Do angry vegans turn you against going vegan?

[Pickman's model]

Yep, the guilt's killing me! The week before last I shot 7 pheasants and 14 partridge. Dunno how I'm going to live with myself. Break out the sackcloth and ashes.

and the rest, pa, tell them the rest.

the complete bag:

7 pheasants
14 partridge
2 dogs
4 beaters
1 phone box
and a teddy bear named aloysius

 

[veganomics]

Only peace on our table
We just feeling quite grateful
Plate full of vegetables
No waste no hate no pain at all
We connect with the empathy
More plants, more energy
And yes we got protein, see through the smokescreen
Vegan is exactly what we're meant to be
Animals are not here to be exploited
We should think about our choices
They say we always preach but we only want to teach
And we have to speak up for the voiceless
They trust us, we betray them
How would you like a taste
Of a lifetime spent in cages
Then an ending filled with pain
So can't we change, yeah can we not change
To only eat fruit & veg & grains
You don't really need to eat that meat
Just know that the truth would set you free
Cause we can't breathe when there's no trees
When there's no fish left in the seas
Don't pay for destruction, fight the corruption
Of greedy industries of disease
Compassion to action, we just make that happen
Meat, eggs and dairy declined, we keep our values aligned
Inspired by these vegans who choose love every single time that they're eating
If you hold the truth you can never be defeated
If you hold the truth you can never be defeated

James Aspey: "We need to put ourselves in the animals position, speak up for animals the way you would want to be spoken for if it was you in their situation."

No silence this year activism on the rise
We hear these animals cry
Look into their eyes and you might think twice
Look into your heart and you might ask why?
No single animal deserves any suffering, that's not right
And all these screens they poison our minds with conditioning, it's all lies
No time now for excuses
Go vegan and feel lucid, this year
We bring about revolution, this year
Have to fight the pollution, this year
Everybody to be thriving
Not killing the environment
Because there's only one planet and it has to be saved
And that starts on your plate

James Aspey: "Because this is not some mundane diet choice. This is the difference between enslavement and freedom, between torture and peace, between death and life."

I'm not really into rap but thought that was quite good.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

If everyone ate vegan for three days a week, that would be the equivalent of half the population going vegan. A much more realistic goal than trying to get half the population to go vegan.

But the absolutist positioning of some vegans, for whom this is a black and white ethical issue, I believe prevents many people from exploring the possibilities of a partial transition to veganism - a failure which is ultimately resulting in more animal death rather than less.

Meat production and consumption on a global scale has gone through the roof in the last 40 years and continues to rise. There is no revolution happening towards veganism on a global scale, if anything the direct opposite.

The Welsh bloke off Googlebox recently provided a perfect example of how the effects of an 'all or nothing' attitude of some extremist vegans can actually prevent behaviour change... He was watching a show about veggie food, and he said: "I could do that, go veggie, that's an idea!"

Then he says... "Oh, but I do love beef stew. Oh well scrap that then, never going to work..."

And so the idea of perhaps eschewing meat for half the week just disappeared. Perhaps the single most important act he could have done for his health and that of the planet was thrown away, because he felt he couldn't switch partially - it had to be completely or wasn't worth it, wasn't possible, wasn't kosher.

It's the extreme positioning of meat vs veganism that I think contributes to the entrenched habits that see us eat meat morning, noon and night, far too much, too often and too cheap. By welcoming each and every instance of non-meat consumption as a victory and a step in the right direction, we could begin to have an impact.

By guilt-tripping people, using revulsion tactics and taking the moral high-ground, some (no doubt well-meaning) vegans are harming their own cause by alienating the very people they COULD be gently and gradually winning over.

I ate meat once this week, and it was a wild Highland venison steak that was shot on a hillside one morning. I find that falls comfortably within my own ethical parameters, and means I ate veggie for 95% of the week... Clearly not perfect, or indeed anywhere near enough for some vegan activists, but infinitely less damaging than a typical UK meat-eaters diet. It's called compromise, and is a useful tool for social change.

Telling someone what to put in their own mouth to keep themselves alive is fraught with difficulties and bound to fail in most instances. If these kinds of vegans understood humans as well as they profess to understand the other animals, they would get further in their quest, imo, and we would all be better off for it.

There is a section of the animal rights movement - known as 'reducitarians' - who encourage the reduction of animal products rather than boycotting them, largely for the reasons you have given. However, it is an empirical question as to which approach is more effective and I am not aware of any reliable studies on this matter.

