It's baffling that "Hey maybe hamburgers aren't worth kilometers of cows chained with their face in a feed trough. Arranged this way so that the only activity they can engage in is to gorge themselves on low quality feed frequently filled with bits of other cows (backfeeding). Maybe they like have feelings and deserve better than this followed by a dehydrated wait in a death line in some artificially lit temple to screams and blood and horror?"
Is talked about in the same language as "Invisible sky person is deeply concerned about your masturbating habits and you are going to suffer for it!"
I was expecting something like "some just mention it and move on". Instead...
It's baffling that "Hey maybe hamburgers aren't worth kilometers of cows chained with their face in a feed trough. Arranged this way so that the only activity they can engage in is to gorge themselves on low quality feed frequently filled with bits of other cows (backfeeding). Maybe they like have feelings and deserve better than this followed by a dehydrated wait in a death line in some artificially lit temple to screams and blood and horror?"
Because despite it being logical to a point, usually the ones who wish to talk about can't actually explain the rationale for some of the more extremely ends of the philosophy.
I'm completely against industrial meat farming, but for instance game meat from deer that were killed for deer management?
Obviously a vegan will take the position that "eating meat is wrong, you're killing just for pleasure" usually. Which obviously isn't true, as there's no "just for pleasure", becsuse we're not talking about trophy hunting, but deer management, which is crucial and without which a lot of animals (and humans) would end up sick, suffering and dying as the ecosystem would overpopulate with deer, leading to a cascade of bad consequences, destroying the environment and the animals in it.
I support vegan products and consider myself a flexitarian, but I do also consume the occasional meat product. Preferably when it's cruelty free game meat.
Sheep are also another thing. Unless we plan to systematically eradicate the species, then we must tend to some sheep at least, which will mean shearing them, as that's required for their health. So then we end up with wool. Should that wool not be used? Would it be cruel to use that wool?
That of course again doesn't mean I'm not fervently against the horrible practices of the large sheep industry. It's just a question of "can't you see the eventual problems that taking a position so extreme would yield?"
And questioning these things can upset people, as it'd require flexing the ideology a bit, and that's something a lot of fervent vegans seem to have issues with. Which is apparent through say, using words like "carnist" to describe anyone who isn't 100% vegan. Almost in the same way dogmatic religions call anyone disagreeing "a heretic".
In the same way that monotheistic Abrahamic religions are, most of the "fighting" rhetoric of vegans is very much dogmatic.
@Dasus@naevaTheRat Why do you care about this stuff? Why does your energy flow towards arguing specifics with vegans? Go engage with meat eaters that don't care whether or not their food was factory farmed instead.
Context of super necessary (apparently) kangaroo culls.
Species don't suffer, only individuals do. This defense of sheep implies we need to keep breeding pugs, or that if I were to make supersheep who lived ever minute of the day screaming in agony it would be bad to stop breeding them. An absurd stance.
In the interim selling wool creates perverse incentives and if it's a humanitarian effort (so to speak) we should use it for ends which don't profit us.
Your objections are standard and tedious, your examples of extremism in the ideology are actually examples of moderate stances.
I've never met a vegan that finds it morally objectional to scavange meat, assuming you aren't creating perverse incentives. Our objections are to suffering, you should probably stop tilting at strawmen.
You're welcome to engage in good faith. I have infinite patience for anyone genuinely interested in discussion. It is against the rules of this community to post antivegan rhetoric.
Your initial comment was borderline butI decided to engage in good faith. Then you didn't engage with anything I said and said a few random gotchas. Other mods are welcome to intervene if they felt I removed your comment in error.
If you would like to rephrase your reply and write a better one you are welcome to do so.
I'm vegan with a somewhat differing view on culls, having worked for the EPA and with national parks. I agree that a better solution than culling would be ideal, and that no life wants to be killed or population managed. However, we cull because of our past failings. We wiped out natural predators in many areas that kept a balance, and now, if left unchecked, deer will eat themselves into starvation, and devastate their ecosystem. It would be death on a massive scale if unmanaged, and would even affect humans. I think it's a far smaller crime to kill a few deer and manage populations at safe levels, than to allow the mass starvation of entire ecosystems because of our past destruction of that balance.
Better solutions have been proposed. Ideally, where we can, we reintroduce native predators and protect their populations until they're stable. Is that different from killing for population control? We're introducing animals for the explicit purpose of hunting and killing deer in order to keep a balance. If that's wrong, then should we kill all predators? Of course not, but I digress. Those aren't arguments I think you'd make, and I'm not suggesting you'd agree whatsoever, but those are the perspectives we think about. Many many smart people have tackled this issue, and we have not found a better solution than culling. Sometimes, we've done some of what you suggested, and attempted to reduce fertility rates, though I see the same moral issue there as well. No sentient creature wants to be neutered or drugged to prevent reproduction. However, it's better than hunting in certain circumstances, and something has to be done. This isn't a problem that can be ignored to reduce environmental impacts in other areas. Overpopulation will happen, and it is devastating. I wish there was a simple solution, but we made mistakes when we destroyed the native ecosystem, and now it falls to us to keep it from totally collapsing.
Without getting all Agent Smith about it, yes, humans are an ecological disaster. I'm not trying to throw charged what-ifs back and forth. We solve the problems we can. Can you clarify what you're saying? I agree that no animal should be killed by humans, but I also recognize that we must work with the solutions we have. Are you suggesting that we stop cullings and allow overpopulation to happen?
I strongly agree that hunting should not be a sport. I also believe that if we're going to kill an animal, we should at least use the corpse to feed back into the ecosystem, and I don't begrudge those that eat the things they hunt, if necessary. Many people subsist off hunting to survive, and while I disagree with the concept of hunting another animal for food, I won't suggest that they starve, especially when they're filling a vital ecosystem role. If we don't need the food though, we should not be hunting animals for food. I don't know if my opinion is well founded enough to defend the position that if an animal is killed, tragically necessarily, for culling, it should not be eaten. I believe that to be true, but I can't defend that position with anything but my personal feelings and beliefs. On some level, I understand the argument that if an animal must be killed, then it's wasteful to not use the meat. Regardless of either argument, I strongly disagree with trophy hunting, and find any hunting for sport abhorrent.
I hope you can see the nuanced nature of my position. I'm not trying to play devil's advocate or be contrarian. I have a well-formed belief from my experiences, and I am trying to argue my position, and don't think you have to agree with me, nor do I expect you to. I do not see a large scale alternative to culling at the moment. I think those types of alternatives are being pursued by some in the industry, but the scale is small. I also do not believe it's an option to allow populations to grow uncontrollably. I believe allowing that to happen would be as morally reprehensible as hunting for sport, as it's neglecting a duty we have to sustain an ecosystem that we damaged. I am open and interested in any and all alternatives to culling, but I've heard none that haven't been tried or that haven't been able to succeed at scale.
I went to sleep, I may write something more sensible when I have more patience but I suspect the difference is mostly speciesm. I think we ought not to discriminate in ways we treat species and standards we have about appropriate interventions. I agree that in the short terms there may not be good options but like suppose there are 5 spots on a liferaft and 10 people, that doesn't really make leaving 5 people to drown OK and you defs shouldn't outsource it to random yahoos that enjoy killing people.
Given we can't like distribute condoms and the pill to like kangaroos or deer or whatever there may be no good answers in the short term, but killing should be the absolute last resort. Like we should be closing farms for more land, managing forests for better outcomes, reducing fertility if we can and so on long before we kill. If we do kill we need to make sure it is done with a sole focus on harm reduction, which the way culls are done now is defs not true and we ought to be happy to apply the same reasoning to human beings (basically that we have tried everything else we can and because we can't reason violence is all that's left).
Just curious, do you not see how that would frustrate someone who is not vegan? If your goal is to be confrontational, that little speech definitely hits the mark, but if you’re not, perhaps reflect on the preaching.
Personally, eat what you want to eat. The more vegans and vegetarians around, the better those food choices will be for everyone.
Why would it be frustrating? It is just true. There's no personal attack there, I'm not calling someone anything. It's just reality, if you eat hamburgers that is what happened to get it to your plate. If you don't think cows have feelings it shouldn't bother you, if you think cows have feelings but they don't matter very much it shouldn't bother you, if you do find it bothersome to think about but eat hamburgers that's on you not me.
Quite seriously, either you are ok with what you do or you are not. How is talking about it frustrating or confrontational?
I don't feel bad when I prune a tree, and if you talk about rows and rows of fruit trees being pruned and how they're slathered in nutrients and watered heavily to produce fruit before a harvester violently shakes them I feel neither confronted nor frustrated. I have no reason to even slightly suspect that treatment is wrong. Surely if feedlots and slaughterhouses are morally good or neutral I would at worst seem vaguely silly.
