure I've lost friends over it, being annoying and preach to a friend's husband and then eventually just not getting invited back for game night. So people are definitely feeling burned/rejected/otherized by vegans who, if not just coming right out and saying it, strongly infer that you are a "bad person" for consuming even small amounts of animal products, or at least let you know that you're being judged for it. As an ex-vegan I've experienced this myself.
On the other hand, non-vegans are also insufferable about food. My friend in college didn't like cheese. Hated how it tasted, hated the way it felt in his mouth. But he loved pizza. He would often buy pizzas for everyone, with cheese on, pick the cheese off himself, and eat it without. I swear that every time he did this someone would say something about it, "what? You don't like cheese? Why?!" I personally had to endure a lot of weird questions and looks, and comments when after volunteering for a whole day at a baseball field for my son's team, and they served pizza after which I just refused. I just quietly didn't get myself any, and people had like 20 questions about it. I didn't even bring up that I was a vegan, I just said I wasn't hungry, which was odd and apparently unacceptable.
Vegans and vegetarians also get judged for their diets, there are plenty of non-v people who will become like preemptively defensive about it, and let you know they think you're weak and unhealthy. You get otherized and judged, even if you dont care what people eat and you just patiently say that its a personal choice, for health or the environment or whatever. This actually deepens the in-group acceptance/out-group rejection of everyone involved. The next time a vegan has to hear about their choices they'll be less patient with the person asking; the next time that person eats an egg around a vegan and gets lectured, they'll be less patient and around and around it goes.
I have theories about why this is, some of which maybe are apparent from what I've written. I think people do construct identities around consumer behavior, and they feel rejected when someone doesn't share those same consumptive habits which they take for granted. I'll get into it if anyone gives a shit.
But I think theres a problem with public discourse that encourages this kind of ingroup/outgroup good/bad acceptance/rejection, so much that it is implied in all discourse whether a vegan or not. This is the thing that drove me away from veganism: I think that vegans are right about a lot of things, but they can't actually see the world for what it is, they can mostly only see through this lens. This is basically the same problem with liberals, conservatives, religious, atheist, whatever. Its the cult of the individual having eroded any experience of interconnectedness, even though we are interconnected. As such, people can't see the world for what it really is, we can only see it from behind the fences of our specific camp.
People like to characterize those they already want to disagree with by the worst, most extreme examples of the group. So before even considering the benefits/drawbacks of veganism, people have already chosen their position after thinking "vegans are just so preachy and annoying".
It's putting outrage before reason, and it's really common in social media and news:
Think about how Fox News viewers picture liberals as the least coherent, unreasonable individuals that they see get interviewed, when in reality most are just normal people.
Or the reverse: how people in liberal circles might see conservatives depicted as Maga-hat wearing weirdos who think 5G is killing them.
Same with how many religious people evaluate atheism or atheists think of religion by their worst representatives.
In short, I think the answer is that it's a symptom of tribalism and identity-politics.
People don't like to be made to feel uncomfortable (via knowledge) about something that they enjoy
I don’t hate people who are vegans.
I do hate the person who righteously yelled at me about eating meat while I was eating her vegan food at her house which she invited me to. And then proceeded to send me Facebook farm videos that were obviously staged. I worked on a farm… so when I corrected her what actually does happen on a farm Vs what these idiots were staging to get reactions, it was even more disgusting to me that she wasn’t doing any of this for the animals as she claimed but doing it so she could feel important. So she can fuck right off up a mountain.
So no:I don’t hate people who are vegans. I hate self involved, insincere shitheads.
That said yeah, we need to address commercial farming. It’s an issue. We need to cut down the meat products that are getting produced and stop creating diets that get capitalists richer. But also we need to be honest with what is actually happening. No, they do not give hormones to animals on farms. That practice was discontinued prior to the 1990s. We need to out assholes who spread this bullshit online, dampening the real issues as to why introducing more plant based food is necessary. We also have to keep plant based food healthy and not just inject it with sugar ,salt and fat creating the same health issues we had with consuming commercialized meat.
Also I think this is why vegan is a ruined word and why ‘plant-based’ is now becoming a substitute. To replace this damage that many of the self called vegans did that were just as much lying and cheating as the industry they so much hate. two wrongs do not make a right. So I’m all about the pivot away from that dumpster fire
My ex was vegan. While I have absolutely no problem with the practice of being vegan, she would critique and criticize nearly everything I ate. It was extremely exhausting. Nothing against vegans personally however some of them won't shut up about it and try to make you feel bad
You tend to get two groups who dislike it. Ignorant folks who think something like no animal stuff means no protein means you shrivel up and die, and the ones who've encountered a few too many militants in their time and ain't interested or are downright sick of their schtick. Vaguely similar to atheism, except replace the animal product stuff with something religion related, ofc.
Except you don’t see atheists throwing a tantrum. So not like atheism at all.
if you think internet atheists can't be just as obnoxious as internet vegans you clearly haven't been around enough of them.
Speaking as an atheist, can confirm.
The common denominator is the internet part though. The last obnoxious atheist I saw was 14, and I have yet to see an obnoxious vegan IRL
To be pendantic, the vocal atheists are more specifically antitheists as in they are opposed to theism, not just someone who doesn't believe.
Give me one example.
Don’t remember when /r/atheism was a default on the other site?
That’s your example? A sub being the default on Reddit? That’s equal to protests in the streets by vegans to you?
The sub being a default wasn't. The content on that sub was though
Atheists highlighting religious atrocities is very annoying, yes. Imagine just doing you thing, raping kids and murdering people for not believing in your religion and someone posting on Reddit about it. So annoying!
Their example is 99% of the popular content for that board during that era.
Did you never go there?
As an example of internet atheists being as obnoxious as internet vegans, yes that’s my example.
Edit: with regards to the content it was posting back when it was a default, not the fact that it was a default
Get real. Every single group that lives outside the heteronormative, christian nationalist banner has fit-throwers. Saying that there aren’t those atheists but certainly are those vegans is as dumb as any other half-baked argument out there.
You make it sounds like the heteronormative, christian nationalist s don't throw fits all the time.
Why has heteronormative become an insult?
How do I make it sound like that? All they do is cry and moan! They are the absolute worst of the fit-throwers. But way to dig deep into my comment for a complete nothing burger.
Can you name any atheist protests?
Every action by the Satanic Temple?
Though they are kind of amusing trolls about it.
It's a form of targeted religious fairness testing for sure, but I wouldn't call TST a protest org. Nobody really stands outside and holds a banner as much as just filing lawsuits.
What is the difference between "religious fairness testing" and protesting? Is a protest not just an active resistance to the current legal status quo? How is a lawsuit not a protest?
I guess it depends on your active definition. Sure those are protest actions I guess, but contextually speaking I would understand "a protest" to be a gathering of people with signs or a message at a place of business, courthouse, or similar.
At the intersection of religion and protest I'm in visioning WBC not TST.
I wouldn’t call them highlighting the hypocrisy of Christians the same as protesting out in the streets. The satanic temple is reactionary.