One concern with reducitarianism is that it does not challenge the acceptability of inflicting violence against animals, it only calls for its reduction. Some think that for veganism to be taken seriously as an ethical position it has to challenge the way we view animals and their moral status in society. Other anti-violence campaigns do not tend to argue for the reduction of violence but rather for the abolition of violent practices and institutions even though, in reality they know such practices will never be fully eliminated. Sometimes taking an 'absolutist' stance can be more effective than adopting a more moderate position.

That said, given the scale of extreme and systematic human violence against the other animals, and how deeply entrenched these practices are, I am not adverse to adopting pragmatic advocacy strategies. I encourage people to eliminate animal products from their diets at a pace that they find sustainable, but I always make clear that I believe the end goal must be veganism. I have also found vegan mentoring programs to be very effective. I have assisted a number of people to go vegan: giving them tips, going shopping with them, sending them recipes and so forth. They have all told me that, with a little support and some commitment, they have found veganism is easy and felt much better - both in terms of their conscience and health - for having adopted it.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

There is a section of the animal rights movement - known as 'reducitarians' - who encourage the reduction of animal products rather than boycotting them, largely for the reasons you have given. However, it is an empirical question as to which approach is more effective and I am not aware of any reliable studies on this matter.

One concern with reducitarianism is that it does not challenge the acceptability of inflicting violence against animals, it only calls for its reduction. Some think that for veganism to be taken seriously as an ethical position it has to challenge the way we view animals and their moral status in society. Other anti-violence campaigns do not tend to argue for the reduction of violence but rather for the abolition of violent practices and institutions even though, in reality they know such practices will never be fully eliminated. Sometimes taking an 'absolutist' stance can be more effective than adopting a more moderate position.

That said, given the scale of extreme and systematic human violence against the other animals, and how deeply entrenched these practices are, I am not adverse to adopting pragmatic advocacy strategies. I encourage people to eliminate animal products from their diets at a pace that they find sustainable, but I always make clear that I believe the end goal must be veganism. I have also found vegan mentoring programs to be very effective. I have assisted a number of people to go vegan: giving them tips, going shopping with them, sending them recipes and so forth. They have all told me that, with a little support and some commitment, they have found veganism is easy and felt much better - both in terms of their conscience and health - for having adopted it.

See ddraig - that’s how to answer things like that. Give it a try sometime.

 

[ddraig]

See ddraig - that’s how to answer things like that. Give it a try sometime.

don't tell me how to post
or by the same token try posting differently yourself with less of the "normal" and crying because a festy went vegi etc etc

 

[Spymaster]

don't tell me how to post

You do make me laugh fella.

 

[ddraig]

The idea of tofu and seaweed being served as an alternative to fish and chips genuinely makes me angry

Make all the arguments about veganism you want - talk about animal rights, environmental impact, health, whatever the fuck you like. Stick to arguments that are credible. But by the very definition of what you're doing you are making meals less interesting and restricting tastes available to you, so don't bloody well come out with crap along the lines of "oh but the food is just as good". Because it isn't.

You make fish and chips with a fucking fish. There's a clue in the name. Do it right and even the chips are a vegan no go area.

try a different reaction that this

 

[ddraig]

My personal arguments for eating meat:

1 - I enjoy it
2 - That's it

or this

 

[ddraig]

Can we just call meat eaters "normal" instead?

or this
want anymore?

 

[PaoloSanchez]

There is a section of the animal rights movement - known as 'reducitarians' - who encourage the reduction of animal products rather than boycotting them, largely for the reasons you have given. However, it is an empirical question as to which approach is more effective and I am not aware of any reliable studies on this matter.

I only became aware of the term "reducitarianism" after seeing this TED talk earlier this year.

One concern with reducitarianism is that it does not challenge the acceptability of inflicting violence against animals, it only calls for its reduction. Some think that for veganism to be taken seriously as an ethical position it has to challenge the way we view animals and their moral status in society. Other anti-violence campaigns do not tend to argue for the reduction of violence but rather for the abolition of violent practices and institutions even though, in reality they know such practices will never be fully eliminated. Sometimes taking an 'absolutist' stance can be more effective than adopting a more moderate position.

I do find it a little bit odd that people are willing to accept a reduced amount of torture,violence and slaughter are seen as moderate when compared to people who on principle don't accept any amount of unnecessary slaughter.

That said, given the scale of extreme and systematic human violence against the other animals, and how deeply entrenched these practices are, I am not adverse to adopting pragmatic advocacy strategies. I encourage people to eliminate animal products from their diets at a pace that they find sustainable, but I always make clear that I believe the end goal must be veganism.