Ok, so I’m sure when you pick up your iPhone you’d love to have someone tell you how much abuse and suffering so many steps in the supply chain involve from the raw material harvesting, terrible working conditions to assemble them, etc.
Just pointing out that what you are doing is the literal definition of preaching. Not sure why you are surprised.
You know what, I would. If there is a problem that I'm unknowingly part of, it's better to know and maybe do something about it than to ignore it.
I can't say I will go live to a hut im the forest with no technology, but will at least be mindful of it and tried to minimize it. If I could afford a new iPhone, I'd certainly rather buy me a Fairphone. There are options and the options are a spectrum, not one or the other.
I've definetly heard plenty of people making fun of or discriminating against others with dietary restrictions due to their religions. Hell I've also heard people making fun of others with lactose intolerance or celiac disease...
We can and should strive for better, but sometimes people can just be terrible 🫤
In my experience it is not NEARLY as prevalent as when someone learns that you are vegan or finds out about vegan communities and whatnot. People make countless memes about vegans for example, but when was the last time you saw a meme about someone choosing to eat Halal? Because to my knowledge there is no scientific study on the different experiences of these groups it is impossible to talk about this topic in any way that isn't anecdotal but for what it's worth I have been all over the US and the anecdotal experience that I have had is so overwhelming that I refuse to believe someone is arguing in good faith if they are claiming that, for example, someone eating Halal has even a remotely similar experience to that of vegans.
My guess is that this is because people tend to associate other dietary or lifestyle decisions as being just a different way to live. Like oh, that person is Muslim or Jewish and that influences their diet. And they don't take that as a personal judgement anymore than they do when they learn that that person is Muslim or Jewish to begin with. But with veganism it is usually not something that a person is raised into. It is a decision that that person has made after learning more about the animal agriculture industry and it is usually for ethical reasons primarily. Not because a religious book told them to. Therefore they hear that someone is vegan and are instantly defensive in a way that isn't true with halal, kosher, etc.
As you've said, this is all anecdotal, but I'd guess that non-vegan non-muslim non-jewish people most often have to "deal with" vegans as opposed to the other two. A quick search says that in the US there are more vegans than muslim and jewish people combined (without even including vegetarians, which definetly get lumped in the same group).
Also, there are definetly other kinds of discrimination against the religious groups going on, so maybe their dietary restrictions doesn't exactly top the list of things to "meme" about.
I'm definetly not saying that vegans are wrong or that they deserve the amounts of "jokes" on them on, far from it, I just wanted to share my experience with "jokes" in very bad taste.
I still remember fondly an occasion at a wedding when my friend group all got placed at the same table, and we were 90% veg with one couple who ate meat. They remarked on it, and we all spent the rest of the meal joking about how it felt to be the minority, and they had to field questions like, "If you were on a desert Island with only vegetables, what would you do?"
yeah the hardest part of being vegan is interacting with non vegans. gotta love how the default response to veganism (you know that thing we do to try to better the planet and animal rights and shit) is to argue as if doing something about the issues you care about is a negative trait.
mfs always got something to say and love attacking a thing that as far as i'm aware is proven to be better for personal health, the environment, your wallet, and animals.
Honestly I've been so quiet about it offline, and one time I just said no thanks to cake as I don't eat dairy, etc, and the whole room alternately made fun of me and told me why I was wrong and meatsplaines until I got up and left.
i hear you - i've basically learned to avoid any topic or activity related to food with other people irl, which really sucks.
cooking is one of my favorite hobbies, can't talk to my friends about it anymore. hell, a close friend from high school completely stopped talking to me because we had literally one very reasonable and civil (from my perspective) debate about veganism. it's been years since i heard from them.
i got a single one of my close friends to even consider trying it, and i've been too anxious to even bring it up since last we spoke about it - a couple years ago now. they didn't seem to believe in the ethics/lifestyle of it and i'm terrified of learning that this person i care so much about has decided that their sensory pleasure is worth more than the lives of the animals they eat.
my experiences with speaking about veganism to the people that i care about is that it is a taboo subject; one that will make other people upset with me and potentially ruin relationships. and i think that fucking sucks.
I even posted a picture of my dinner one night on Facebook, and it happened to catch a picture of my spouse's dinner across from mine which visibly had cheese on it as he's not vegan, and all my friends pounced on it and began haranguing me, they obviously thought it was hilarious.
One of my CW is vegan, and another staff member brought her a frosted cake, and just said to her "Oh sorry didn't have time to get a vegan cake", and stood there expecting her to eat it. Like what do they not get? We commiserate a lot. My spouse is also on a special diet for gastroparesis, which means he can't have corn and legumes as well as other things, and that makes our mealtimes really fraught with arguments.
I love cooking, and while i don't have any vegan friends that i cook for, i really appreciate my other friends just "trusting me" and eat whatever i cook for them. Probably the biggest and weirdest compliment i get is: "no way, that's vegan?"
It's still a bit weird to be treated like an alien. Like when i cook for my sister and family, she always cooks "real food" on the side for people who don't like it. Kinda bizzare, but whatever.
I think it's easy to cope with for me because i also don't drink, and people absolutely lose their shit when they find out. "Never?" "Not even wine for dinner?" "You can have a beer and still drive you know." "But it's really good." "You can hardly even taste the alcohol."
Or being a dude who doesn't care about football around here. "What? You NEVER watch football? But you support your local team, right?" "So you only watch the euro championship?" "No? Only world cup?" "NO? But you still support your country?"
People are just opposed to things they don't understand.
We have a friend with an egg allergy, dairy allergy, and MMA. They're vegan as well by choice but it's made me very careful. I've briefly upset a few vegans and vegetarians by questioning them in a bit more depth. It's happened much less over time as I've refined how I clarify and ask.
I'm always amused when someone says vegetarian. Okay, what type? Can I serve you cheese? Eggs? Fish? One of my coworkers is also vegetarian but eats chicken...which was new to me.
I thought the chicken one was just a meme from the 90's because it was somewhat common for vegetarians to eat chicken. An old lady asked me if i eat fish, after asking me all kinds of other questions. She went: not even fish?? But they don't have blood.
What does that has to do with anything, and yes they do.
I think it's religious? I didn't have a chance to dig in at the time.
My primary concern was getting all the different vegetarians to identify what type they were. As an example one of them was lacto-vegetarian but was fine if eggs were in something (bread). I was laser focused on by feeding everyone with appropriate diets and allergy considerations.
Honestly thinking back I wish I'd had the time for more detail. We had someone with a lethal fish allergy and another with a crustacean allergy so never asked about sea food. Wonder if it was a religious and/or cultural thing to not eat pigs or cows.
Just fyi, one of the community rules is "Carnist rhetoric & Anti-vegans are not allowed." which is why so many top level replies are removed. I (and I assume many others) interpreted this post as "carnists, why do you do this?" but it's NOT and per community rules we're not allowed to explain or defend.
This is a safe place for vegans and we should leave it to them.
Sorry for imposing, I'll leave now. Mods, maybe you should pin a post for people like me who wander in here without knowing that rule? Might cut down on the carnist replies.
I cannot speak for any other mod, being newly minted, but this is not a vegans only sub.
Respectful and contextually appropriate replies are welcome but replies specifically hostile or following standard, trivially disputed, rhetoric will be removed.
For example I would not remove a reply like "What is it that determines whether or not something or someone is ok to eat in your eyes?" but I would remove "don't you know grass screams when you cut it. You're just hypocritical!"
Basically if you're posting stuff to own the vegans, explain why vegans are wrong, or saying something against veganism that a trivial search or five minutes considering the opposite position would show as false or grossly distorted your comment will be removed.
EDIT:
Just to add on to what I said. I think most of us would actually love to be wrong, if someone had strong evidence. Going vegan isn't tremendously hard, but it is definitely harder than never thinking about food and eating/wearing/using whatever you feel like because the whim to do so takes you. Mostly it can be socially isolating, because regardless of how much empathy you might actually have for carnists (having been one yourself, there is no shame in having been indoctrinated) people will feel that you condemn them and consequently try to shame you. (there was some study about this but I'm struggling to remember the title).
If someone could show me evidence that idk dogs were mere reflex machines like Descartes maintained when he vivisected them I would chow down. It's not really a particularly comfortable position to feel like you're living in the middle of a holocaust and most of the people you love and respect are not only oblivious, but actively defend and relish it.
It's just incredibly tedious to deal with the same set of disingenuous excuses. Like the aforementioned plants feel pain thing, I have never in my life seen anyone actually protest something like mowing lawns. I have basically zero reason to believe that anyone who isn't a jain thinks this is true, and even then... what is it that animals eat and how does physics work?