Can you name a “vegan” protest?
https://www.google.com/search?q=vegan+protest
You know if you do the same for “atheists protest” tons of shit pops up too. Even ones without Megan Kelly. You position is so flimsy and yet you still are digging in. You are a reply away from “do your own research”. Embattled ideology always comes with protest. The absolute unmitigated smugness that one group of people are more annoying than another based on their ideology is problematic at best and at worst, you are a pube away from wearing a red hat and diapers.
You make me reconsider if I am on the right side of this, you are such an asshole that you drive people away from thinking of using trump as an insult
Opposition to religious monuments on public grounds. They are low key and the only violence, vandalism, or public disturbances come from religious folks.
So not really the same then.
That is correct that they aren't the same. That's why I added the part about how the only issues come from religious folks...
That’s ALL they do. I say this as an atheist that avoids atheism on the internet like it’s a disease.
It's not the diet or anything that bothers me; it's the vegans themselves. They're basically religious zealots but for food. If a meat eating atheist went around yelling at vegetarians and theists in unrelated discussions, I'd hate them too.
No, that’s the only way most people KNOW that they are.
The most common is probably passing them in the halls at work, knowing nothing about their dietary choices.
Edit: Autocorrect
That's only true in select places. Most people in one place can have different experiences from most people in a different place, due to the places being different environments with different populations.
The majority of the internet is definitely among the places you've described, though.
Source: I've lived in both types.
How do you know someone's a vegan?
Don't worry, they'll tell you.
Same with any evangelical.
That's just incorrect. It's pretty common not to find out until you're talking about what to eat. I would imagine you've met vegans that you simply don't know are vegan yet.
There are enough vegans who absolutely discuss their diet immediately to keep the joke alive. Given how difficult and isolating it can be in many places, I get how it can become really core to one’s identity.
Very fair. My core point remains that it's all about that
though. If you live in a region with more than a handful of vegans, you find very differently. It's a personal pet peeve of mine when people try to paint their own experiences as "most people", and all of any group as being just like those members they have met and are thinking about. It completely ignores several distinct internal mental biases, that are themselves making our world shittier because they lead to inaccurate conclusions, and are fairly natural unless you've received training to be made aware of them.
Statistical selection bias, confirmation bias, etc.
Because of this, it's less a joke to me, and more just a pain in the ass. And I'm a happy carnivore that also does not like being preached to.
Do-gooder derogation
Defensiveness
I have never, ever, heard someone in real life bring up veganism unless it was specifically in the context of what they eat.
The problem is, it comes up. Food is a very foundational element of social life. Sharing a meal is important, providing a meal as a host is important, and supplying food at events is customary.
Rejecting the offer to put something in their body is misunderstood as an insult.
Cuz it itches the part of our brain that looks for status-seeking behavior and labels people as inauthentic.
Being vegetarian places a degree of exclusivity onto your consumer habits, and in the Western capitalist lens, conspicuous consumption has a lot to do with how we communicate our status.
Being vegan stands in direct relationship to vegetarianism as being even more exclusive. This does two things:
Just that in and of itself puts vegans on the receiving end of a whole bunch of cognitive biases.
But wait, there's more!
Because mass production never lets a social identity go to waste, major brands got on board with explicitly labeling things as vegan, which starts to make it seem like you're trying to be cool but really just deepthroating the corporate cock to "buy your way to cool".
And then came the trends of organic/non-GMO, local-first, artisanal, farm-to-table, etc. etc.
At the point where Wal-Mart has their own artisanal farm-to-table cheese brand, it starts to look (to our dumb pattern-matching brains) like vegans are just rubes falling for the most basic version of an obviously fake status-seeking game propped up by cynical brands preying on how desperate you are to look cool.
But wait, there's even more!
Because, surprise -- our brains never actually stop caring about status, even if we think we're just trying to make rational, objective, moral choices. Picturing yourself as a rebel for being vegan, taking the sneers and the insults in stride because you know it's the right choice for the planet... is appealing.
And that self-aggrandizing image is inseparable from actually doing the thing, because that's just how our brains work. Even for the most pure-hearted among us, thinking we're morally superior -- especially in tangible ways that we get to physically play out on a daily basis -- is intoxicating.
So the people who are chuckling about the inauthenticity are... kind of right. But this same dynamic exists for literally everything. So when you chuckle at the vegan, but then take a moment to consider which kind of bacon really speaks to who you are as a consumer, you're playing the same game. It's just one that far more people are invested into. So if anyone calls it silly, nobody takes that criticism seriously. Not like your organic local-first artisanal acai kale kombutcha.
--
Basically my recollection of this episode of You Are Not So Smart: https://soundcloud.com/youarenotsosmart/selling-out-andrew-potter
...which I listened to, for the first time, as an attempt at bonding with my then-girlfriend/now-wife's roommate. We had not gotten along up until then, because she was aggressively vegan and I ate a lot of fast food. But I found out she liked podcasts and I was really enjoying this one and there was a new episode I hadn't heard yet! She really enjoyed it, until the guest talked about veganism as a form of status-seeking. That didn't go well. I didn't mind taking over her half of the lease though.
I think it’s guilt actually. Most people deep down kind of know that eating meat is wrong, but if the whole world does it, you can’t be blamed cause you have no choice.
And then there comes someone who is not participating. Their existence breaks the logic above and implies that it’s a personal responsibility.
Vegans are like Arch Linux users:
They make sure you know they are vegans.
There’s a ton of vegans who exist without trying to force their way of life on everyone, but the ones who do dominate the conversation and can be off putting.
Just like with everything else that people make into a lifestyle or part of their identity. Most are cool, but there's always a vocal minority of dillweeds that take it way too seriously or use it to judge others that aren't part of their pack.
You are upset and allowed to be so, the problem starts when you start trying to make other people live like you and force it into conversations.
If we are sharing recipes, you can fuck right off.
Conversation about climate change and the causes of and solutions to? Jump on in running.
It’s all about the context.
In the mid-19th century there was a doctor in Vienna named Ignaz Semmelweis. He worked in a maternity ward and took extreme focus on the extremely high mortality rate in his ward, and Semmelweis eventually found that hand washing before providing care was extremely effective at reducing the mortality rate (consistent hand washing dropped it from 18% to 2% mortality rate) specifically doctors would do autopsies in the morning then (without any sanitization) move onto their duties in the maternity ward.
Semmelweis had the seniority to mandate hand washing (specifically he identified Lyme to be very effective, but of course it's very unpleasant to wash with Lyme) he had the data to back up it's effectiveness, but what he lacked was the social capital to successfully shift the local medical culture to include handwashing before caring for sensitive prenatal and postnatal care. Specifically he was a dick about it. Because he was extremely outspoken about doing this unpleasant Lyme wash before providing care for which he couldn't provide a good theory as to why it worked, he was replaced as the director, continued his advocacy with limited success and eventually was placed in an asylum following a nervous breakdown where he died of sepsis from a caretaker not washing their hands.
