You must log in or register to comment.
Holy shit the last one is so infuriating. Like, even if they did, you end up needing to cultivate a lot less plants if you’re vegan instead of a carnie, thus still reducing harm overall
As a social animal, we have a strong instinct to conform to the herd’s views, because it’s more important to our survival to agree with the group than it is to be objectively correct. But then we must live in a state of cognitive dissonance, constantly protecting the lies we tell ourselves. A little bit of thought shows why carnists “murder” more plants than vegans do. But does take a little bit of thought, and if you don’t think, it sounds like it makes sense, so it’s the perfect distraction. The point of these “arguments” isn’t to make and support a claim about reality. It’s simply to distract the person making the argument from their own thoughts and feelings that they are unwilling or unable to process. They are very afraid of disturbing the worldview that they uncritically accepted as a child. But that worldview isn’t based in reality, it’s based in wishful thinking and propaganda from capitalists. It requires constant bulwarking through denial, distraction, histrionics, groupthink, etc. People are genuinely afraid that they might change their mind, and suddenly find themselves without a herd. They’ll tell themselves any stupid thing to prevent that from happening.
Very well put
To all the people downvoting this:
Vegan here. I got all of these responses multiple times online and in face-2-face discussions. And believe me when I say, people where mostly serious when they put out these statements.
The clowns on the right kind of describes my inner WTF response quite accurately though. 🤷
Removed by mod
Which can really annoy people who see it as natural.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t this considered a logical falicy?
It is. But in the mind of these people, this is a valid concern and we need to be able to lead them away from this mindset. We have to guide them to new insights, not fight them over it. (Not that I would imply that YOU were trying to fight.)
PS:
I forgot an important note on the “morality” point.
It might not always be obvious to non-vegans, but Veganism is not a diet. It actually is a moral compass. To make this more clear, let me copy you some of the “definition of veganism”:
“Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; […]”
That is veganism. Nothing more, nothing less. The things we collectively do as vegans are just consequences of internalizing this philosophy and acting according to it.
That’s why the topic of “morality” often comes up in discussion with vegans, but for an outsider going that route might sound a little far-fetched. But it actually isn’t - it is at the core of our actions.
Just wanted to put that out there.
I would like to give you the chance to see it from our perspective:
If you would see something fundamentally wrong in the streets/online, wouldn’t you speak up about it?
Like for example, someone boasts online that they steal from a local family business every day and on their way out, they punch the owners kid in the face. And others are even rooting for that person in the comment section. - You would still speak up about it, wouldn’t you? You would try to set that person straight.
As vegans, we came to the conclusion that using and exploiting animals is a wrong thing to do. We’ve seen too many horrible things while experiencing the gentleness and kindness of these animals. We have sworn ourselfs to change our ways to not be part of that anymore and we try to fight for them - as they are not able to do it on their own. We speak up about the injustice that we perceive - just as you would do in the other instance.
We know that we are annoying because of that, annoying because we speak up. The people that try to break the echo chamber are always considered annoying. But we can’t help it. We need to do something at least.
Eating meat is considered in most scientific thoughts as an evolutionary trait that occurred due to humans’ original nomadic nature. Meaning it was easier to hunt an animal for food than having to replace energy and proteins with plants. Plus at the time meat was introduced into the human diet, we would have had to compete with grazing animals, and edible plants were scarce. There are many good alternatives to meat, and I personally agree that cattle industries have gone too far in many regards. However, meat is still one of the easiest ways to give yourself the nutrients required for the human body
Eating meat is considered […] as an evolutionary trait
Correct. But these early humans had no supermarkets or global trade systems. We (and our food selection process) has very little to do with the constraints that these previous generations had. Your argument basically boils down to "it is natural for us to eat meat. This is called “appeal to nature” and is a logical fallacy (i.e. not a very good argument).
cattle industries have gone too far
Kudos to you for acknowledging that.
meat is still one of the easiest ways to give yourself the nutrients required
I do not agree, as meat is lacking in some of the essential nutrients or has a suboptimal composition of them. But even if it was the best source, that would not necessarily justify everything we do (i.e. harm other sentient beings) to get it. To give you an (over the top) counter example: Human meat would even be much better in terms of it’s nutrient composition - but no one would argue for canibalism because of that fact.