If someone is going to browse all then they should be aware that they are entering different communities and be respectful of those communities. If they are disrespectful, whether it is a result of being unaware or just not caring, in my opinion that should warrant an immediate ban pending a demonstration of understanding and admission that what they did was wrong. Unfortunately even that might not make a noticeable difference since many of the disrespectful people are probably not repeat posters. Beyond that the only thing that I'm aware of that could really be done is making the community private which is obviously not ideal. Perhaps there could exist some middle ground of a community not being private but also not appearing on all but I'm unaware of if that's possible or if it would even be any better in practice.
In my experience, the reactions depend a lot on the people you talk to and well, what you look like.
Like, I've got a tiny lady colleague who's vegan and she's never been in a conflict from being vegan.
Meanwhile, me as a big dude, I will get various males who take it as a personal affront:
those who are just insecure about their own food choice,
those who take every interaction with other males as a competition for who's better (me telling them I'm doing it for ethical reasons means I'm saying their ethics are bad),
those who are stuck in their old ways (women can eat salads, not men though),
and last but definitely not fucking least, (ex-)military dudes who are personally disappointed that, despite me having the physique of their military buddies, I have different values.
This is especially also amplified on the countryside, where not only progressive ideas take longer to arrive, you've also got farmers with skin in the game.
In my hometown, there's a pig farmer. Holy fuck, for that guy, my mere existence was a statement that his entire livelihood is immoral.
The screenshot is obviously wrong. People will make fun of anyone for anything, anywhere and anytime.
Problem is the disagreement on what's acceptable.
I wouldn't call it "a good number." It's a very small minority. Outside of the memery of the militant vegan, I've never experienced a vegan preaching to me about dietary habits.
which means it often comes along with judgemental opinions about carnists
I would disagree with this portion of your post if it said most or all vegans. I have found most vegans are making a personal decision without passing judgement on others.
Even so, there absolutely are militant vegans who want to shame others, and those vocal minority give the rest a bad name.
Source: Spouse is vegan. I am supportive, slowly changing my diet. Blood tests show really positive results. I still don't understand honey.
I mean that's not only vegans. On tinder i see a ton of militant meat eaters and anti vegans. Vegans or vegetarians literally say: i'm vegan, would be nice if you were too. While the other side of the coin is: real men eat meat, sorry not sorry. I eat meat, because i enjoy food too much. Please no vegans.
I met one super annoying vegan in my life who said: eating meat is like paedophilia, once you fucked a child you'll always be a childfucker. On the other hand every time someone puts one and one together and realises that i'm a vegan, they tell me how bad it is and how good meat is and that it sucks.
Absolutely true. It's almost like a badge of "look at how bad my arteries will be in a couple of years." I guess the vocal minority in a lot of areas probably give a lot of groups a bad rep.
Yes. Some health concerns started me thinking about my diet. Regular blood tests in my case means one baseline to basically kick everything off, followed by another 6 weeks later, and 2 subsequent follow up.
I have been a beekeeper for years. I agree that the bees are NOT in their natural habitat. However, I keep a significantly better control of the environment than the bees do in this habitat. It is better for the surrounding area, and I have talked my neighbors out of pesticide use because my bees will help pollinate their gardens and trees.
One extra note from the ko-fi article: I have never, ever heard of the practice of trimming queen wings. That is vicious, and I would never do that. Let the bees be bees. If they leave, I wasn't doing a good enough job of supporting them. I am not a commercial beekeeper, though. Merely someone who likes being around them all year.
Edit: it looks like both articles really focus on commercial beekeeping. I don't know where I will land on this. The honey I get is not food for the bees during the winter. Bees overproduce honey if the conditions are right. I only harvest honey that contains no brood (baby bees) and is separated from the laying queen. The food for the hive stays near the brood core, which is where bees stay during the winter.
I haven't lost a hive yet during the overwintering process. I also have not substituted with any sugar feed. The only thing that I have supplied the bees is a 100% pollen "patty" from local pollen and water during the hottest part of the year.
I have never heard of a beekeeper gassing a hive with cyanide instead of "spending money" overwintering them (as stated in the fastcompany article). There is no cost to overwintering bees. You just wrap the hive in what equates to a blanket during the coldest parts of the year. The bees do a great job of keeping themselves warm.
Plus, why would a beek "gas" the hives when they could simply take the covers off and let the bees freeze to death? I presume cyanide is expensive. That entire argument is counter to itself.
Once again, I am NOT a commercial beek, but that seems unnecessarily complicated.
Non-vegan here. I was going to reply one time, but even tho I was supporting y'all I realized it's not really my place to speak. This community is supposed to be your safe space, and I respect that. I hope y'all have a good one and wish you all luck.
Gotta ask, if you support vegans/veganism I assume that means you take it as at least more right than wrong. Is that the case? if so what's holding you back from joining our feeble, protein deficient ranks?
I just ask because personally I spent a few years being like "Yeah these people are correct and don't deserve the hate but oysters? Is that really a priority concern?" before realising that was a baffling stance and I should align my actions with the 99% I agreed with and worry about the rest later if it ever came up.
Fair question. Right now I live with my family, and basically everything we make has meat in it and since I don't cook I don't really get a say in it. Everything I choose to eat for myself is vegetarian, so I'm at doing a little.
Even tho it's hard for me to stop rn, it's not like you guys are wrong about the horrible conditions and treatment of animals in farms so it would be hard for me to argue against y'all.
It can be difficult if you're not managing your own food, you can of course choose what you wear or eat when you get food out and so on. That is vegan. It is not a purity cult, it is about doing what we can.
Evil is a relative term. I could argue that capitalism is evil, or buying things that can't be recycled, or Catholicism. Maybe start with asking yourself how you justify doing things someone else might think of as evil before using it as some sort of magic bullet argument.
Being vegan doesn't equate with being religious. I think that a part of the problem is that some vegans truly do base their entire identity around it and people find that annoying, like when atheists are surrounded by one friend who won't shut up about god.
Veganism is (mostly) binary for a reason. You either kill and exploit non-human animals for your pleasure (taste, comfort, affordability, i.e. a want) or you don't (exceptions exist, but mostly represent needs and not wants, e.g. conditions, intial acclimatisation etc.)
Veganism and Vegetarianism are not two steps of the same ladder. I'm not an expert on vegetarianism, but AFAIK vegetarianism aims to avoid meat-eating. Veganism aims to minimise suffering from the killing and exploitation of (non-human) animals by abstaining from consuming products directly made from (non-human) animals.
Veganism isn't inherently utilitarian. I don't agree with them, but there are vegans who are climate change (impact) denialists. I don't agree that giving up on veganism (which has huge climate action potential) for some vague 'free energy' is a viable climate action path that doesn't follow RCP8.5. Nevertheless, I consider those either-or, dichotomy debates as delayist discourse or simply put fossil fuel arguments. Food AND Energy need to cut emissions completely.
Cole M, Morgan K. Vegaphobia: derogatory discourses of veganism and the reproduction of speciesism in UK national newspapers. Br J Sociol. 2011 Mar;62(1):134-53. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-4446.2010.01348.x. PMID: 21361905.
I was at my dad's birthday last year and the meal was: sauerkraut, potatoes and an ABSURD amount of different meats. Like it was bizzare, even for someone who is used to people eat a lot of meat. It wasn't even good (i guess) because it was all greasy and just too much. It wasn't good looking or anything, it was just a lot and like half of it they threw away.
At some point one of his alcoholic friends said loud: thank god there are no vegans here har har har.
Are you so absorbed in your meat religion that... No, i still don't know what the point was. But everyone found it very funny, so i guess it is.
It's honestly the best thing I ever did for myself. Made me think about food and living in s whole new way. Thanks for the genuine support, it gets old being made fun of.
I believe in you. It seems way harder than it really is. If you have questions or want recipes or tips or whatever there are armies of us dying to help others live in alignment with their values.
Also like selfishly I found I felt waaaaay better after going vegan. Probs more a side effect of just more whole foods but damned did I feel notably more energic and clear headed.
All the days I have tried vegan, I constantly would have to eat to get full and get energy. So that's why I haven't gone vegan. I feel like you would just need to constantly eat.
You're probably just not eating rich enough food! If your normal meal is something like say spaghetti bolognese and you take out the beef and cheese and just throw in some lentils for an equivalent mass they have 1/3 the calories! Not to mention cheese is incredibly energy dense.
Usually, proteins tend to work out if you're using lentils/legumes in reasonable amounts. They tend to beat meat on a gram for gram basis just on raw numbers but be much lower energy to make up the difference so you need some fats in there. This is where stuff like nuts and seeds come in.
If you're also suddenly increasing fibre intake that can irritate your gut and make it move stuff a little too fast which can make you feel hungry.