Indeed, it's a bit like alcohol prohibition, unrealistic to expect everybody to adopt it at a practical level, however I don't think there's anything wrong with advocating the ethical principle which is at the heart of veganism. I don't believe that expressing those opinions should be off putting. I try not to tell people what they should do however if I'm asked why I've made certain choices, I will explain. Sometimes there is genuine curiosity, sometimes indifference and sometimes the response is hostile and defensive.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

or this

I’d say that’s as honest a view on meat eating as you’ll find, no?

 

[Wookey]

There is a section of the animal rights movement - known as 'reducitarians' - who encourage the reduction of animal products rather than boycotting them, largely for the reasons you have given. However, it is an empirical question as to which approach is more effective and I am not aware of any reliable studies on this matter.

One concern with reducitarianism is that it does not challenge the acceptability of inflicting violence against animals, it only calls for its reduction. Some think that for veganism to be taken seriously as an ethical position it has to challenge the way we view animals and their moral status in society. Other anti-violence campaigns do not tend to argue for the reduction of violence but rather for the abolition of violent practices and institutions even though, in reality they know such practices will never be fully eliminated. Sometimes taking an 'absolutist' stance can be more effective than adopting a more moderate position.

That said, given the scale of extreme and systematic human violence against the other animals, and how deeply entrenched these practices are, I am not adverse to adopting pragmatic advocacy strategies. I encourage people to eliminate animal products from their diets at a pace that they find sustainable, but I always make clear that I believe the end goal must be veganism. I have also found vegan mentoring programs to be very effective. I have assisted a number of people to go vegan: giving them tips, going shopping with them, sending them recipes and so forth. They have all told me that, with a little support and some commitment, they have found veganism is easy and felt much better - both in terms of their conscience and health - for having adopted it.

Jeff, thanks for your thoughtful reply!

I imagine a very considerable percentage of meat-eaters will never give up their animal - based diets because they love eating meat, they're culturally wedded to it, and they see it as natural as breathing.

We also have a percentage of poor rural dwellers (about 70% of 880million people) who rely on their livestock for their food security - that's about 650million people who have no alternative to eating meat, because they don't live near a Lidl with three types of veggie sausage on offer.

So between the ones who won't go vegan, and the ones who cannot because of their life situation, you have the ones who could and would. It's here that change could be made, potentially. But as I mentioned, more pork and more chicken is eaten now than last year, but not as much as next year...

China hasn't even reached its peak meat consumption yet...how do we even start to convince them that animals have feelings?

Edit: I don't do maths or percentages so my workings out might be wrong...

 

[spanglechick]

There is a section of the animal rights movement - known as 'reducitarians' - who encourage the reduction of animal products rather than boycotting them, largely for the reasons you have given. However, it is an empirical question as to which approach is more effective and I am not aware of any reliable studies on this matter.

One concern with reducitarianism is that it does not challenge the acceptability of inflicting violence against animals, it only calls for its reduction. Some think that for veganism to be taken seriously as an ethical position it has to challenge the way we view animals and their moral status in society. Other anti-violence campaigns do not tend to argue for the reduction of violence but rather for the abolition of violent practices and institutions even though, in reality they know such practices will never be fully eliminated. Sometimes taking an 'absolutist' stance can be more effective than adopting a more moderate position.

That said, given the scale of extreme and systematic human violence against the other animals, and how deeply entrenched these practices are, I am not adverse to adopting pragmatic advocacy strategies. I encourage people to eliminate animal products from their diets at a pace that they find sustainable, but I always make clear that I believe the end goal must be veganism. I have also found vegan mentoring programs to be very effective. I have assisted a number of people to go vegan: giving them tips, going shopping with them, sending them recipes and so forth. They have all told me that, with a little support and some commitment, they have found veganism is easy and felt much better - both in terms of their conscience and health - for having adopted it.

A couple of responses to this excellent post.


Firstly, harm reduction strategies exist in a number of fields. Hitting children would be one (banned in schools, then guidelines on types of hitting that is deemed acceptable), another would be the gradual whittling away of which crimes invoked capital punishment. In the other side of the political spectrum, those who seek to ban abortion often caveat with allowing it when there has been rape/incest... there are other examples. And the thing they all have in common is that these issues don't have anything like a cultural consensus. Campaigns against knife crime or bullying or DV can be absolutist because everyone bar the real pond scum knows those thing are bad.

