Do angry vegans turn you against going vegan?

[PaoloSanchez]

I had lunch in a vegan resturant earlier this week, I wish I'd taken a photo.
I ordered the hummus, olives and seasonal salad combo.
The olives were ok.

I've been vegan for almost 20 years and I've never been to a vegan restaurant. The closest was the now defunct ЯED☆VEG in Dean St and Brighton, which was like the vegetarian equivalent of McDonalds. Now there appears to be loads of new establishments knocking about. I might get around to checking them out some time, especially now that I've installed the Happy Cow app on my phone.

 

[Athos]

Spymaster Regardless of the question of causing suffering to other sentient beings, the environmental impact alone makes it morally inferior. But, so what? Which of us doesn't make selfish choices?

 

[PaoloSanchez]

Let's be honest. Veganism is healthier, less cruel, and less environmentally destructive than eating meat. However, I love the taste of meat. Even to the extent that I'm willing to risk my health, and cause some animal suffering and environmental damage. Clearly, my choice is less morally good than choosing veganism. But, for meat, that's something I'm willing to live with. And I don't care what vegans (or others) think about that, or how they choose to live.

I suppose that's the sort of thinking behind many of the seemingly poor choices that people make and the mainstay of vices like smoking, alcohol consumption, coffee, drugs and other vices, especially physically addictive ones. "I know it's wrong but I like it so I'm going to do it anyway even if it kills me or others". I think there are always going to be people who are not going to change. Fortunately there are many that do eventually realise the absurdity of their behaviours and are willing to change, however it is currently much easier to carry on doing what the majority are doing and there's not much of a motivation to go "against the grain". Safety in numbers.

For inspiration I look to the people who persisted in doing what they thought was right even if it cost them their lives. Without these courageous pioneers, slavery and apartheid might still be widespread, being gay would still be a crime, and it would still be ok to discriminate against women and beat your wives if they don't behave. The places in the world where those things still happen are considered backwards, and sometime in the future (perhaps the very distant future) humanity will look back at some of our present behaviours, including the non obligate meat eating, and think them primitive and backwards.

You say you don't care "how they chose to live", and that's fair enough, each to their own as they say. However it would appear that there are quite a few that do care how vegans live, enough to at least pass comment or criticize, which is one of the reasons that this subject is always so well attended by members of the meat eating majority ready to have a pop.

 

[Casual Observer]

I've been vegan for almost 20 years and I've never been to a vegan restaurant. The closest was the now defunct ЯED☆VEG in Dean St and Brighton, which was like the vegetarian equivalent of McDonalds. Now there appears to be loads of new establishments knocking about. I might get around to checking them out some time, especially now that I've installed the Happy Cow app on my phone.

I don't know where you are but the best veg/vegan lunch place I know of is Alara on Marchmont Street, Bloomsbury. It's mostly a healthfood shop but has a self service hot buffet with a different menu every day. The only drawback is that you pay by weight (of the food, not you) and with everything being so tasty, you can end up paying quite a bit. I used to eat there once or twice a week for 6 years or so.

Honourable mentions to Terre A Terre in Brighton and Streatham's Wholemeal Cafe.

 

[PaoloSanchez]

Spymaster Regardless of the question of causing suffering to other sentient beings, the environmental impact alone makes it morally inferior. But, so what? Which of us doesn't make selfish choices?

Well at least one person in this thread was arguing that the cessation of meat eating would be problematic from an environmental standpoint (although they didn't show their working), so there isn't universal agreement even on that subject, even though the evidence appears to be overwhelmingly in favour of a plant based lifestyle being far less harmful to the environment.

Yes we all make selfish choices, but that doesn't make it ok. If your conscience can live with choices that are damaging to the environment and to humanity then good for you. Some people would like to at least try to do more of the "right things".