Here are a few cheap and lazy meals that always fill me up. Try them for yourself.
Where I live its in the legal gray zone to talk shit about religion, so theres that. And so far that I know, no vegan have commited terror acts because of the ill treatment of vegans.
Have you seen the
what does halal mean? youtube short by therealsamalkhatib? It's a cute little sketch and whenever I make/eat falafel now it's become a bit of a meme.
I think this lack of respect is something new. I dont know when, but the other (pretty illogical and believe-driven) habits are all older than veganism
What you're referring to are legal classifications that prevent discrimination in very specific circumstances such as when applying for a job. When someone decides to make fun of vegans they absolutely DO NOT think to themselves "is that a legally protected class? No? Okay, I'm in the clear." This reasoning is blatantly incorrect.
If this were the actual reason then why do people also discriminate against groups that are protected classes like women? The answer is because we aren't in a court. We are talking about social values, not legal ones. Despite how much of a fucking asshole it would make someone to be misogynistic in their daily life there is nothing preventing them from doing so other than the fear of being outcast by their peers. It only becomes illegal in very specific circumstances.
They aren't consciously going through a checklist in their head. But legal influences societal. Maybe in the past they made fun of someone's funny hat, got in trouble for it, got annoyed at a preachy vegan and now shits on vegans instead.
I'm vegan and i make fun of everyone who only eats food touched by a magician. I don't even understand how they compare. One is a choice the other ones got indoctrinated by people who vut their dicks for fun.
Thanks. Can you also add a rule that it should have a link to the source, if it is a screenshot of a webpage?
I see a lot of pictures of headlines or tweets, where it could easily be spreading misinformation. But just a link to the source solves the issue of accessibility for the blind and also citing the source for verifying the accuracy of the information.
Veganism is a philosophical belief and is regarded as such in the EU and UK at least, yes.
Veganism isn't about food though, it's about everything touching animal rights and abuse.
Well, tens of thousands of people are murdered every year, and millions have been brutally tortured and murdered for religious reasons over human history. From crusades to jihads, to caste systems. So, you'll see, it is a very sensitive topic when a subset of the population thinks their religion gives them permission to exact violence upon others.
Vegans do have the moral high ground simply by not murdering animals for food.
There is absolutely no reason to take your feelings of persecution seriously, if you're locked in on the idea that you're morally superior to anyone who isn't a vegan. Identical vibes to an Evangelical Christian that ends arguements that go nowhere with I'll pray for you.
Your attitude expressed here is the exact reason for that which you complain about.
The fediverse is such an interesting new human experiment (and I'm just saying this to you specifically since I don't expect this comment to make it past the moderators either). I was going in expecting reddit except not morally bankrupt, yet what you find are numerous bubbles that their respective communities use to shield themselves from whatever it is that they (for whatever arguably rationalizable reason) cannot accept to penetrate the safe space.
I truly feel for the emotions OP experiences and has outlined. I was just trying to level with them from an outside perspective and it is truly sad that there seems to be absolutely no platform left on the internet (if there ever was one) where one can be guaranteed to find community that puts the commune and the upkeep of its unity before any agenda or collective emotional guidance.
Hopefully, you do also understand then that this distinction between "murder" and "slaughter" exists, because people wanted to apply different moral standards to it. Since we vegans disagree with having those different standards, we also disagree with what's the correct word.
Yes I understand why vegans use the word murder, so that they get a strong emotional reaction to something they consider abhorrent. And I get it. But I think precision in language is important, and I think using that kind of language actually pushes people away from a better understanding of what veganism is all about. Although it shows how passionate vegans are, it can push people away with what some might consider vitriolic hyperbole.
That fact that a mod removed my post about the dictionary definition of an english word kinda illustrates my point. Despite my calm, clear, and nonconfrontational language, I expect this post to get removed as well.
I do agree that this harsh language can push people away. I rarely use it myself for that reason. But whether to use it or not, is their personal decision.
As for your dictionary definition comment, I am absolutely on board with it being removed. It was extremely tone-deaf.
You do not need to answer me, but ask yourself the following: Did you really think, they were not aware of the dictionary definition?
They were purposefully using a non-standard word. You could have argued their decision to use that word, if you really felt that strongly about it, although frankly, just don't do that either. They've almost certainly thought about this more than you have, and there's also just no need to discuss something like that all the time.
The way I interpreted your comment is that you personally felt uncomfortable with their use of language, so you felt an urge to react to it in any way whatsoever. Absolutely understandable.
But that is precisely what this whole post is about. People, who eat meat, will feel uncomfortable with the discussions we have here and then they respond to argue things that really do not need arguing.
Like, if you notice a factual mistake in a post, I welcome you to correct that. Intentional different usage of language is not a mistake, though.
I understand your viewpoint and I would offer you mine (I did not comment out of discomfort) but based on the mod activity in this post I don't think it would be well received. It seems this is a community by vegans for vegans only, and other viewpoints, even non-antagonistic ones, are not welcome. Nothing wrong with that, but it means I will show myself the door rather than irritate the community members.
I can't speak for the people that made the community but I don't think that places like this are necessarily made by vegans for vegans as you describe. Personally I can attest that it's just extremely frustrating to be made to feel like an out group in the ONE community where you shouldn't be made to feel like that. I personally welcome nonvegans to participate in discussion so long as they come with the understanding that they are a guest in our community and should respect the community as such which does include taking care to not come across as tone deaf. I'm not religious and in fact actively oppose religion but if I found myself at a church for whatever reason I'm not going to go in there and start a bunch of arguments and whatnot. I would be respectful because I understand that going to their place of worship and causing a commotion is uncalled for and doesn't benefit anyone. To be clear, I'm not trying to say that veganism is a religion because it is not and it is not viewed in the same way as religion is by its followers. I am merely using the analogy to illustrate how you should act when going into a community that you are not a part of.
This isn't a popularity contest or a fad. If you understand the moral problem, it doesn't matter what percentage of the people think that it's not wrong.
I know that it is the standard question to people that have no problems with killing thousands of sentient animals for their own enjoyment, but what do you think about eating dogs or cats? Do you think that cock-/bull-/dogfighting is bad? Is it okay to kill a mentally disabled person for fun?
Social settings exist outside of social media platforms
They aren't crying about or anything, just saying it doesn't make sense. I'd be pretty annoyed if people felt the need to joke about my food preference all the time, too
I think my point still stands, OP isn't crying about it or anything. I'm not a vegan but I've definitely been annoyed by the things omnivores say here.
Halal eaters and teetotalers don't try to preach as and convert as often, perhaps?
(I support vegans and I dont mock them, for the record.)
Halal eaters do try to convert you, but to their religion, not their eating habits.
They are also made fun of for that.
People genuinely don't like to be told what they are doing is wrong.
Why do people call it preaching?
It's baffling that "Hey maybe hamburgers aren't worth kilometers of cows chained with their face in a feed trough. Arranged this way so that the only activity they can engage in is to gorge themselves on low quality feed frequently filled with bits of other cows (backfeeding). Maybe they like have feelings and deserve better than this followed by a dehydrated wait in a death line in some artificially lit temple to screams and blood and horror?"
Is talked about in the same language as "Invisible sky person is deeply concerned about your masturbating habits and you are going to suffer for it!"
I was expecting something like "some just mention it and move on". Instead...
lol
Because despite it being logical to a point, usually the ones who wish to talk about can't actually explain the rationale for some of the more extremely ends of the philosophy.
I'm completely against industrial meat farming, but for instance game meat from deer that were killed for deer management?
Obviously a vegan will take the position that "eating meat is wrong, you're killing just for pleasure" usually. Which obviously isn't true, as there's no "just for pleasure", becsuse we're not talking about trophy hunting, but deer management, which is crucial and without which a lot of animals (and humans) would end up sick, suffering and dying as the ecosystem would overpopulate with deer, leading to a cascade of bad consequences, destroying the environment and the animals in it.
I support vegan products and consider myself a flexitarian, but I do also consume the occasional meat product. Preferably when it's cruelty free game meat.
Sheep are also another thing. Unless we plan to systematically eradicate the species, then we must tend to some sheep at least, which will mean shearing them, as that's required for their health. So then we end up with wool. Should that wool not be used? Would it be cruel to use that wool?
That of course again doesn't mean I'm not fervently against the horrible practices of the large sheep industry. It's just a question of "can't you see the eventual problems that taking a position so extreme would yield?"
And questioning these things can upset people, as it'd require flexing the ideology a bit, and that's something a lot of fervent vegans seem to have issues with. Which is apparent through say, using words like "carnist" to describe anyone who isn't 100% vegan. Almost in the same way dogmatic religions call anyone disagreeing "a heretic".