The other thing is, there are many excellent arguments for veganism that are nothing to do with believing eating animal products is unethical. I don't feel uncomfortable with my position in the food chain, but I would like to be healthier and I'd like to be responsible for less environmental damage. So for me, being encouraged to reduce my meat- eating by even a quarter seems like a really impactful thing to aspire to. If four people achieve that, while l having no fundamental issues with eating animals, that's just as good as one person turning vegan 100%. There's no point saying to those people that for you the end goal has to be absolute, because that only makes sense to people who share those ethics.

 

[SaskiaJayne]

On topic, because it's probably vegan but uninspiring. In my ongoing no waste project I'm making some sort of pasta dinner today with corgette, onions, carrots stirfried with herbs, spices tin of kidney beans & tom puree after that my cupboard is bare. That will clear me out in more ways than one & force me to go to Lidls afterwards.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

A couple of responses to this excellent post.


Firstly, harm reduction strategies exist in a number of fields. Hitting children would be one (banned in schools, then guidelines on types of hitting that is deemed acceptable), another would be the gradual whittling away of which crimes invoked capital punishment. In the other side of the political spectrum, those who seek to ban abortion often caveat with allowing it when there has been rape/incest... there are other examples. And the thing they all have in common is that these issues don't have anything like a cultural consensus. Campaigns against knife crime or bullying or DV can be absolutist because everyone bar the real pond scum knows those thing are bad.

Those are good examples. I am not adverse to engaging in single issue campaigns of that nature in the animal context. As I said to LBJ earlier in the thread, I'm all in favour of campaigning against things like 'the badger cull, fox hunting, vivisection, wild animal circuses' as well 'trying to get cruel practices banned, such as farrowing crates or mutilations without anaesthesia'.

Ultimately though, these examples, and the ones you give, are campaigns around repealing laws or banning existing practices. What we are talking about in the vegan context is encouraging people to change their behaviour. In the corporal punishment example it would be something like requesting teachers to reduce caning students by 25% rather than trying to persuade them never to engage in caning because caning is wrong. The analogy obviously isn't a perfect one but it does highlight what I find wrong with reducetarianism as an end in itself rather than a means to the end of veganism: it does not challenge the acceptability of inflicting needless violence against animals, it only says we should do it less. One of my fears is that precisely because it does not fundamentally challenge violence against animals, it might actually be a counter-productive strategy, at least in the long term, to the goal of trying to promote a more just world for animals.

The other thing is, there are many excellent arguments for veganism that are nothing to do with believing eating animal products is unethical. I don't feel uncomfortable with my position in the food chain, but I would like to be healthier and I'd like to be responsible for less environmental damage. So for me, being encouraged to reduce my meat- eating by even a quarter seems like a really impactful thing to aspire to. If four people achieve that, while l having no fundamental issues with eating animals, that's just as good as one person turning vegan 100%. There's no point saying to those people that for you the end goal has to be absolute, because that only makes sense to people who share those ethics.

There are already lots of nutritionists and environmentalists encouraging a reduction in the consumption of animal products for those reasons. And if people choose to consume less animals then I'm happy about that. But what I'm concerned with is animal rights: that's what matters to me. And promoting animal rights means challenging people's assumptions about the acceptability of inflicting or supporting needless violence against animals.

You seem to be suggesting that ethical argumentation is pointless, but I disagree. After all, it convinced me to go vegan and it has encouraged many others to do so too, and although the numbers are still very small, they are increasing at a rapid rate, especially amongst younger people. And, from the research I have seen, the reason why most people adopt a vegan diet is for animal-centred ethical reasons.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

Jeff, thanks for your thoughtful reply!

I imagine a very considerable percentage of meat-eaters will never give up their animal - based diets because they love eating meat, they're culturally wedded to it, and they see it as natural as breathing.

We also have a percentage of poor rural dwellers (about 70% of 880million people) who rely on their livestock for their food security - that's about 650million people who have no alternative to eating meat, because they don't live near a Lidl with three types of veggie sausage on offer.

So between the ones who won't go vegan, and the ones who cannot because of their life situation, you have the ones who could and would. It's here that change could be made, potentially. But as I mentioned, more pork and more chicken is eaten now than last year, but not as much as next year...

China hasn't even reached its peak meat consumption yet...how do we even start to convince them that animals have feelings?

Edit: I don't do maths or percentages so my workings out might be wrong...

Culture changes. Bull baiting and cock fighting were fairly popular at one time. Although animal product consumption is largely accepted now, I suspect that in the future it will become far more controversial (for a whole variety of reasons).