His work was never recognized until long after his death. He probably could have had more success if he wasn't so annoyingly loud and outspoken about this hand washing thing. It was clearly the right thing to do but it took time and effort, wasn't entirely pleasant, and it wasn't yet the norm. He saved hundreds of lives while he was in charge and hand washing was mandated, but because his successor ended the handwashing mandate countless more died at his hospital alone.
The first successful soaps, in part created by a handful of individuals Semmelweis had inspired, were only successful when marketed as a cosmetic product to make you smell better (and by convincing people that they real!)
The point is, in advocacy, no matter how right you are, if you're fighting against "the way we've always done things" you will always have a significant uphill battle and have to play the politics and not be too upsetting to the order of things until some momentum is built, because otherwise, no matter how right you are, you can simply be written off as a lunatic and too annoying to be worth listening to
This argument is the same one anti-abortionists use.
How is it?
Edit to address your edit: Still the same argument anti-abortionists use.
I’m saying that what you are saying is the same as anti-abortionists saying that abortion is murder.
It’s not going to convince anyone who doesn’t think the exact same as you on the subject because it relies on beliefs that not everyone has.
How would you frame the vegans as the pro-choice activists in your hypothetical situation?
It challenges something people have been indoctrinated with and causes them to question their moral character.
Its because they ran into the loudest, most annoying vegans.
IDK how, maybe different areas have more militant vegans, or maybe they just roll with negative stereotypes and the algorithm bs that lets the worst folks float to the top of their media feeds.
I've actively sought out vegans because they have great advice on dietary restriction resources and as long as you're respectful of their choices, they've been consistently so willing to share.
And they also really love a good breakfast, in my experience, like the local vegan group has just pages of discussion on good vegan donut resources.
My list..
Sometimes they'll offer their opinions as "proof" that they're "right"
It's expensive, so often vegans are people with resources others don't have and yet they act like this isn't a thing
They're right that it's way better for the environment and it annoys me that I'm contradicting my own values on that point
There's an abuse of science at times, which always bothers me, even in the name of a good cause. If you're right, let the truth do the talking.
Just off the top of my head...
Not all vegans, etc... no actual hate involved for anyone
I don't hate veganism.
I just don't like the militant and pompous attitude that some vegans seem to possess, that they feel that they have to flaunt their vegan lifestyles on others over.
Yes, go eat as many vegetables as you like, go eat meat alternatives and whatever. You do you, eat what you want. But I don't want to ever have someone like that coming up to my face and tell me what I'm allowed to eat in their eyes.
So, here's the thing.
Regardless of a hundred different ethical and meta-ethical theories that people espouse, what everyone actually reacts to with outrage is plausibly-generalised threat perception.
If someone's actions are directly threatening you, you'll feel anger and/or fear.
If someone's actions don't affect you or yours, but :stuff like that: being commonplace definitely would, then you will feel outrage.
If I kill people and take their stuff, you'll be very upset: you're a people, and you like stuff - and if we let the general case happen, the specifics could come bite you in the ass soon enough.
If I kill and eat animals, most people don't consider it plausibly worrying that they or little Timmy will be next. We have great big enormous taboos against eating people, so that slope just don't slip - and as a result they just don't have a problem with it.
(If I go and torment animals for lulz, then that's a very different case; people who are cruel to animals are often even worse to people, after all - and so people see that as monstrous. And again, if you want to manufacture consent for some atrociy, the easiest way is to reclassify the victims as qualitatively different. Oh good lord no, we're not killing people and taking their stuff, that would be awful. Nonono, we're killing :group: and taking their stuff, totally different proposition...)
So when vegans are horrified at people killing and eating (or breeding and milking, or whatever) animals, and go to great lengths to try and elicit that same outrage, there's a disconnect and dissonance going on. The non-vegans don't have the emotional trigger of perceived threat, so to have them keep trying regardless is seen as pearl-clutching and sleeve-tugging, like making up a sad story and loudly demanding that everyone weep about it on the spot. It's uniquely annoying. And when you combine that with (perceived) moral superiority and a hypercritical attitude, it comes across as something like a Karen with BPD. It's calling red on someone else's scene; everyone is supposed to cater to the vegan's emotional distress when there's no corresponding emotion in themselves, and honestly that just provokes people to schoolyard bullying.
That's at the core of it, I think. There's a bunch of other annoyances around it, but I think they're mostly after the fact.
Honestly if you want to make people feel that general existential threat, frame it in terms of ecological damage. Animal agriculture is horribly unsustainable and causes huge enviromnental problems, not least of which are are a truly gigantic carbon footprint. Pushing that angle would actually stand a chance of being effective, tbh. But annoyingly (from the outside), it seems that the most vocal vegans don't want people to be outraged on that basis, they want them to be outraged for the poor little lambikins, and will settle for no less. I can see their point, and I can be a stubborn bastard myself about not settling, but jesus fuck it's annoying.
Not a vegan, though I've been mostly-veggie for the last couple of years for health reasons. It's interesting how it shapes your perceptions; eating meat doesn't seem wrong to me, but it has started seeming weirdly excessive and uncreative.
Imagine that you go to an outdoor barbecue on a bright Summer day.
And some guy who is an extreme Muslim is going around telling some women that they're not dressed in a modest enough way and that everybody should follow the Teachings of the Prophet and how life is a lot better when people follow the Teachings of the Prophet.
It's not Islam that's the problem, it's certain kinds of people, their proselytising and, worse, their trying to force or even impose their own moral values on others.
Same with Veganism and some kinds of Vegans: because it's a moral choice some of those who practice it have the very same behavioural disfunctions as religious nutters and because they're the most visible representatives of it they just cause many to draw negative conclusions about the entire thing.
I guess I’m lucky I’ve never personally known anyone to preach about their diet.
For someone like myself, this all sounds overblown and just a meme/trope you see in movies and TV.
Because the idea that there are vegans and vegetarians is an implied accusation of guilt to people that eat meat and animal products that are the direct result of animal suffering. Some people that don't eat animal products might be militant or preachy, but I've never met one. In fact I have only ever met the inverse, people that constantly berate people for being vegan or vegetarian. Having been one myself, I can say that for me and people I know it is the same reason religious people hate atheists; their existence implies that people that eat meat are wrong and therefore bad people. Studies have confirmed this. Here is an article from the BBC that goes over some of the studies.
I don't think many people truly hate veganism, they are just frustrated by a few of the louder vegans out there.
For example, some vegans are very judgy - they will unabashedly tell non-vegans that eating meat is morally reprehensible. They also often want you to watch brutal videos of animal abuse and slaughter, with the overt overtone being an accusation of "you are doing this. It's your fault if you eat meat."
I'm not sure how any person who isn't vegan could possibly see that as anything but unwelcome. Life is hard enough without this sort of thing.
This said, I know plenty of vegans that never do this. I think it's awesome that they can avoid meat, and I applaud and support alternatives like impossible and beyond.
Because brains are wired to avoid 1) changes to habits and 2) admission of wrongdoing. Encountering a vegan makes the brain start running cover and looking for ways to discredit arguments. Often, the mental framework for dismissing "uppity" advocates already exists. There's also the force of money and industry propaganda which should be acknowledged, but in my experience people are more than capable of coming up with justifications on their own.