In the same way that monotheistic Abrahamic religions are, most of the "fighting" rhetoric of vegans is very much dogmatic.
@Dasus @naevaTheRat Why do you care about this stuff? Why does your energy flow towards arguing specifics with vegans? Go engage with meat eaters that don't care whether or not their food was factory farmed instead.
You've invented a vegan in your head to be smarter than. My vegan stance on culls is found here: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/11017095
Context of super necessary (apparently) kangaroo culls.
Species don't suffer, only individuals do. This defense of sheep implies we need to keep breeding pugs, or that if I were to make supersheep who lived ever minute of the day screaming in agony it would be bad to stop breeding them. An absurd stance.
In the interim selling wool creates perverse incentives and if it's a humanitarian effort (so to speak) we should use it for ends which don't profit us.
Your objections are standard and tedious, your examples of extremism in the ideology are actually examples of moderate stances.
I've never met a vegan that finds it morally objectional to scavange meat, assuming you aren't creating perverse incentives. Our objections are to suffering, you should probably stop tilting at strawmen.
You're a mod and didn't like the reply so you deleted it.
And you pretend you don't know what I mean when I say some vegans get upset and have issues with replying to these arguments, lol.
You're welcome to engage in good faith. I have infinite patience for anyone genuinely interested in discussion. It is against the rules of this community to post antivegan rhetoric.
Your initial comment was borderline butI decided to engage in good faith. Then you didn't engage with anything I said and said a few random gotchas. Other mods are welcome to intervene if they felt I removed your comment in error.
If you would like to rephrase your reply and write a better one you are welcome to do so.
If you can do the following:
comment on the content of my post on culling
talk about hunting and perverse incentives
edit your reply in the context of sheep species perpetuation to address what I had to say about super sheep/pugs, how wool is used
edit your reply to differentiate hunting versus scavenging
I will engage with you. Otherwise I will be recommending you get banned.
I'm vegan with a somewhat differing view on culls, having worked for the EPA and with national parks. I agree that a better solution than culling would be ideal, and that no life wants to be killed or population managed. However, we cull because of our past failings. We wiped out natural predators in many areas that kept a balance, and now, if left unchecked, deer will eat themselves into starvation, and devastate their ecosystem. It would be death on a massive scale if unmanaged, and would even affect humans. I think it's a far smaller crime to kill a few deer and manage populations at safe levels, than to allow the mass starvation of entire ecosystems because of our past destruction of that balance.
Better solutions have been proposed. Ideally, where we can, we reintroduce native predators and protect their populations until they're stable. Is that different from killing for population control? We're introducing animals for the explicit purpose of hunting and killing deer in order to keep a balance. If that's wrong, then should we kill all predators? Of course not, but I digress. Those aren't arguments I think you'd make, and I'm not suggesting you'd agree whatsoever, but those are the perspectives we think about. Many many smart people have tackled this issue, and we have not found a better solution than culling. Sometimes, we've done some of what you suggested, and attempted to reduce fertility rates, though I see the same moral issue there as well. No sentient creature wants to be neutered or drugged to prevent reproduction. However, it's better than hunting in certain circumstances, and something has to be done. This isn't a problem that can be ignored to reduce environmental impacts in other areas. Overpopulation will happen, and it is devastating. I wish there was a simple solution, but we made mistakes when we destroyed the native ecosystem, and now it falls to us to keep it from totally collapsing.
But why not humans? and why make a sport of it and celebrate it, why eat them?
Like if species with a tendency to breed to ecosystem collapse should be killed, aren't we top of the list?
Without getting all Agent Smith about it, yes, humans are an ecological disaster. I'm not trying to throw charged what-ifs back and forth. We solve the problems we can. Can you clarify what you're saying? I agree that no animal should be killed by humans, but I also recognize that we must work with the solutions we have. Are you suggesting that we stop cullings and allow overpopulation to happen?
I strongly agree that hunting should not be a sport. I also believe that if we're going to kill an animal, we should at least use the corpse to feed back into the ecosystem, and I don't begrudge those that eat the things they hunt, if necessary. Many people subsist off hunting to survive, and while I disagree with the concept of hunting another animal for food, I won't suggest that they starve, especially when they're filling a vital ecosystem role. If we don't need the food though, we should not be hunting animals for food. I don't know if my opinion is well founded enough to defend the position that if an animal is killed, tragically necessarily, for culling, it should not be eaten. I believe that to be true, but I can't defend that position with anything but my personal feelings and beliefs. On some level, I understand the argument that if an animal must be killed, then it's wasteful to not use the meat. Regardless of either argument, I strongly disagree with trophy hunting, and find any hunting for sport abhorrent.
I hope you can see the nuanced nature of my position. I'm not trying to play devil's advocate or be contrarian. I have a well-formed belief from my experiences, and I am trying to argue my position, and don't think you have to agree with me, nor do I expect you to. I do not see a large scale alternative to culling at the moment. I think those types of alternatives are being pursued by some in the industry, but the scale is small. I also do not believe it's an option to allow populations to grow uncontrollably. I believe allowing that to happen would be as morally reprehensible as hunting for sport, as it's neglecting a duty we have to sustain an ecosystem that we damaged. I am open and interested in any and all alternatives to culling, but I've heard none that haven't been tried or that haven't been able to succeed at scale.
I went to sleep, I may write something more sensible when I have more patience but I suspect the difference is mostly speciesm. I think we ought not to discriminate in ways we treat species and standards we have about appropriate interventions. I agree that in the short terms there may not be good options but like suppose there are 5 spots on a liferaft and 10 people, that doesn't really make leaving 5 people to drown OK and you defs shouldn't outsource it to random yahoos that enjoy killing people.
Given we can't like distribute condoms and the pill to like kangaroos or deer or whatever there may be no good answers in the short term, but killing should be the absolute last resort. Like we should be closing farms for more land, managing forests for better outcomes, reducing fertility if we can and so on long before we kill. If we do kill we need to make sure it is done with a sole focus on harm reduction, which the way culls are done now is defs not true and we ought to be happy to apply the same reasoning to human beings (basically that we have tried everything else we can and because we can't reason violence is all that's left).
Just curious, do you not see how that would frustrate someone who is not vegan? If your goal is to be confrontational, that little speech definitely hits the mark, but if you’re not, perhaps reflect on the preaching.
Personally, eat what you want to eat. The more vegans and vegetarians around, the better those food choices will be for everyone.
Why would it be frustrating? It is just true. There's no personal attack there, I'm not calling someone anything. It's just reality, if you eat hamburgers that is what happened to get it to your plate. If you don't think cows have feelings it shouldn't bother you, if you think cows have feelings but they don't matter very much it shouldn't bother you, if you do find it bothersome to think about but eat hamburgers that's on you not me.
Quite seriously, either you are ok with what you do or you are not. How is talking about it frustrating or confrontational?
I don't feel bad when I prune a tree, and if you talk about rows and rows of fruit trees being pruned and how they're slathered in nutrients and watered heavily to produce fruit before a harvester violently shakes them I feel neither confronted nor frustrated. I have no reason to even slightly suspect that treatment is wrong. Surely if feedlots and slaughterhouses are morally good or neutral I would at worst seem vaguely silly.
Ok, so I’m sure when you pick up your iPhone you’d love to have someone tell you how much abuse and suffering so many steps in the supply chain involve from the raw material harvesting, terrible working conditions to assemble them, etc.
Just pointing out that what you are doing is the literal definition of preaching. Not sure why you are surprised.
You know what, I would. If there is a problem that I'm unknowingly part of, it's better to know and maybe do something about it than to ignore it.
I can't say I will go live to a hut im the forest with no technology, but will at least be mindful of it and tried to minimize it. If I could afford a new iPhone, I'd certainly rather buy me a Fairphone. There are options and the options are a spectrum, not one or the other.
https://www.fairphone.com/
Yes actually, I don't deal with problems by ignoring them. That's uh, why I have a second hand phone.
See, when something I'm doing upsets me and conflicts with my self image as a person who tries to do good I stop doing that thing. What do you do?
Edit: rule 5. Sorry
Preaching doesn't mean lying or talking about unimportant things, nothing you said contradicts the idea its preaching.
Preaching is when you describe your beliefs in an attempt to convert other people, or to change their behavior.
I've definetly heard plenty of people making fun of or discriminating against others with dietary restrictions due to their religions. Hell I've also heard people making fun of others with lactose intolerance or celiac disease...
We can and should strive for better, but sometimes people can just be terrible 🫤
In my experience it is not NEARLY as prevalent as when someone learns that you are vegan or finds out about vegan communities and whatnot. People make countless memes about vegans for example, but when was the last time you saw a meme about someone choosing to eat Halal? Because to my knowledge there is no scientific study on the different experiences of these groups it is impossible to talk about this topic in any way that isn't anecdotal but for what it's worth I have been all over the US and the anecdotal experience that I have had is so overwhelming that I refuse to believe someone is arguing in good faith if they are claiming that, for example, someone eating Halal has even a remotely similar experience to that of vegans.