As for the rural poor (i'm not sure what part of the world you are referring to there) and China, these evidently are not the people I am targeting my advocacy towards! But even the Chinese government are concerned about meat consumption and the UN FAO have been saying for over a decade now that the meat consumption habits of the West are undermining the food security of the global poor.

 

[Yossarian]

I saw some idiot wearing this shirt yesterday, think it may have inspired me to get back on the vegan wagon.



Mind you, it was at an agricultural show so I guess a certain amount of pro-meat sentiment was inevitable.

 

[gentlegreen]

I encountered a woman on youtube the other day who literally ate no plant material that hadn't been converted to an animal product - I thought you needed at least 500kcals of carbs to stay alive...
She maintained her health had never been better (she looked like a dead woman walking)
I dread to think what her bathroom smells like ...

 

[gentlegreen]

I saw some idiot wearing this shirt yesterday, think it may have inspired me to get back on the vegan wagon.

View attachment 120023

Mind you, it was at an agricultural show so I guess a certain amount of pro-meat sentiment was inevitable.

gathering veggies takes a lot of skill - and fire is just as important for veggy preparation.

 

[PaoloSanchez]

Responding to some of the recent points/criticisms in this thread...

1. Die hard ,eat eaters ain't gonna change. Well even if this is true it's not really my concern. I don't see it as my job to convert anybody. I'll share whatever information that I have with anyone who may be interested then it's up to them what they do. (The futility of veganism - The world won’t go vegan – 55:16)

2. Rural poor relying on livestock. This is a bit like the "what about the Inuit/tribal peoples..." argument. Again, not really a concern of mine and not within my sphere of influence. Rural poor and tribal people are most likely not killing as many animals as us modern folk do with or industrialised techniques. This is another one of those "appeals to necessity" fallacies. (Isolated tribes need to eat animals – 11:40)

3. The "woulds and coulds", potential vegans. Well in the west it would appear that vegan activists, bloggers and vloggers have been increasingly effective in getting the vegan message across and more "woulds and coulds" are being exposed to good quality information. The momentum is building nicely.

4. Global meat consumption increasing because China. I've had this stat thrown at me quite a few times recently, almost as if it's something to gloat about. Well, that increase is largely due to the heavy widespread meat consumption in China that is a relatively recent phenomenon assisted by the improved economic conditions. This has changed the status of meat from a luxury item that most Chinese could not regularly afford to a staple and has been fuelled by rising incomes and the adoption of (crappy?) western diet culture. Even with that growth, the average Chinese person consumes about half as much meat per year as the average Australian. There are concerns that if China's meat consumption were to reach western levels it would have dire environmental consequences. Herein lies an opportunity. It is possible that China's meat consumption could be "helped" to peak early and that attitudes take on more of a sensible and compassionate bias as they have already started to in some western countries and in Israel. Using the global reach of social media it could well be possible to change attitudes in China so that they change their course a lot quicker and earlier than happened in the west.

5. Vegan absolutism ain't going to work. Well as I said earlier, I don't feel the need to apologise for believing that it is wrong to kill animals unnecessarily. I don't believe that it is an extremist position at all. If others believe that it is ok to kill animals but would prefer to reduce the amount of killing then of course less killing is going to be better, but that still doesn't change the underlying principle.

6. If vegans stopped talking about the ethical side then more people might be persuaded to change. Well I disagree with this one. I believe the change is happening anyway and the main reason imo is that, similar to other justice movements, when truly compassionate people are exposed to injustices and it is explained to them they cannot help but see that it is wrong. Of course there will be those that dig their heels in and want to stick to their well established habits, a bit like Eugene Terreblanche at the end of apartheid, however as society evolves they will become relics of a bygone era. (hopefully)

 

[PaoloSanchez]

 

[Humirax]

There's an argument between vegans that seems to be gathering pace. Some vegans claim that you can be vegan and eat honey, drink beer with fish bladder in it... Other vegans think that you have to be 100% vegan or get to f***. Those in the latter group tend to be quite militant/vegans.

These angry vegans clearly haven't put me off because I've recently gone vegan. I've been vegan for atleast a couple of months now and it was easier than I thought to change my diet. I thought I would miss my dairy, such as my butter on toast in the morning, and my dairy milk- but I really didn't, it took abit of time though to totally change but I wouldn't call it 'tough' or 'hard'. This, ofcourse, has been made easier by the improvement of vegan food, even vegan cheese, and there are a whole variety of decent alternatives to dairy now, and meat aswell.