It's very difficult to overcome these psychological forces, but simply making the switch can remove a lot of cognitive dissonance and expose certain BS arguments for what they are.
100% it's just cognative dissonance. Everyone knows meat is bad but most can't come to terms that they're too weak to quit it. This is especially painful when people are confronted directly and a self-defence mechanism kicks in.
It's ok to be a bit weak sometimes, everyone has a lot of going and has to choose their battles. Our contemporary culture hates to acknowledge this thus creating a lot of binary tension.
I don't see many people hating veganism. I see a lot of people hating vegans pushing their ideology when it wasn't asked for. The simple truth is that every person has different ideologies, beliefs, priorities, and ethical systems, and what makes perfect sense to one person sounds over-prohibitive, and any attempt at dialogue to find a middle ground ends with a bunch of moral posturing.
they hate vegan preacher. how do vegan promote their ideas? by saying meat eater are murderer. by calling people meat eater. meat bad. 🤷🏻♂️
It takes a "special" kind of person to take something so ingrained in culture and still say "I'm not gonna do that," usually a slightly crazy and/or neurodivergent person. I think this is partly why there are so many "insane" vegans, because it's self selecting for people who are outside the norm.
I don't even mention to most people I'm vegan, usually just an excuse like "meat makes me feel sick" because the average person will think I'm going to give them a 20 minute lecture.
To anyone who is the vegan who will give the 20 minute lecture, please consider if your goal is actually animal welfare, you can hardly ever debate someone out of something they like. Instead, just show people easy dishes you made that they actually enjoy (pasta with spaghetti sauce, French fries, vegetable stir fry, roasted veggies with olive oil) and you'll often find they start cooking more vegan food (or at least less meat), and also talk more positively about veganism
I think people hate vegans more than veganism. The most annoying x% makes the other (100-x)% look bad
Choose your own x I don't want dunks from either side lol
no one hates veganism, we just hate the vegans
It's not veganism we hate, it's the stereotypical preachy vegans, acting like farming is the equivalent of the holocaust.
You don't tell me what to eat, I won't tell you what to eat, everyone's a winner.
Obviously there's the stereotype and that is what it is, but I usually get irked at the suggestion that it's easy and an imperative. Veganism and other similar diets are an EXTREME luxury, and is only a viable option for a small percentage of the population. It would never have been an option in the past and is still not remotely an option for most humans.
edit: see below comments to understand what I mean
For me it's the high-horse holier than thou attitude most of them seem to carry in online conversations. I know a fee vegans and they are mostly fine in person after the first few months of radicalization, but I imagine they just suppress it in person to maintain the acquaintanceship and then bitch in their vegan echo chambers about how "my co-worker who knows I'm vegan had the audacity to order a hamburger and eat it in front of me knowing I'm vegan, does he know he's destroying the world with that Burger... AITA?"
If you're looking for scientific answers, good luck they, Inrhjnjbmost people stop worrying about micromanaging people after a few years of academia.
Seems like most people on this post have fallen into the trap of judging a group based on a loud subset of the group. Most vegans/vegetarians I know don’t like to share that they are veg precisely because of that stereotype.
There is a push from the meat industry to make hating veganism the cool thing is what I feel is going on. Some militant vegans are honestly annoying.
Because appx 1% of vegans are straight up obnoxious and indignant. And a similar percentage of meat eaters are also.
Then everyone else just mildly gravitates to tribalism but probably doesn't actually care that much.
I do not like being told by someone that i need to become vegan because they have become vegan.
No body hates veganism as a concept in and of itself. People dislike vegans that think they're better than everyone else because they eat no animal product.
Half my social circle has gone vegan at this point and I think a lot of the anti-vegan sentiments is people don't like modifying their behaviour to give up their own comfort even when they know something is distressing to someone else. Since a lot of vegans see a very real cruelty that they are generally powerless to stop and other people do not understand their reactions to seeing other people participate in cruelty is often to feel very sad. Since so much of human culture surrounds shared meals having a vegan takes a lot of options off the table entirely and alters other people's options even when they don't intend to.
Like it's not a matter of "well we'll go to your vegetarian restaurant this time and next time we go to a place I'm excited to go" for those of us who care about our friends being upset we basically rarely pick our first choices and more often sacrifice things we are excited for in the name of someone else's comfort. It can be a love language to find restaurants and eat the things on the menu that don't exactly thrill you but other times you just want to have that selfish Birthday dinner where you don't feel compelled to pick a restaurant for someone else.
I think a lot of people reject veganism more forcefully because they don't want to have to participate in that sort of friction. All it takes is one ethical vegan to completly change a friend groups food culture. Even when they bring their own food and try not to make a big deal and mask it not bothering them when they see meat being consumed people are generally compelled to care for people they know and ignoring someone's distress isn't showing care. When people ratchet up the social cost of veganism they are more often than not trying to engineer a social sphere where they do not feel callous, don't have to give up what they like and don't have to do any additional research work or social calculations .
Funny is that I have only seen Anti Vegan threads on here. Like, who is the annoying one?
I don't mind vegans, or that lifestyle, at all. What I do mind is people who are overtly (and possibly aggressive) in presenting a lifestyle that the feel is "right". Unfortunately there's a stereo type with vegans being that way.
Veganism is a big lifestyle choice and the difference to vegetarian is the avoidance of near all animal products if and when possible. Not just in regards to eating meat, but things like a leather wallet too.
Someone has to be careful and on top of their diet and dietary needs to be vegan and properly nourished (even omnivorous people are subject to this malnutrition mind you).
I have some personal differences in views to vegans in regards to the consumption of meat, but rather similar views in how it's obtained. I do think generally the mass production and lifestyle is not morally correct for the animals. However I would also say humans are naturally omnivorous and eating meat is something that not only is built into our diet but what gave us a fundamental evolutionary advantages.
Animals eat animals and humans are animals. Though if we are sentient enough and empathetic enough creatures we should at least provide a decent life for the animals and utilize all we can so as not so waste them.
I have no issues with veganism but I do have issues with being attacked because I'm not vegan. I've been attacked for using cow milk even after explaining that I can't use plant milk because of sensory issues.
Funnily enough, just like you said, I know vegans IRL who would never behave that way and of course I accommodate their dietary choices when I'm in charge of food.
I think it's mostly an Internet thing when you just see the loudest minority instead of the more quiet majority.
Because it's the easiest way to avoid having to consider changing opinions and behaviors
People don’t like to have deeply held beliefs challenged and even less so like to be told they are a bad person for eating certain types of food.
It's the fandom mostly. I like using Linux but I don't think you are immoral for using windows. Rick and Morty is funny but I don't think Rick is someone to take any advice from. CrossFit seems to work for most people who stick with it but it is one of many options. I won't apologize for being an atheist but I don't think you are stupid for not being one.
The problem with Veganism is the problem with monotheism. There is one proper way to live and all the others are wrong and awful.
That and the lying. I won't deny that there are farmers who abuse their animals, that is a problem that can be dealt with through the legal system, but you can't sell me a sack of lies claiming that I abused the cows I milked growing up. Because I know I didn't.