My guess is that this is because people tend to associate other dietary or lifestyle decisions as being just a different way to live. Like oh, that person is Muslim or Jewish and that influences their diet. And they don't take that as a personal judgement anymore than they do when they learn that that person is Muslim or Jewish to begin with. But with veganism it is usually not something that a person is raised into. It is a decision that that person has made after learning more about the animal agriculture industry and it is usually for ethical reasons primarily. Not because a religious book told them to. Therefore they hear that someone is vegan and are instantly defensive in a way that isn't true with halal, kosher, etc.
As you've said, this is all anecdotal, but I'd guess that non-vegan non-muslim non-jewish people most often have to "deal with" vegans as opposed to the other two. A quick search says that in the US there are more vegans than muslim and jewish people combined (without even including vegetarians, which definetly get lumped in the same group). Also, there are definetly other kinds of discrimination against the religious groups going on, so maybe their dietary restrictions doesn't exactly top the list of things to "meme" about.
I'm definetly not saying that vegans are wrong or that they deserve the amounts of "jokes" on them on, far from it, I just wanted to share my experience with "jokes" in very bad taste.
I still remember fondly an occasion at a wedding when my friend group all got placed at the same table, and we were 90% veg with one couple who ate meat. They remarked on it, and we all spent the rest of the meal joking about how it felt to be the minority, and they had to field questions like, "If you were on a desert Island with only vegetables, what would you do?"
yeah the hardest part of being vegan is interacting with non vegans. gotta love how the default response to veganism (you know that thing we do to try to better the planet and animal rights and shit) is to argue as if doing something about the issues you care about is a negative trait.
mfs always got something to say and love attacking a thing that as far as i'm aware is proven to be better for personal health, the environment, your wallet, and animals.
Honestly I've been so quiet about it offline, and one time I just said no thanks to cake as I don't eat dairy, etc, and the whole room alternately made fun of me and told me why I was wrong and meatsplaines until I got up and left.
i hear you - i've basically learned to avoid any topic or activity related to food with other people irl, which really sucks.
cooking is one of my favorite hobbies, can't talk to my friends about it anymore. hell, a close friend from high school completely stopped talking to me because we had literally one very reasonable and civil (from my perspective) debate about veganism. it's been years since i heard from them.
i got a single one of my close friends to even consider trying it, and i've been too anxious to even bring it up since last we spoke about it - a couple years ago now. they didn't seem to believe in the ethics/lifestyle of it and i'm terrified of learning that this person i care so much about has decided that their sensory pleasure is worth more than the lives of the animals they eat.
my experiences with speaking about veganism to the people that i care about is that it is a taboo subject; one that will make other people upset with me and potentially ruin relationships. and i think that fucking sucks.
I even posted a picture of my dinner one night on Facebook, and it happened to catch a picture of my spouse's dinner across from mine which visibly had cheese on it as he's not vegan, and all my friends pounced on it and began haranguing me, they obviously thought it was hilarious.
One of my CW is vegan, and another staff member brought her a frosted cake, and just said to her "Oh sorry didn't have time to get a vegan cake", and stood there expecting her to eat it. Like what do they not get? We commiserate a lot. My spouse is also on a special diet for gastroparesis, which means he can't have corn and legumes as well as other things, and that makes our mealtimes really fraught with arguments.
So I feel you. Most people don't get it at all.
I love cooking, and while i don't have any vegan friends that i cook for, i really appreciate my other friends just "trusting me" and eat whatever i cook for them. Probably the biggest and weirdest compliment i get is: "no way, that's vegan?" It's still a bit weird to be treated like an alien. Like when i cook for my sister and family, she always cooks "real food" on the side for people who don't like it. Kinda bizzare, but whatever. I think it's easy to cope with for me because i also don't drink, and people absolutely lose their shit when they find out. "Never?" "Not even wine for dinner?" "You can have a beer and still drive you know." "But it's really good." "You can hardly even taste the alcohol." Or being a dude who doesn't care about football around here. "What? You NEVER watch football? But you support your local team, right?" "So you only watch the euro championship?" "No? Only world cup?" "NO? But you still support your country?" People are just opposed to things they don't understand.
Just decline without giving a reason
If pressed, say you don't feel like it
We have a friend with an egg allergy, dairy allergy, and MMA. They're vegan as well by choice but it's made me very careful. I've briefly upset a few vegans and vegetarians by questioning them in a bit more depth. It's happened much less over time as I've refined how I clarify and ask.
I'm always amused when someone says vegetarian. Okay, what type? Can I serve you cheese? Eggs? Fish? One of my coworkers is also vegetarian but eats chicken...which was new to me.
I thought the chicken one was just a meme from the 90's because it was somewhat common for vegetarians to eat chicken. An old lady asked me if i eat fish, after asking me all kinds of other questions. She went: not even fish?? But they don't have blood. What does that has to do with anything, and yes they do.
I think it's religious? I didn't have a chance to dig in at the time.
My primary concern was getting all the different vegetarians to identify what type they were. As an example one of them was lacto-vegetarian but was fine if eggs were in something (bread). I was laser focused on by feeding everyone with appropriate diets and allergy considerations.
Honestly thinking back I wish I'd had the time for more detail. We had someone with a lethal fish allergy and another with a crustacean allergy so never asked about sea food. Wonder if it was a religious and/or cultural thing to not eat pigs or cows.
I am changing my diet, but I am not fully "there" yet.
I have gotten a lot of traction by merely saying "today is not a meat day for me" when I order some things.
It's way easier to eat at a veg-forward restaurant, but those aren't always available, and often the food is expensive.
Just fyi, one of the community rules is "Carnist rhetoric & Anti-vegans are not allowed." which is why so many top level replies are removed. I (and I assume many others) interpreted this post as "carnists, why do you do this?" but it's NOT and per community rules we're not allowed to explain or defend.
This is a safe place for vegans and we should leave it to them.
Sorry for imposing, I'll leave now. Mods, maybe you should pin a post for people like me who wander in here without knowing that rule? Might cut down on the carnist replies.
I cannot speak for any other mod, being newly minted, but this is not a vegans only sub.
Respectful and contextually appropriate replies are welcome but replies specifically hostile or following standard, trivially disputed, rhetoric will be removed.
For example I would not remove a reply like "What is it that determines whether or not something or someone is ok to eat in your eyes?" but I would remove "don't you know grass screams when you cut it. You're just hypocritical!"
Basically if you're posting stuff to own the vegans, explain why vegans are wrong, or saying something against veganism that a trivial search or five minutes considering the opposite position would show as false or grossly distorted your comment will be removed.
EDIT:
Just to add on to what I said. I think most of us would actually love to be wrong, if someone had strong evidence. Going vegan isn't tremendously hard, but it is definitely harder than never thinking about food and eating/wearing/using whatever you feel like because the whim to do so takes you. Mostly it can be socially isolating, because regardless of how much empathy you might actually have for carnists (having been one yourself, there is no shame in having been indoctrinated) people will feel that you condemn them and consequently try to shame you. (there was some study about this but I'm struggling to remember the title).
If someone could show me evidence that idk dogs were mere reflex machines like Descartes maintained when he vivisected them I would chow down. It's not really a particularly comfortable position to feel like you're living in the middle of a holocaust and most of the people you love and respect are not only oblivious, but actively defend and relish it.
It's just incredibly tedious to deal with the same set of disingenuous excuses. Like the aforementioned plants feel pain thing, I have never in my life seen anyone actually protest something like mowing lawns. I have basically zero reason to believe that anyone who isn't a jain thinks this is true, and even then... what is it that animals eat and how does physics work?
“Meatsplaining” made me cackle, what a word
Tourists without guides can end up in very strange situations.
Or with good enough guides.
If someone is going to browse all then they should be aware that they are entering different communities and be respectful of those communities. If they are disrespectful, whether it is a result of being unaware or just not caring, in my opinion that should warrant an immediate ban pending a demonstration of understanding and admission that what they did was wrong. Unfortunately even that might not make a noticeable difference since many of the disrespectful people are probably not repeat posters. Beyond that the only thing that I'm aware of that could really be done is making the community private which is obviously not ideal. Perhaps there could exist some middle ground of a community not being private but also not appearing on all but I'm unaware of if that's possible or if it would even be any better in practice.
Cool,.that's not how.people.use this app. I think your idea of delisting from all but being searchable is a good idea.
I think "personal choice" comes off as slightly dismissive, as if it's below your effort to even discuss.