 

[PaoloSanchez]

I don't know where you are but the best veg/vegan lunch place I know of is Alara on Marchmont Street, Bloomsbury. It's mostly a healthfood shop but has a self service hot buffet with a different menu every day. The only drawback is that you pay by weight (of the food, not you) and with everything being so tasty, you can end up playing quite a bit. I used to eat there once or twice a week for 6 years or so.

Honourable mentions to Terre A Terre in Brighton and Streatham's Wholemeal Cafe.

Thanks for that. It reminds me a bit of the Country Life shop/cafe in Picadilly that used to be run by Seventh Day Adventists. (and hence closed on Saturdays)

I'd probably know a few more if I was the sort that ate out a lot, but I hardly ever do, which is why I was surprised when I found out that there are so many more places available now. I'm almost spoilt for choice. Happy Cow has helped me find decent places since 2003 in many places in Europe and now I have the phone app it's even easier.

 

[Yossarian]

I'm tempted to check out a place near me that specializes in vegan junk food, not that I'm exactly craving Big Macs.

 

[innit]

Spymaster Regardless of the question of causing suffering to other sentient beings, the environmental impact alone makes it morally inferior. But, so what? Which of us doesn't make selfish choices?

You've got kids, right? Is that what you'd say to them if they asked them why you kept eating meat even though you knew it was damaging the environment? "So what"?

Think I'm going to have to hide this thread.

 

[PaoloSanchez]

You've got kids, right? Is that what you'd say to them if they asked them why you kept eating meat even though you knew it was damaging the environment? "So what"?

Think I'm going to have to hide this thread.

That reminded me of one of this lyrical snippet from one of my favourite bands...

Oil slicks on the ebbing tide
Progress out of hand
Blind men choke on swallowed pride
Heads down in the sand
Don't wanna see the damage they've done, oh no

Trees destroyed by acid rain
Falling from the skies
When our children place the blame
Who will tell them, why?
Hear me now the chant has begun...

 

[Athos]

You've got kids, right? Is that what you'd say to them if they asked them why you kept eating meat even though you knew it was damaging the environment? "So what"?

Think I'm going to have to hide this thread.

I think I'd reply that we all do things that damage the environment, like flying or using a car. And that, on balance, the pleasure I get from eating meat outweighs the displeasure of knowing the effects of that choice.

 

[Athos]

Well at least one person in this thread was arguing that the cessation of meat eating would be problematic from an environmental standpoint (although they didn't show their working), so there isn't universal agreement even on that subject, even though the evidence appears to be overwhelmingly in favour of a plant based lifestyle being far less harmful to the environment.

Yes we all make selfish choices, but that doesn't make it ok. If your conscience can live with choices that are damaging to the environment and to humanity then good for you. Some people would like to at least try to do more of the "right things".

What does 'not ok mean, though? Is your choice to use fossil fuel ok, notwithstanding the harm to the environment it causes?

 

[AnnaKarpik]

Let's be honest. Veganism is healthier, less cruel, and less environmentally destructive than eating meat. However, I love the taste of meat. Even to the extent that I'm willing to risk my health, and cause some animal suffering and environmental damage. Clearly, my choice is less morally good than choosing veganism. But, for meat, that's something I'm willing to live with. And I don't care what vegans (or others) think about that, or how they choose to live.

Veganism is healthier - are you sure? What does healthier mean? Can you find anyone comparing vegans with meat/fish/dairy eaters that takes account of other life-style factors? I'm genuinely interested, because the Seventh Day Adventist studies (which are conducted on a population with a reasonably similar lifestyle) appear to show that the people eating some fish do better than the vegans. There are no health benefits to avoiding honey or leather shoes that I have ever heard of.
Growing plants is not necessarily less environmentally destructive than raising meat animals - there are different ways to do both of those things. There must be vegans and vegetarians around who daily consume produce from vast monocultures, if only on cost grounds.
AS I understand it, veganism is not about avoiding causing suffering to animals but rather concentrates on not using animals (or exploiting them to use the more emotionally-loaded, preferred term); if you only talk about meat/fish/eggs you can argue that it's the same thing, as long as you accept that death always involves suffering. But honey is also verboten, as is eating the eggs of rescued battery hens although both bees and rescue hens appear to enjoy a perfectly happy existence.