Well it's like the old joke says,
Q: how do you know someone's a vegan?
A: OH, THEY'LL TELL YOU.
Seriously tho I don't have a problem with them unless they start saying there's no difference betwern killing an animal and torturing it.
I don't hate vegans. I even dated one for a while. She would eat veggies, I would eat meat. It worked because neither of us were dismissive of the others choice.
I do hate being preached to. I think most people do. Many of my encounters with vegans were ones where they were very hostile to me. For just not being vegan. I wasn't going around telling them veganism was bad or that they were a terrible person for being vegan. I have been told that by vegans. That I am a bad person for eating meat.
I have to eat meat I have always had a high metabolism. At various times in my life my maintenance diet had to be at least 3,000 calories. Plus of course any additional food needed for non maintenance activities. Additionally I'm allergic to soy. This means that it would be nearly impossible for me to have gotten enough food without eating meat. I am pretty certain that if I had not eaten meat and animal fat. I would have died as a child, or at best had serious issues with nutrition. I was well fed as a child. I could eat as much as I wanted, still many of my memories of childhood were ones of hunger.
I even explained this to someone once and they responded by saying "well you didn't die" and then heavily implied they wish I did. As if me not dying made my point invalid.
This is why I am skeptical of vegans and vegan ideology. It is often toxic, and actively tries to hurt and shame people. Even people like me who are effectively choiceless in regards to eating meat.
Often even non-militant vegans will allow this behavior. I know how frustrating it can be to be told you need to police your own community. Though that doesn't mean it's okay to allow bad behavior amongst your peers.
My personal experience: Trying to find a restaurant that has vegan friendly options isn't always easy, and used to be much harder. That would make trying to find somewhere to eat as a group much more tedious if someone was vegan. I don't think anyone had issue with the person being a vegan, I think they just didn't like eating at the same two restaurants over and over.
No one likes being criticized and labeled a monster by an ignorant prick. They way too frequently act like every egg comes from a half zombie chicken that's kept in a little box and tortured just for fun, or that a cow couldn't possibly end up in a cheeseburger after living its best life. Factory farming is bad for lots of reasons, but it's not characteristic of the entire industry.
Some people feel judged for eating meat if they learn that you're a vegetarian or vegan. As veganism appears more extreme, it causes a stronger reaction.
These people don't like being judged, so they seek to judge you instead. If they can judge you for not eating meat, you can't judge them for eating it, or so they feel.
Some vegans being quite obnoxious in their attempts to convert others, doesn't improve things. Rather, it helps those who dislike vegans to reaffirm their beliefs that all vegans are silently judging them all the time.
All of this is just my theory.
I can only speak for myself, but not eating meat is not something that’s offensive. Nothing about veganism as a diet is offensive or in need of being critical of.
It’s the reputation of them being insufferable and obnoxious. It’s their need to inject their diet into discussions that aren’t about them, or their diets. It’s the way they lord over everyone with a ‘holier than thou’ attitude.
And I have experienced all these things first hand- MANY times.
In short, the problem with vegans is that there aren’t enough positive and down-to-earth vegans to counter the bad ones.
Vegans simply existing make people feel uncomfortable, so defense mechanisms in the brain trigger.
Since it’s an ethical stance, and people at least deep down know that killing innocent animals for 5 minutes of taste pleasure is wrong, but they don’t want to change themselves.
So the brain tries to rationalize how it’s definitely not wrong and really the vegan is wrong, and/or demonize the position to shield itself from the discomfort of knowing.
Basically psychological defenses kick in to defend unethical behavior that someone highlights by simply existing.
There are some very militant vegans out here on Lemmy, equating eating meat with rape and murder and generally being annoying without actually contributing to the discussions.
They are actively harming their cause. So much so, I suspect them of actually being trolls trying to make vegans look bad.
Or they are just dumb as a brick and don't understand common discourse. That's possible too.
I can't stand the proselytizing powered by privilege on so many planes. Whether it's cost, availability, or time, people have many reasons for being mUrDeReRs. Nobody likes being condescended over things that are barely in their control as it is.
I have nothing against veganism as a dietary decision, I'm actually seriously considering it for health reasons and for easier food preparation.
I am sick of veganism as a moral high horse, especially with hypocrisy in the background. I have a friend constantly ordering stuff, including vegan ingredients, from Amazon of all places. If he's going to low-key admonish me for hurting animals, I'd expect him to care about the Amazon warehouse employees to a similar degree. Unless it's all just posturing.
Because the Internet makes it easy to more forcefully express strong opinions, from both parties.
It's very easy to run into vegans on the Internet who will call you an unethical monster for eating meat, which if you don't think of yourself as an unethical monster, can be a bit offensive.
You also run into non-vegans who can't get it through their heads that that's not every vegan on earth, or even just the Internet or likely even that conversation.
It's much harder to call someone an animal hating monster or a pretentious condescending asshole face to face.
I respect other people's choices in what to consume, and I expect the same respect in return. I have no problem with people being vegan or vegetarian. In fact, most people I work with are from India and are vegetarian. We eat lunch together most days and no one has any problems with each other.
Unfortunately most vegans I know are extremely pushy and judgemental about their diet/lifestyle. They do not respect my choice in what to consume. This used to causes some preemptive judgements on my part, where I would get defensive immediately about my dietary choices, because I assumed they were judging me. Over time I have learned to control this reflex.
I can only assume that many people have had the same experience as me, and jump to the same conclusions.
My experience around any opinion where there is a default option, the vast majority will accept the default without thinking. Then when presented with an alternative by someone who has actively chosen to not chose the default, people become highly defensive as if they did do their due diligence, whether or not they actually did. Depending on where you live, the defaults change, but being that humans are tribal, differences in lifestyle naturally create friction. In parts of America, you drive an SUV, use an iPhone, and eat meat. Whether or not they actively or passively chose that lifestyle, when someone doesn't conform to what is expected there will be friction. How people react to that friction is up to them, but again, the default is to be critical of them and encourage conformity.
To grossly oversimplify things, there are two kinds of vegans...
Type 1 are "healthy living" and "sustainability" vegans. These type are generally benign, polite, helpful, positive, and keep to themselves unless asked. They also tend to not be super militant about their veganism... like the occassional egg from someone's beloved home-raised chickens is fine.
Type 2 are ideological vegans. These types believe that "exploiting" "living creatures" in any way is fundamentally immoral, and because it's a morality issue (e.g. basically religion) the vast majority are very preachy, demanding, and in-your-face about it. They don't consider type 1 to be "real vegans".
Type 2, being the loudest and most abrasive, giving veganism a bad name and ruining it for everyone.
It's simple: if you don't shove your ways in other people's faces, it's fine. If you do, it's not.
I don't care if you're vegan, but if you throw a BBQ and man the grill but don't cook any meat because it's not what you want, you're inviting criticism.
Right. I see what you mean but I think what you're asking for is impossible to ascertain
Because nobody likes self aggrandizement. The perception that so many people only do it to make themselves appear to be better people because of their morally superior choice is often a vile taste to anyone who hasn't made that same choice.