Personally, I just go with "for ethical reasons, plus, its good for the environment" and I've never had anyone chuck a tantrum.
In my experience, the reactions depend a lot on the people you talk to and well, what you look like.
Like, I've got a tiny lady colleague who's vegan and she's never been in a conflict from being vegan.
Meanwhile, me as a big dude, I will get various males who take it as a personal affront:
This is especially also amplified on the countryside, where not only progressive ideas take longer to arrive, you've also got farmers with skin in the game.
In my hometown, there's a pig farmer. Holy fuck, for that guy, my mere existence was a statement that his entire livelihood is immoral.
Lemmy's so small I can't browse without posts from the vegan community showing up on front page feeds. Of course that'll draw in anyone/everyone.
The screenshot is obviously wrong. People will make fun of anyone for anything, anywhere and anytime. Problem is the disagreement on what's acceptable.
I wouldn't call it "a good number." It's a very small minority. Outside of the memery of the militant vegan, I've never experienced a vegan preaching to me about dietary habits.
not cool tho
I never had a meat eater stand up next to me harassing me for eating a salad while I was eating out.
I would disagree with this portion of your post if it said most or all vegans. I have found most vegans are making a personal decision without passing judgement on others.
Even so, there absolutely are militant vegans who want to shame others, and those vocal minority give the rest a bad name.
Source: Spouse is vegan. I am supportive, slowly changing my diet. Blood tests show really positive results. I still don't understand honey.
I mean that's not only vegans. On tinder i see a ton of militant meat eaters and anti vegans. Vegans or vegetarians literally say: i'm vegan, would be nice if you were too. While the other side of the coin is: real men eat meat, sorry not sorry. I eat meat, because i enjoy food too much. Please no vegans. I met one super annoying vegan in my life who said: eating meat is like paedophilia, once you fucked a child you'll always be a childfucker. On the other hand every time someone puts one and one together and realises that i'm a vegan, they tell me how bad it is and how good meat is and that it sucks.
Absolutely true. It's almost like a badge of "look at how bad my arteries will be in a couple of years." I guess the vocal minority in a lot of areas probably give a lot of groups a bad rep.
You are having regular blood tests? Is there a reason for this?
Yes. Some health concerns started me thinking about my diet. Regular blood tests in my case means one baseline to basically kick everything off, followed by another 6 weeks later, and 2 subsequent follow up.
The short version:
https://ko-fi.com/post/Unveiling-the-Bitter-Side-of-Honey-M4M5N7135
https://www.fastcompany.com/90457908/eating-honey-is-more-complicated-than-you-might-think
If you know anything about apiculture, then you know that it's part of animal farming/raising (zootechny) in the same vein as pastoralism.
The fact that you think your pleasureful experience is what matters is part of the problem. It's not about you.
I have been a beekeeper for years. I agree that the bees are NOT in their natural habitat. However, I keep a significantly better control of the environment than the bees do in this habitat. It is better for the surrounding area, and I have talked my neighbors out of pesticide use because my bees will help pollinate their gardens and trees.
One extra note from the ko-fi article: I have never, ever heard of the practice of trimming queen wings. That is vicious, and I would never do that. Let the bees be bees. If they leave, I wasn't doing a good enough job of supporting them. I am not a commercial beekeeper, though. Merely someone who likes being around them all year.
Edit: it looks like both articles really focus on commercial beekeeping. I don't know where I will land on this. The honey I get is not food for the bees during the winter. Bees overproduce honey if the conditions are right. I only harvest honey that contains no brood (baby bees) and is separated from the laying queen. The food for the hive stays near the brood core, which is where bees stay during the winter.
I haven't lost a hive yet during the overwintering process. I also have not substituted with any sugar feed. The only thing that I have supplied the bees is a 100% pollen "patty" from local pollen and water during the hottest part of the year.
I have never heard of a beekeeper gassing a hive with cyanide instead of "spending money" overwintering them (as stated in the fastcompany article). There is no cost to overwintering bees. You just wrap the hive in what equates to a blanket during the coldest parts of the year. The bees do a great job of keeping themselves warm.
Plus, why would a beek "gas" the hives when they could simply take the covers off and let the bees freeze to death? I presume cyanide is expensive. That entire argument is counter to itself.
Once again, I am NOT a commercial beek, but that seems unnecessarily complicated.
This is why I launched https://vegantheoryclub.org I delete the carnist posts lol
![email protected]
I support purging animal abuse "content"
Non-vegan here. I was going to reply one time, but even tho I was supporting y'all I realized it's not really my place to speak. This community is supposed to be your safe space, and I respect that. I hope y'all have a good one and wish you all luck.
Gotta ask, if you support vegans/veganism I assume that means you take it as at least more right than wrong. Is that the case? if so what's holding you back from joining our feeble, protein deficient ranks?
I just ask because personally I spent a few years being like "Yeah these people are correct and don't deserve the hate but oysters? Is that really a priority concern?" before realising that was a baffling stance and I should align my actions with the 99% I agreed with and worry about the rest later if it ever came up.
Fair question. Right now I live with my family, and basically everything we make has meat in it and since I don't cook I don't really get a say in it. Everything I choose to eat for myself is vegetarian, so I'm at doing a little.
Even tho it's hard for me to stop rn, it's not like you guys are wrong about the horrible conditions and treatment of animals in farms so it would be hard for me to argue against y'all.
It can be difficult if you're not managing your own food, you can of course choose what you wear or eat when you get food out and so on. That is vegan. It is not a purity cult, it is about doing what we can.
Thanks for sharing and helping me. <3
It is wrong though. Like you clearly care but what, it's ok to do a little evil as a treat? why?
Evil is a relative term. I could argue that capitalism is evil, or buying things that can't be recycled, or Catholicism. Maybe start with asking yourself how you justify doing things someone else might think of as evil before using it as some sort of magic bullet argument.
Forcibly impregnating someone, kidnapping their baby, and taking their breast milk is like when you buy potatoes.
^[citation needed]^
Sorry, trolls don't get to request citations.
Being vegan doesn't equate with being religious. I think that a part of the problem is that some vegans truly do base their entire identity around it and people find that annoying, like when atheists are surrounded by one friend who won't shut up about god.
Veganism is (mostly) binary for a reason. You either kill and exploit non-human animals for your pleasure (taste, comfort, affordability, i.e. a want) or you don't (exceptions exist, but mostly represent needs and not wants, e.g. conditions, intial acclimatisation etc.)
Veganism and Vegetarianism are not two steps of the same ladder. I'm not an expert on vegetarianism, but AFAIK vegetarianism aims to avoid meat-eating. Veganism aims to minimise suffering from the killing and exploitation of (non-human) animals by abstaining from consuming products directly made from (non-human) animals.
Veganism isn't inherently utilitarian. I don't agree with them, but there are vegans who are climate change (impact) denialists. I don't agree that giving up on veganism (which has huge climate action potential) for some vague 'free energy' is a viable climate action path that doesn't follow RCP8.5. Nevertheless, I consider those either-or, dichotomy debates as delayist discourse or simply put fossil fuel arguments. Food AND Energy need to cut emissions completely.
Relevant paper
Cole M, Morgan K. Vegaphobia: derogatory discourses of veganism and the reproduction of speciesism in UK national newspapers. Br J Sociol. 2011 Mar;62(1):134-53. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-4446.2010.01348.x. PMID: 21361905.
https://foodethics.univie.ac.at/fileadmin/user_upload/p_foodethik/Cole__M._2011._Vegaphobia._derogatory_discourses_of_veganism.pdf
It's the same mindset that gets mad about things being woke
I was at my dad's birthday last year and the meal was: sauerkraut, potatoes and an ABSURD amount of different meats. Like it was bizzare, even for someone who is used to people eat a lot of meat. It wasn't even good (i guess) because it was all greasy and just too much. It wasn't good looking or anything, it was just a lot and like half of it they threw away. At some point one of his alcoholic friends said loud: thank god there are no vegans here har har har. Are you so absorbed in your meat religion that... No, i still don't know what the point was. But everyone found it very funny, so i guess it is.
As a non vegan. I have the largest respect for you guys. Keep on living the good life. Maybe I can manage to hop over in the future.
It's honestly the best thing I ever did for myself. Made me think about food and living in s whole new way. Thanks for the genuine support, it gets old being made fun of.
I believe in you. It seems way harder than it really is. If you have questions or want recipes or tips or whatever there are armies of us dying to help others live in alignment with their values.
Also like selfishly I found I felt waaaaay better after going vegan. Probs more a side effect of just more whole foods but damned did I feel notably more energic and clear headed.
All the days I have tried vegan, I constantly would have to eat to get full and get energy. So that's why I haven't gone vegan. I feel like you would just need to constantly eat.