As for this discussion in the vegan 'movement' you are referring to, I can't be in either category because I do believe that if you, for example, drink non-vegan beer etc then you are not vegan. However, being angry and tetchy and over emotional with people is just going to backfire and put people off and I firmly believe that using logical arguments (rather than emotional ones) is best. That said I still respect passion, but you can be passionate but logical.

I actually knew a vegan from years ago who was what I would describe as very dogmatic and she really did put me off of veganism at the time, at the time I was vegetarian. Now, I'm with people who have convinced me of the logical arguments and with the right sort of encouragement I've seen sense and made the change and would certainly say I feel healthier, this isn't just a feeling though- I've actually lost a bit of weight (I am rather tubsy, and due to a couple of health conditions I have, need to lose weight). I still enjoy my food though and eat really well and I and my girlfriend make sure we get the nutrition we need without any bother, the idea that it's difficult to be vegan is just a misconception.

I certainly enjoy drinking 'milk' that does not contain hormones, puss and blood that I am not supposed to consume and I like the fact that I am not contributing to the disgusting mass cruelty and murder of animals and the destruction of the environment.

 

[ddraig]

Wish I could love your post @Humiax

 

[veganomics]

What the hell did you just make me listen to. Now I cannot unhear it. I think my ears are bleeding.

Looks like you found that angry vegan.

 

[extra dry]

Say what now?

'Fish bladder beer'...That would make most people upset..

 

[extra dry]

I am put off being a vegan because I like to eat animal products. The opinions and attitudes of vegans doesn't have an impact on me.

Can I shock you..I like cheese.

 

[veganomics]

4. Global meat consumption increasing because China. I've had this stat thrown at me quite a few times recently, almost as if it's something to gloat about. Well, that increase is largely due to the heavy widespread meat consumption in China that is a relatively recent phenomenon assisted by the improved economic conditions. This has changed the status of meat from a luxury item that most Chinese could not regularly afford to a staple and has been fuelled by rising incomes and the adoption of (crappy?) western diet culture. Even with that growth, the average Chinese person consumes about half as much meat per year as the average Australian. There are concerns that if China's meat consumption were to reach western levels it would have dire environmental consequences. Herein lies an opportunity. It is possible that China's meat consumption could be "helped" to peak early and that attitudes take on more of a sensible and compassionate bias as they have already started to in some western countries and in Israel. Using the global reach of social media it could well be possible to change attitudes in China so that they change their course a lot quicker and earlier than happened in the west.

China and India, the two most populous countries, will be influential in number of ways and the directions they take will have global environmental consequences. I agree with you in that there is an opportunity for those two countries and other developing countries to leapfrog the developed countries and to learn from some of the mistakes made in the western countries. This has already been identified in terms of things like pollution from factories and cars and also carbon emissions. The Chinese government plans to try and cut meat consumption by 50%. It will be interesting to see if they can manage to achieve those targets and would be a step in the right direction. I'm not sure what is happening in India with regards to meat consumption. I know that India has the largest vegetarian population, however my understanding is that quite a lot of dairy is consumed in India. I am cautiously optimistic these countries will avoid some of the worst excesses of the west and will eventually even overtake, lead the way and become pioneering plant based nations.

 

[NoXion]

'Fish bladder beer'...That would make most people upset..

Would it really? When I found out about where isinglass came from, my reaction was "meh, so what?" I already knew there was a particular red food colouring (cochineal) derived from crushed bugs, and that didn't bother me.

The sort of person who would be disgusted or disturbed by discovering any of that about their food should perhaps remain entirely in ignorance about how any of their food is made these days. Like how there is actually a legally allowed proportion of insect parts per weight unit of flour.

Which means that pretty much any bread product isn't vegan.

 

[PaoloSanchez]

What the hell did you just make me listen to. Now I cannot unhear it. I think my ears are bleeding.

Looks like you found that angry vegan.

lol, it's only a bit of fun. My daughter informed me that it is inspired by this...

...not really my kind of music either tbh. I just like the bloke sitting behind the singer with the cat in his lap.

 

[AnnaKarpik]

<snip>
I'm not sure what is happening in India with regards to meat consumption. I know that India has the largest vegetarian population, however my understanding is that quite a lot of dairy is consumed in India. I am cautiously optimistic these countries will avoid some of the worst excesses of the west and will eventually even overtake, lead the way and become pioneering plant based nations.

I can't remember where I read or heard about this, but India - allegedly - is the one country where rising wealth has not led to increasing meat consumption. Or not yet, anyway.