What I was getting at is that it’s harder to fight evolution and it takes time. Advocating for meat free lifestyles would most likely push different evolutionary traits in a few million years. And you have to consider cultural influences as well. Additionally, veganism is more prominent in higher income countries because of food processing and “health food” taxes cost money, so many vegan items aren’t inexspensive. Those people that are too impoverished to afford a full vegan diet would starve without meat. Also consider those places where the land can’t be fertilized and farmed. Those people as well would starve. Trade could resolve that only if they can afford it.
So this is a bit of a non sequitur, I just think it’s interesting.
We already evolved FROM being exclusively meat-eating animals. When the first land animals (our direct ancestors) enter the fossil record, there were no plants on land that were edible to them. We already evolved INTO herbivores.
it’s harder to fight evolution and it takes time
See, I don’t really understand why you think we would need any evolution for this. For what it’s worth, we are already very well capable of thriving on a plant-exclusive diet with our current genetic setup.
meat free lifestyles would most likely push different evolutionary traits in a few million years
Most probably not - or at least not to great extent. You need a selection pressure for evolution to happen. I.e. you need natural selection. And since our food-choices influence our chances for reproduction very little in our modern days. Humans removed them selves to a great extent form “evolution by natural selection” anyways in our age.
you have to consider cultural influences as well
Cultural influences can be used as an explanation for a status quo, but are a bad justification for future behavior most of the time.
Additionally, veganism is more prominent in higher income countries because of food processing and “health food” taxes cost money, so many vegan items aren’t inexspensive.
I can not agree with you on that statement in any way. The cheapest staple foods you could get are mostly vegan (Grains, Legumes, Dried goods, seeds, vegies, fruit, potatos). Meat and animal products are quite expensive to produce in comparison. Most of the time this just does not seem like it, because animal ag is extremly subsidized to keep this industry economically viable. If anyone would need to pay the FULL price of animal products, most of us would not be able to afford then on a regular basis.
Those people that are too impoverished to afford a full vegan diet would starve without meat.
Completely backwards. “Poorer” regions that have a climate suited to produce crops often have traditionally a very plant heavy diet, since things like grains and legumes have a great shelf life and are very cheap. Meat is fucking expensive. It boils down to basic thermodynamics. You need to put so much calories into an animal that you will never be ably to retrieve by consuming their body. It is wasteful.
Also consider those places where the land can’t be fertilized and farmed. Those people as well would starve.
No one in their right minds would say that some indigenous tribes or the Inuit need to be eating veggie burgers tomorrow. We are talking about the vast majority of people on this planet - like you and me. And we have the choice. Diverting the argument over to some hypothetical about foreign tribes or poor people is not necessary and also not at the heart of the arguments.
Did you read the articles?
“My morality is based on what lions do”
Really?
I had the genuine question asked once about “But lions do eat meat and how would you stop them?” In a discussion about why I am vegan. 🙈
lol that’s absurd
i think it’s important to not mock those ridiculous questions, no matter how bad people act towards you, though. im not a vegan myself and i can imagine people being genuinely confused and saying some very weird things
It was not the first time I got that response. I genuinely don’t know where people get this from?!
it’s important to not mock those ridiculous questions
Totally! It might be the first time a person gets to think about the matter in a deeper way. It is normal for them to be all over the place.
I think my answer at that time was something along the lines of:
It’s true that these wild animals need to do that. But you are not a wild animal. You are an intelligent human, that has anything they could ever think of in the supermarket right around the corner. While a lion might not have another choice in order to survive, we as humans are not not in the same position. We can choose to eat something different while still enjoying our food and live a happy healthy life. So would it still be right for us to kill other sentient beings, if we are not forced to do so?
I normally think of my discussion partners as intelligent people that are able to reason. I won’t let them off the hook easily, but there is no reason to “fight” with them as this will improve exactly nothing.
It was not the first time I got that response. I genuinely don’t know where people get this from?!
there’s a lot of assholes out there! i think its always best to remind everyone that we should be kind to each other, especially when we disagree or misunderstand each other
i didn’t mean to imply you’re an asshole haha sorry if that’s what came across
i think your response is sensible
i didn’t mean to imply you’re an asshole
Don’t worry. I wasn’t lead to believe that. Quite the contrary: You sounded like a sensible person one can reason with. That’s why I took the time to reply in greater depth, so you (and maybe others) understand our viewpoints a little better. :)
i think your response is sensible
Thank you for the kind words!