You're probably just not eating rich enough food! If your normal meal is something like say spaghetti bolognese and you take out the beef and cheese and just throw in some lentils for an equivalent mass they have 1/3 the calories! Not to mention cheese is incredibly energy dense.
Usually, proteins tend to work out if you're using lentils/legumes in reasonable amounts. They tend to beat meat on a gram for gram basis just on raw numbers but be much lower energy to make up the difference so you need some fats in there. This is where stuff like nuts and seeds come in.
If you're also suddenly increasing fibre intake that can irritate your gut and make it move stuff a little too fast which can make you feel hungry.
Here are a few cheap and lazy meals that always fill me up. Try them for yourself.
https://www.purelykaylie.com/vegan-moroccan-stew/#tasty-recipes-10125-jump-target
https://thestingyvegan.com/vegan-jambalaya/
https://lovingitvegan.com/vegan-burrito/#recipe (lazy in big batches anyway)
https://www.veganricha.com/grillable-veggie-burger/#recipe
https://thewoksoflife.com/buddhas-delight-lo-han-jai/#recipe (ok this one isn't lazy but it isn't hard and it'd delicious!)
Where I live its in the legal gray zone to talk shit about religion, so theres that. And so far that I know, no vegan have commited terror acts because of the ill treatment of vegans.
Have you seen the what does halal mean? youtube short by therealsamalkhatib? It's a cute little sketch and whenever I make/eat falafel now it's become a bit of a meme.
I think this lack of respect is something new. I dont know when, but the other (pretty illogical and believe-driven) habits are all older than veganism
Seems like the obvious answer is that religion is a protected class and veganism isn't.
What you're referring to are legal classifications that prevent discrimination in very specific circumstances such as when applying for a job. When someone decides to make fun of vegans they absolutely DO NOT think to themselves "is that a legally protected class? No? Okay, I'm in the clear." This reasoning is blatantly incorrect.
If this were the actual reason then why do people also discriminate against groups that are protected classes like women? The answer is because we aren't in a court. We are talking about social values, not legal ones. Despite how much of a fucking asshole it would make someone to be misogynistic in their daily life there is nothing preventing them from doing so other than the fear of being outcast by their peers. It only becomes illegal in very specific circumstances.
They aren't consciously going through a checklist in their head. But legal influences societal. Maybe in the past they made fun of someone's funny hat, got in trouble for it, got annoyed at a preachy vegan and now shits on vegans instead.
Don't you know that everyone in the internet is American? Thanks for the link :)
I'm vegan and i make fun of everyone who only eats food touched by a magician. I don't even understand how they compare. One is a choice the other ones got indoctrinated by people who vut their dicks for fun.
that's not what kosher means
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2711054/
I thought this paper was interesting
No class is protected from comedy.
I think Dave Chappelle would disagree.
Don't post pictures of text
Thanks. Can you also add a rule that it should have a link to the source, if it is a screenshot of a webpage?
I see a lot of pictures of headlines or tweets, where it could easily be spreading misinformation. But just a link to the source solves the issue of accessibility for the blind and also citing the source for verifying the accuracy of the information.
Veganism is a philosophical belief and is regarded as such in the EU and UK at least, yes. Veganism isn't about food though, it's about everything touching animal rights and abuse.
It is akin to relgion in the sense that it is a moral question for the person and not a health concern.
Not sure why people get so touchy when religion is brought up.
Well, tens of thousands of people are murdered every year, and millions have been brutally tortured and murdered for religious reasons over human history. From crusades to jihads, to caste systems. So, you'll see, it is a very sensitive topic when a subset of the population thinks their religion gives them permission to exact violence upon others.
You don't make fun of halal or kosher? Where's the fun in that?!
Vegans do have the moral high ground simply by not murdering animals for food.
There is absolutely no reason to take your feelings of persecution seriously, if you're locked in on the idea that you're morally superior to anyone who isn't a vegan. Identical vibes to an Evangelical Christian that ends arguements that go nowhere with I'll pray for you.
Your attitude expressed here is the exact reason for that which you complain about.
The fediverse is such an interesting new human experiment (and I'm just saying this to you specifically since I don't expect this comment to make it past the moderators either). I was going in expecting reddit except not morally bankrupt, yet what you find are numerous bubbles that their respective communities use to shield themselves from whatever it is that they (for whatever arguably rationalizable reason) cannot accept to penetrate the safe space.
I truly feel for the emotions OP experiences and has outlined. I was just trying to level with them from an outside perspective and it is truly sad that there seems to be absolutely no platform left on the internet (if there ever was one) where one can be guaranteed to find community that puts the commune and the upkeep of its unity before any agenda or collective emotional guidance.
Hopefully, you do also understand then that this distinction between "murder" and "slaughter" exists, because people wanted to apply different moral standards to it. Since we vegans disagree with having those different standards, we also disagree with what's the correct word.
Yes I understand why vegans use the word murder, so that they get a strong emotional reaction to something they consider abhorrent. And I get it. But I think precision in language is important, and I think using that kind of language actually pushes people away from a better understanding of what veganism is all about. Although it shows how passionate vegans are, it can push people away with what some might consider vitriolic hyperbole.
That fact that a mod removed my post about the dictionary definition of an english word kinda illustrates my point. Despite my calm, clear, and nonconfrontational language, I expect this post to get removed as well.
I do agree that this harsh language can push people away. I rarely use it myself for that reason. But whether to use it or not, is their personal decision.
As for your dictionary definition comment, I am absolutely on board with it being removed. It was extremely tone-deaf.
You do not need to answer me, but ask yourself the following: Did you really think, they were not aware of the dictionary definition?
They were purposefully using a non-standard word. You could have argued their decision to use that word, if you really felt that strongly about it, although frankly, just don't do that either. They've almost certainly thought about this more than you have, and there's also just no need to discuss something like that all the time.
The way I interpreted your comment is that you personally felt uncomfortable with their use of language, so you felt an urge to react to it in any way whatsoever. Absolutely understandable.
But that is precisely what this whole post is about. People, who eat meat, will feel uncomfortable with the discussions we have here and then they respond to argue things that really do not need arguing.
Like, if you notice a factual mistake in a post, I welcome you to correct that. Intentional different usage of language is not a mistake, though.
I understand your viewpoint and I would offer you mine (I did not comment out of discomfort) but based on the mod activity in this post I don't think it would be well received. It seems this is a community by vegans for vegans only, and other viewpoints, even non-antagonistic ones, are not welcome. Nothing wrong with that, but it means I will show myself the door rather than irritate the community members.
I can't speak for the people that made the community but I don't think that places like this are necessarily made by vegans for vegans as you describe. Personally I can attest that it's just extremely frustrating to be made to feel like an out group in the ONE community where you shouldn't be made to feel like that. I personally welcome nonvegans to participate in discussion so long as they come with the understanding that they are a guest in our community and should respect the community as such which does include taking care to not come across as tone deaf. I'm not religious and in fact actively oppose religion but if I found myself at a church for whatever reason I'm not going to go in there and start a bunch of arguments and whatnot. I would be respectful because I understand that going to their place of worship and causing a commotion is uncalled for and doesn't benefit anyone. To be clear, I'm not trying to say that veganism is a religion because it is not and it is not viewed in the same way as religion is by its followers. I am merely using the analogy to illustrate how you should act when going into a community that you are not a part of.
Politeness is often used as a mask for horrible ideas and actions.
This isn't a popularity contest or a fad. If you understand the moral problem, it doesn't matter what percentage of the people think that it's not wrong.
You don't have to. You choose to for a bunch of feelings and "identities" which have nothing to do with "caloric appropriation".
Why would I try to sway a selfish sociopath with arguments?
Your claims to being open for discussion go out the window the moment you put your taste experience before the lives of "animals".
I know that it is the standard question to people that have no problems with killing thousands of sentient animals for their own enjoyment, but what do you think about eating dogs or cats? Do you think that cock-/bull-/dogfighting is bad? Is it okay to kill a mentally disabled person for fun?
They are all of those things. Meat is murder. Dairy is rape and murder.
to be fair we are made out of meat
Furries could know better.
The only furry I know IRL is vegan, so anecdotical evidence I guess?
Social settings exist outside of social media platforms
They aren't crying about or anything, just saying it doesn't make sense. I'd be pretty annoyed if people felt the need to joke about my food preference all the time, too
I was responding to what OP wrote in the post:
"We can't even talk in this community dedicated to vegans without someone coming along and meatsplaining."
I've edited my comment to make it clear what I was responding to.
I think my point still stands, OP isn't crying about it or anything. I'm not a vegan but I've definitely been annoyed by the things omnivores say here.
Relevant thread:
https://lemmy.world/comment/10304725