We all know eating meat is bad and for the many reasons for it. What we don't want to hear is that someone made the switch and that their bleeding heart simply couldnt take it anymore.
I eat beyond meat and I do my best to transition, yet, I'd never say that for the purpose of making myself seem like a better person. Vegans typically do.
I think a lot of people also have a hard time seeing it as a priority for themselves compared to their personal problems and other ongoings. It's subjective, sure. But it also takes a ton of personal responsibility and self control/denial to change habits.
Bottom line, there is a lot of things out there to care about right now, and being vegan is a big change for a lot of people. That, mixed with the extreme (understandable) feelings about mistreatment of animals by vegans, often leads to a feeling of repulsion from investing personal bandwidth into changing the behavior.
That's my opinion based on growing up with religiously vegan parents.
Same reason people who love fossil fuels hate people who are worried about global warming
I think its the extreme. The idea of reducing meat consumption over eliminating it is not met kindly by many vegans and vegan communities. I also see a lot of down play of the nutrient challenge discussion. Now like anything on the internet the extremes tend to be the most vocal. I have personally known vegans who are pretty happy if people are even reducing meat consumption at all or being lacto/ovo pescatarians or such. Its really bad as sometimes the message is if your not going to go full on vegan than your personally responsible for destroying the planet (much like all responsibility for palastinian suffer is because joe bidens the one doing the genocidin) and you might as well eat meat at every meal. The reaction of this for non vegans is very often F these folks and you know what I think I will go out and have a triple bacon cheese burger right now because they taste great.
Because strident, belligerant activists don't raise awareness, they just make people hate them. I'm sure there's a generalizable lesson in here somewhere.
I generally try not to bring it up, but I know folks that've resumed eating meat and we're welcomed back with high-fives. This argues against the "preachy" argument in this thread. And people don't get criticized the same way over eating unnutritious fast food all the time. My view is that some people feel criticized by other folks' different life choices. When Alice to be in an out group, Betty is confronted with their own life choices.
Some ideas on the topic.
I've only met vegans on social media. The vocal minority preaching vegan lifestyle is delusional. Outside of it, it's still corporations doing their best to make a profit. The regular person just eats quietly and lives their life. The requirements and costs are pittance only in their idealistic view of the world. "If only people would just .." No. They won't. We are where we are because people don't. Everyone wants the world to go their way and we kill each other for it.
As an omnivore animal, I eat what my budget allows. Sometimes it's meat, sometimes it's vegetables and sometimes it's cardboard. Just like the wild life, eating plastic bags because they taste yummy. Social media vegans seem to be either the ones that can afford to be picky or can't afford anything else.
Simple truth is that life can always be better, people can always do more and most of us simply don't want to.
reddit
It’s like everything else, no one has a problem with probably 99.9% of vegans, it’s just the ones that want to pretend they are better than other people because they don’t eat meat.
The rest of them are fine.
Plus text is forever unless deleted, someone could have typed it 5 months ago, but it is still there as fresh as if it had been said 5 minutes ago, so there is a lot of aggregation involved.
If you say it, only the people around you hear and then it’s gone.
I think some meat lovers get aggressively opposed to vegan ideas because they know that vegans are morally correct. I say this as a meat lover
Might be an exposure thing. If you're vegan and you go online for the explicit purpose of talking about veganism to sttangers, you're going to attract haters. That goes for anything. Politics, veganism, parenting, car enthousiasts, movie fandoms, etc..
If you keep to your own, you won't experience the same hate.
I'm not saying you should hide your opinions, but you should mind the context in which you out them. Also, just brush it off, don't let others define you.
It's the preachy judgmentalism that has led to the hatred of vegans. Of course I'm not trying to say all vegans are like that, it's obviously a vocal minority. Most just eat their damn food and live their life.
But I can't even tell you how many times I've been attacked on places like this and Reddit when I commented about meat.
Because y'all are fuckin annoying. Good for you on not using animal products. I'm glad you have something you care a lot about. I dont need to hear about it every second of the day though. Vegans IRL generally dont preach about it but online people get on their sop boxes more consistently.
Because many people see it as political, or at least moral. And that means they want to "pick a side"
People don't want to be told that they have been contributing to horrible animal cruelty and environmental destruction, and do not wish to be morally accountable to it.
I am not fully vegan yet, but vegans are correct.
Some of the movement's ideas seem difficult to accept. The more vocal aherents of the movement can be abrasive and very zealous. It can be seen as like vegetarianism taken to an unreasonable extreme for ethical reasons many do not understand or agree with.
Not just vegans. These a million of things that bring this up in people.
Holier Than Tho - "having or showing the annoying attitude of people who believe that they are morally better than other people."
Its like when normal people say they hate the Green Bay Packers, what they really mean is they hate the people that are fans of the Packers.
So many vegans in this thread tring to answer the question and getting it completely wrong.
Veganism is more or less a 1st world phenomenon. Most humans, especially in the past, did not have the luxury to choose what they could eat. They ate what they could get and if they got access to meat and animal products they ate it because it has high nutritional and caloric value. Even the vegetarian Indians who don't eat meat foe religious purposes still have eggs, milk, etc.
It feels disconnected with the human struggle.
In addition, it's sort of meaningless in the grand scheme of things. OK. You don't eat meat to protect domesticated cows. In reality, those cows would not exist in the first place. So really, you're advocating to eliminate the species of domesticated cattle.
In addition, our modern society requires massive amounts of energy which is often generated by fossil fuels. Even if a society uses 100% solar, they're importing products from countries like China that burn coal.
So you're pumping out carbon emissions that will inevitably result in mass extinctions anyway. It seems like a meaningless protest against the inevitable. You say let's exterminate the cows to save them from suffering on one hand and with the other drive to work talking on your iPhone with the A/C turned up- contributing to the destruction of infinitely more animals.
The only real way to stop is for everyone to give up every modern luxury and live in a log cabin in the woods. And for the vast majority of the population to die off.
It just feels like pissing into the void but doing so with moral superiority.
Having said all that, I empathize with many vegans. But those are some thoughts on why people may look down on vegans.
Guilt.
Not sure why you’re downvoted for that. I’m a meat eater, and I’ll admit veganism seems more ethical. But it’s too inconvenient to give up meat, so I don’t. And having vegans around reminds me that I could be doing more to make the world a better place. So guilt.
Probably helped by the fact that none of the vegans I know are preachy about it, so I can’t just assume they’re all assholes either.
Most people think themselves as good people. Most people love, or claim to love, animals.
The existence of veganism and its implication is that there is an unnecessary animal holocaust happening, because of societal norms and for the entertainment of people's palates. So how do you reconcile these things? By claiming that veganism is something extreme, something unattractive, something that is impossible to do.
People who talk about how "militant vegans have turned them away from veganism" are mostly lying to themselves. If an asshole told you not to litter, would you litter because of that? If an asshole told you to be atheist would you go "well now, i will be even more religious"? But when people make arguments like this, leftists realize how ridiculous those arguments are. Except when it comes to veganism.