 

[Athos]

I suppose that's the sort of thinking behind many of the seemingly poor choices that people make and the mainstay of vices like smoking, alcohol consumption, coffee, drugs and other vices, especially physically addictive ones. "I know it's wrong but I like it so I'm going to do it anyway even if it kills me or others". I think there are always going to be people who are not going to change. Fortunately there are many that do eventually realise the absurdity of their behaviours and are willing to change, however it is currently much easier to carry on doing what the majority are doing and there's not much of a motivation to go "against the grain". Safety in numbers.

For inspiration I look to the people who persisted in doing what they thought was right even if it cost them their lives. Without these courageous pioneers, slavery and apartheid might still be widespread, being gay would still be a crime, and it would still be ok to discriminate against women and beat your wives if they don't behave. The places in the world where those things still happen are considered backwards, and sometime in the future (perhaps the very distant future) humanity will look back at some of our present behaviours, including the non obligate meat eating, and think them primitive and backwards.

You say you don't care "how they chose to live", and that's fair enough, each to their own as they say. However it would appear that there are quite a few that do care how vegans live, enough to at least pass comment or criticize, which is one of the reasons that this subject is always so well attended by members of the meat eating majority ready to have a pop.

My choice might not be one you'd make, but it's far from absurd; it's carefully considered and entirely rational.

People ascribe their own values to risk and reward, such that you can't really objectively describe the sort of things you're referring to as poor choices. Yes, alcohol may shorten my life, but that's a price I'm happy to pay for the pleasure it gives me.

And some of what makes people have a pop at vegans isn't their choice of diet, but (in some cases) their attitude.

 

[Athos]

Veganism is healthier - are you sure? What does healthier mean? Can you find anyone comparing vegans with meat/fish/dairy eaters that takes account of other life-style factors? I'm genuinely interested, because the Seventh Day Adventist studies (which are conducted on a population with a reasonably similar lifestyle) appear to show that the people eating some fish do better than the vegans. There are no health benefits to avoiding honey or leather shoes that I have ever heard of.
Growing plants is not necessarily less environmentally destructive than raising meat animals - there are different ways to do both of those things. There must be vegans and vegetarians around who daily consume produce from vast monocultures, if only on cost grounds.
AS I understand it, veganism is not about avoiding causing suffering to animals but rather concentrates on not using animals (or exploiting them to use the more emotionally-loaded, preferred term); if you only talk about meat/fish/eggs you can argue that it's the same thing, as long as you accept that death always involves suffering. But honey is also verboten, as is eating the eggs of rescued battery hens although both bees and rescue hens appear to enjoy a perfectly happy existence.

Of course, it depends how you do it. But I find it hard to believe that, taking both at their best, veganism wouldn't be less environmentally damaging, and more healthy. Though, as you say, I can't prove that because I'm not sure anyone can control for other factors to create a reliable data set.

 

[tonysingh]

52 pages of people arguing over something as inconsequential as dietary choices. Good job!

 

[A380]

You've got kids, right? Is that what you'd say to them if they asked them why you kept eating meat even though you knew it was damaging the environment? "So what"?

Think I'm going to have to hide this thread.

Well, by far, by far, the best thing any individual can do to minimise their environmental impact is not have children.

 

[Athos]

... sometime in the future (perhaps the very distant future) humanity will look back at some of our present behaviours, including the non obligate meat eating, and think them primitive and backwards.

And? Why do you care? Every period will look backwards to a more advanced period, almost by definition. The idea that someone on a hoverboard in 300 years time will think me primitive because I eat meat is probably the weakest argument I've heard against so doing.

 

[innit]

I think I'd reply that we all do things that damage the environment, like flying or using a car. And that, on balance, the pleasure I get from eating meat outweighs the displeasure of knowing the effects of that choice.

I don't do either of those anymore either, and as you doubtless know you may have to bear the displeasure of the consequences of your choices but it's those in poorer parts of the world and those younger than us, including our kids and grandkids, who will really bear those consequences.

But so what.

 

[Athos]

I don't do either of those anymore either, and as you doubtless know you may have to bear the displeasure of the consequences of your choices but it's those in poorer parts of the world and those younger than us, including our kids and grandkids, who will really bear those consequences.

But so what.

Ok, what about your use of fossil fuels in other ways?

Do you have kids, by the way?

 

[ddraig]

back to hypocrisy hunting!! great

 

[Spymaster]

back to hypocrisy hunting!! great

Well you call it hypocrisy hunting but it's valid, isn't it? You can't just do away with an argument because it doesn't suit you.

If the discussion is about the environment and my opponent is impacting the environment as much, more, or almost as much as me overall, but in different ways, they're on dodgy ground. That's not hypocrisy hunting.

The kids thing is massive.

 

[ddraig]

Well you call it hypocrisy hunting but it's valid, isn't it? You can't just do away with an argument because it doesn't suit you.

If the discussion is about the environment and my opponent is impacting the environment as much or almost as much as me, but in different ways, they're on dodgy ground. That's not hypocrisy hunting.

it is hypocrisy hunting, it's looking for something anything to prove that the vegan is "bad"/makes damaging choices in some other area of their life to make the carnist feel better about their choices and say "ner, see, you're not perfect" when the vegan isn't even claiming they are. Also the carnist probably makes many many other choices and actions that are also "bad" like most of us.
you said it yourself "my opponent is impacting the environment as much or almost as much as me, but in different ways, they're on dodgy ground"
it's a competition and your opponent must be discredited / shown up
and it's boring

 

[Athos]

I'm not interested in hunting hypocrisy in vegans; I have no beef with them (pun intended) - I'd rather there were more.

I'm just trying to point out that it's not quite as binary as some would suggest. Yes, I willingly choose a lifestyle which is less morally defensible, but, in reality, in the developed world, we all do that.

It's just that some vegans choose to draw the line about where those choices should be condemned in a self-serving way, whilst pretending its objective.

 

[ddraig]

I'm not interested in hunting hypocrisy in vegans; I have no beef with them (pun intended) - I'd rather there were more.

I'm just trying to point out that it's not quite as binary as some would suggest. Yes, I willingly choose a lifestyle which is less morally defensible, but, in reality, in the developed world, we all do that.

It's just that some vegans choose to draw the line about where those choices should be condemned in a self-serving way, whilst pretending its objective.

who here is suggesting it's totally binary?
why should people drawing their own line and having to defend it constantly be condemned?

 

[Athos]

I'm not condemning anyone. But I do think it'd be more honest for those who draw the line just short of their own moral failings to recognise that choice as self-serving sanctimony.

 

[Pickman's model]

52 pages of people arguing over something as inconsequential as dietary choices. Good job!

Cheese and beans simultaneous, chuck

 

[gentlegreen]

52 pages of people arguing over something as inconsequential as dietary choices. Good job!

I suppose it might be seen that way if your intention is to live fast and die young ...

 

[littlebabyjesus]

back to hypocrisy hunting!! great

What exactly do you think you've been doing on this thread?

 

[rubbershoes]

who here is suggesting it's totally binary?
why should people drawing their own line and having to defend it constantly be condemned?

So meat eaters drawing the line that allows meat eating shouldn't be condemned. Isn't that what the thread is about

 

[Casually Red]

For the record I don't believe a fucking word out of them about either the environment or health . No matter how much propaganda they bash out . I'm not giving them an inch . And I'm not saying that piss taking either . They get way too much of a free ride on their claims . I don't trust them , don't believe them . It's an ideological position built around an eating disorder .