Obviously you catch more bees with honey than with vinegar but i want to believe that people in this site can see past that and think for themselves.
Legumes(beans/lentils), vegetables, fruits, potatoes, pasta and rice is what most of the world already eats. Nowadays there are vegan alternatives for stuff and most restaurants often have a vegan option. It isnt hard to be vegan but any lifestyle change can be hard, especially if real life is putting a lot of pressure on you.
Any change is hard, being vegan is easy. Millions of people are vegan and have been vegan for many years. I have been vegan for 12 years now. There has never been an easier time to be vegan than now. Being vegan is the easiest and with the biggest impact thing you can do.
True Courage Is About Knowing Not When To Take A Life But When To Spare One
PS Salt potato chips and oreos are vegan. You dont need to eat healthy. And if you are a straight dude, vegan dudes are more attractive to women, even to non vegan women. It's literally free +charisma in real life.
There are a subset of vegans who are very vocal an pushy about being vegan.
There are a lot people who think vegan food is just salads.
Vegans often don't actually remember what meat tastes like. I have several very nice vegan friends. They sometimes that something tastes just like meat and you can't tell the difference. In sorry but I can tell and vegan meat substitutes are often bad.
It's too bad because there are a lot of tasty and satisfying vegan dishes but they are usually not trying to mimic meat. I love fried tofo or mapo tofu. I've never had a good tofu burger.
There are also a lot of vegans who are all or nothing. I eat meat but I also try to limit the amount. I don't need meat at every meal. Some act like that's the same as eating streak for the meals a day.
There is also a lot of complexity eating vegan. Just cooking for vegan friends can almost double the complexity.
I primarily limit meat because of environmental reasons. And frankly my backyard chickens are lower impact then that avocado at the store.
In this thread: a lot of confused vegans refusing to acknowledge the behaviour of other vegans and explaining why non-vegans' experiences with them are wrong.
What they really hate is being guilt tripped into changing their dietary habits.
EDIT: To be clear, I support veganism. I'm saying the people who react apprehensively to veganism are choosing willfully ignorant bliss. To choose a high meat diet is to deny reason and give into what the animal in us wants.
Same reason they hate gay guys, trans, renewable energy and electric cars. Toxic masculinity.
I really don't care what others eat but a lot just of vegans, especially the ones who take it super serious, I had to deal with have just a aura of passive agressive judgmental smugness. Vegetarians not at all from my experience.
You can see who the vegans are in this comment section by trying to make it some moral issue
You can see who isn’t vegan by the comments talking about vegans being annoying
IRL these groups don’t interact as much, if you bring both to a barbecue then you will find the above sentiment again
because vegans never, ever, miss an opportunity to tell you they hope the blood of baby seals that went into your burger was worth it
I knew a vegan that tried to convince me that when vegans shit, it doesn't stink. Guess what their shit smelled like.... I'll wait.
There is no life without death. In order to feed vegans, countless insects must die. In order for agriculture to exist in any form, we must wage war against nature (and win). For example, coconut oil is a terrible vegan product. If vegans are complacent about killing insects and ravaging natural habitats, why not kill and eat crustaceans and mollusks - they're not all that different in terms of neurons. We can keep stepping up the level of consciousness - fish, etc... when does it become unacceptable?
The next question I would ask, is whether death is always equal to suffering. Death can be painless. Some vegans don't eat honey because many honey bees are treated horribly. What if they're not? Also, if you feel that way as a vegan, you shouldn't eat anything pollinated by bees (try not to starve). Some animals have good lives and painless deaths. If there's no financially viable market for animal products of happy animals (by vegan boycotting), we'll be left with only industrial animal agriculture. Do you think a deer would rather be ripped apart by a puma, hit by a car, shot by a bullet, or become elderly and senile - abandoned by the herd to die alone in a field, picked apart by buzzards. Nature is brutal as fuck. Death by human is not the worst outcome for many animals.
The final thing I'd assert is that animal agriculture has an important role in the overall food system. Pigs, cows, and chickens are fed a lot of agricultural byproducts, like spent brewing grains or corn stalks, and their manure is used as non-petroleum fertilizer. Many animals are raised on land that is too hilly and rocky to farm any other way. Our industrial food system is like a artificial ecosystem of its own. Each piece of the industrial food web has a role, and you can't simply remove all the animals - you'd be overwhelmed with green waste, reliant on petroleum fertilizer, and many would go hungry.
Ethical veganism is idiotic because it places human morality onto nature. It's a child-like misunderstanding of the real world. The reality is that for you to be fed, the natural world will suffer. Don't draw a line in the sand and think you're living a better life. You're an ostrich with your head buried in sand.
Freeganism on the other hand, is something we could use a lot more of (25-50% more). The only thing worse than raping and killing animals to feed ourselves, is that there's so much abundance that we throw a lot of it in the trash. Freegans understand the real crime against nature is food waste.
Because the morals is on their side. Society should be disrupted everyday until animal exploitation ends.
Because veganism is an inherently right wing activity and exploiting animals a left wing activity. (Do I need to put that /s?)
The concept of being vegan originated from a newsletter for vegetarian recipes in the UK, in the '60s, I believe. It was purely for recipes. Veganism was an offshoot of this newsletter that, from day one, was far more ideological. The people who ran this newsletter immediately succumb to much of the infighting common amongst the vegan community online today. It wasn't about a diet, it was about who could be the better person by being the most vegan.
I hate to break it to you, but vegans have been preachy and annoying since the concept originated.
I cook and eat vegan sometimes. I have a bunch of vegan friends.
Vegans on the internet are really annoying.
I love vegans. A few of my friends are vegan. There are two things some vegans will say which boil my piss, however. First is that they have a moral high ground because they don't eat animals. This isn't a given, it's a complex and nuanced argument I'd happily partake in if the other party weren't approaching it with a top-down belief that they're already in the right. Second is the notion that we should all be vegan to save the planet from climate apocalypse. I don't want this comment to get too long, but I have multiple problems with this faulty line of reasoning, and it muddies the waters. The only likely effect of it is that less progress is made on stopping global heating. So the upshot is that these people are literally sacrificing the ecosystem they purport to care about in order to bang their drum. Fuck that.
Currently being vegan or vegetarian is a choice of privilege. An healthy and varied diet becomes more difficult and expensive, when you start removing dishes from your pallet.
So it becomes coupled with a status symbol, instead of being the default way. As long as people call themselves "vegan" or "vegetarian" because of their choice (people being vegan or vegetarian because of mental or medical issues, is different case), they highlight that status over "normal" people.
If people are just not eating meat or animal products for whatever reason, without trying to use labels like "vegan" or "vegetarian" to highlight their status, then that is fine and a personal choice.
Creating societal change, to make vegan or vegetarian the default position, will also lessen the status of the vegans and vegetarians, that use those labels as such. So they have incentives to not produce a political or societal change.
Vegans & vegetarians should go on protests and lobby to make vegan food cheaper and easier than meat, so that it becomes the default. If they don't do that, and still call themselves vegan/vegetarian then that might imply that it is all about showing their status, and people don't like that.
Consumer choice is a privilege and not about creating an effective societal/political movement. They should not be used as a status symbol.
(Disclaimer: I eat meat and animal products very infrequently, only when my body demands it. I am also thankful for all vegans and vegetarians, because they gave us more interesting options in stores and restaurants.)
It’s because people feel threatened. Vegans indirectly say „you meat eaters are the baddies” no one wants to be the baddies. But… instead of putting effort to change to vegan, the easier and lazier thing to do is to paint them as mad, bad, cult, in the mind.
And also some of the vegans really ride a high horse and behave all pure and that stuff is making it easier. Some vegans really do it to get moral high and have superiority syndrome.
I am not a vegan but I managed to curb these coded in ape brain mechanisms somewhat.
The one nutrient I for sure know vegans lack should be Vitamin A, since it’s not found in plants and the body has this weird thing of "the more beta carotene it converts into Vitamin A, the less effective it gets“ making it impossible to get the minimum recommended amount of it - and vitamin A deficiency could lead to depression.
They are way overly convinced their option is the best and only viable option, and they won't shut up about. They also want special treatment at all gatherings. "You don't have a vegan option?" "I said I was a vegan and all they gave me was a simple salad" "You're hurting the environment" blah blah blah.
Yes, "not all vegans are like that", but enough are that it makes them all assumed to be annoying.
How do you know someone is a vegan? Don't worry. They'll tell you.
I can see why not having vegan options at gatherings is frustrating, tbh. For the same reason not having halal or kosher options is also frustrating if you are going to invite guests with those restrictions. Providing a decent vegan option is easy and nonvegans can also eat it, plus you can easily make it a catch-all option for gf folk as well. I wouldn't throw a fuss about it, or post about it online, but I always try to make sure there's a vegan option when bringing snacks in for the kids at school for example (I'm a highschool teacher) so everyone can participate
As someone who knows his ways around the kitchen: No. It is definitely not easy, even if you just go for the salad option. Have you ever looked at any ingredient list? Some store-bought "fresh" pasta is not vegan. A lot of things you would not think for a second about them containing animal products like salad dressings are actually not vegan. In a lot of countries, McDonalds fries are not vegan.
And as soon as it comes to the necessity to replace non-vegan ingredients with vegan ones, you'll fall down a rabbit hole of "this can be used to replace that, but only in those circumstances", "Yes, you can replace X with Y, but you have to be careful to cover up some flavors", or even "The replacement for X is basically a doctoral thesis in chemsitry".
See. Here we are. Even now. "Vegan option yadda yadda. So easy. Why would you invite such and such without thinking of food restrictions blah blah blagh"
You couldn't help yourself.
Considering even a basic caesar salad (cheese) and Jell-O (gelatin) are not vegan, providing vegan options at an event really isn't particularly easy. Most events will have vegetarian options without even thinking about it. However, vegan options require very explicitly thinking about what is offered. Meanwhile, group event planning is already quite a bit of work even before considering such heavy restrictions.
When I'm hosting an event, guest comfort is my highest priority. I'm not a vegan, but if anyone coming to an event that I'm hosting has dietary restrictions, you can bet your ass I'm going to be accommodating.
It's not giving them "special treatment" in my eyes; it's giving them basic respect as my guest. I invited them to an event because they're a friend/colleague/fellow human who I invited to attend. It's my responsibility as host to make sure everyone who decided to join me at the event is fed a good meal.
I sympathize with anyone who has a restrictive diet (for medical reasons or otherwise) so I consider this high on the totem pole of tasks involved in event planning. A couple of years ago my doctor told me to cut my carb intake to help lower my cholesterol a bit and it sucked majorly at any event I attended cause there'd be no low-carb options. Could eat all the bacon and eggs I wanted, though, ironically.
Maybe so. I typically will provide something like falafel/bhaji/spiced chickpeas with hummus in a wrap, but in situations I've helped with event planning for, there has always been a significant proportion of the party who are either religious vegetarians or have other dietary restrictions. If veganism isn't as common where you are, you wouldn't think about it I suppose
I don't.
I invited you to my event. You're vegan? Too fucking bad.
As a guy eating a smokehouse meat pizza right now, you can fuck right off.
If you invite someone to your house, then it is your responsibility to do the same for them as everyone else you invited, within reason.
It’s not hard to throw some hummus, salad, or a fruit and/or veggie tray out.
I loves me some run down both you arms cheeseburgers, but I also like apples, carrots and broccoli.
Down south we had whole fruterias dedicated to just making fruit cups, in Texas, not Cali or some hippie shit like that.
All of those same options are great at home choices for bad brain ADD days, for all my fellow broken brain gang.
Salads aren't usually vegan. Many gave been touched by cheese, a milk product, or egg.
Vegan also isn't like an allergy. It's a choice. Choose to bring your own food.
People are haters, Lemmy is infested with them as you can see from other comments.
The core of the hatred is the hater doesn't want to admit they're wrong. Nothing you can do about that, but the fact is there are certain societal choices that can solve our problems and there are certain people who do and don't make those choices. Passionate vegans who try to convince people through force of rhetoric are usually wasting their breath, but effective activism doesn't trigger the same flight of fight neurotransmitter cocktail that argumentation does.
There's also a TON of capital interest in bashing vegan lifestyles from animal agriculture, manufacturing and so on.
The only way you can make someone into a vegan is to get them to decide that it's the best thing for themselves. My grocery bill is $50 to $150 a week for a 2-person household and I'm able to stay in great shape with minimal exercise because I sleep better at night.
Personally, I had a formative experience on a family ranch during steer castration that went badly. My dad says he saw the devil in the animal's eyes, if you ask me though it was his own mug reflected back at him. Cheese has always stunk to me and meat always has this aroma of decay to it even though meat eaters tell me it's good. A lot of people say things like "live and let live" and I think this is a good way of trying people's words against their actions.
Because it requires them to admit that what they're choosing to do is damaging the planet more significantly than they need to in order to survive.
For me, it's this subset of vegans:
Me: want a burger? V: No thanks, I'm vegan. Me: Oh, cool. Well there's egg and cheese in the salad dressing so you'll want to avoid that too, but I have some black bean patties in the freezer if you want. V: Do you know how bad meat is for your body? Me: Yeah I actually do, but we all make our own decisions about self-harm, don't we? V: Factory farms are cruel and sadistic! Me: Agreed. That's why I buy from a local butcher. V: RAISING MEAT IS DESTROYING THE PLANET! Me: Corporations are destroying the planet. Now fuck off and let me enjoy my burger in peace.
Lookup the vegan teacher on YouTube or TikTok you'll see why.
Every vegan I've ever spoke with is rude, condescending, and Iamverysmart material. Probably due to lack of essential amino acid intake for proper brain function.
red meat -> testosterone -> roid rage -> red meat -> testosterone -> roid rage -> HUMAN FLESH
Why not eat meat it doesn't make sense. No health benefit and if you source your meat right you won't be contributing to killing animals. At the end of the day I don't hate them they just don't make sense. You do you, to each their own