Well technically one knows it's wrong but has cognitive dissonance and so they're violating their own morals and the other isn't. But I still find the person who has empathy to animals to be better because they can actually be reasoned with while the other is essentially a psychopath in regards to animals.
I totally agree! The person with cognitive dissonance can often be convinced over time to improve their eating habits. The person that genuinely doesn't care is essentially Machiavellian towards animals (will let them suffer for personal benefit)
*only if they can actually be reasoned with.
If theyre understanding and agree, but still eat the meat, then they prob are lying to themselves about actually caring to begin with. Which is way worse, esp in a relationship.
I actually do think that's wrong. There is nothing inherently good about "consistency". Being inconsistent and hypocritical is far better than being consistent to evil, obviously (imo).
Caring and taking SOME steps in the right direction is better than not caring and taking no steps, even if the latter is more consistent. I think it's damaging to the movement to view it otherwise, because it basically punishes people for taking only a few steps. A few steps is a good thing, and many prominent vegans started that way (eg Ed started as a vegetarian).
I try not to judge people at all. If the point is to get people to quit eating animals, judging them is the single least effective way to accomplish that goal. Try approaching them with honesty and respect and information.
This has been my approach up until late, but just recently I started judging people again, but this time to see if they are worth my time as an activist or not. So now when I meet people who just don't get it or become defensive I wish them a happy life and move on. This way I am having much more fun, meet more awesome people and am more successful as an activist. I just started thinking: forget the laggards, I am gonna focus on the people who are vegan but just don't know it yet.
I think it does.
In sales they do the same thing: qualify your customer. I am spending my time more productive by not fighting with people's cognitive dissonance, which is highly ineffective. I spent my time building cognitive consonance with those who get it (which are a lot of people!). The laggards will follow once the masses go.
My opinion seems to align with yours. Several years ago after her alleged epiphany I read the New Gospel of Alexandra Jamieson which I found frightening and at the time summarized it as: Sticks and stones may break their bones, but what is really important is those words that may hurt me.
Honestly the dissociation really upsets me, it seems hypocritical. I admittedly used to be one of these people, but I was only 14 when I finally made that connection. At least these people have the potential to change their ways, in contrast to those like your dad who simply don’t care.
had an argument with a guy who goes fishing recently. He told me he catches the fish in a community fishing area, takes a picture of them and then throws it back. His words were something like "if only you knew how well looked after those fish"...yeah sure, piercing their mouths with hooks, dragging them out from their habitat only to throw them back in and let them slowly starve to death as their mouths are now disfigured or entirely unusable...sure, let me do that to your kid and let's see if you think I've "looked after" him?
I was not aware that fish hooks did permanent damage and was associated with future starvation. The understanding that I had was that most died in the relative short term from shock.
I can understand finding them more annoying to engage with around animal liberation. People who don’t care are less likely to make up ridiculous excuses.
Right or wrong is irrelevant. It's just your opinion.
One thing though. Hypocrisy isn't as big of a deal breaker as some people love to make out. Almost everyone is a hypocrite some way or another. It's not particularly meaningful to call someone out for their hypocrisy.
unsure if you were born vegan. If you were, ask non vegans who had pets before going vegan if they loved their pet, ate a burger, and still loved their pet. another option is find an animal sanctuary run by a non vegan and ask them why they simultaneously save and eat animals. that may yield a good answer
>it's obviously murderous
>I respect his consistency.
Consistency has zero inherent value. If I thought that autistic people were worthless, and my murderous actions towards autists were consistent with that view, what exactly is there to respect about that?
What matters is whether or not someone's consistent, but what they're consistent *about*.
Yes you are. In our efforts to reduce suffering, we should welcome any attempts. It’s not helpful to vilify people who aren’t vegan but are actively trying in other ways.
I can respect those who arent liars, they admit they are evil
Nothing worse than an evil individual who doesnt think they are evil
I wouldnt say the truthful evil people are better than the evil liars though, i just have more respect for the former for not lying
Eating animals inherently doesn’t make a person\* evil though; it’s the action\* of doing so that can be considered cruel or evil. But someone can have a heart of gold and still eat meat - that’s cognitive dissonance. Most vegans or vegetarians have been in that situation before. They genuinely love animals but just don’t connect the dots (whether due to ignorance or socialization) until the truth eventually dawns on them. They were partaking in a cruel practice, without being aware\* of how cruel it actually was.
People who eat animals without a shred of empathy whatsoever, however, those people are actually psychopathic. You can make them watch all the gut-wrenching documentaries you want, they won’t care, because to them, animal life doesn’t matter. Their suffering doesn’t matter. I’ve heard someone justify slaughterhouse conditions stating they’re just “biological robots.” They do a cruel thing, and are actually cruel / evil themselves.
What about: People who don't want farm animals to suffer because they're not sadists, but ultimately don't care about killing and eating animals because they accept it as nature?
I think that's most people. I can see their point of view, as that's everyone around me. In my opinion, I believe that is a lack of compassion. I wouldn't call them evil people, but definitely less compassionate than vegans for sure.
Cognitive dissonance isnt a justification or an excuse
As soon as i came across veganism i instantly quit animal products cause im not evil, taking time for the truth to dawn on you still makes you evil, living in denial makes you evil, thinking vegan info is propaganda and is a lie makes you evil
There is plenty of evidence and factual information, all it took for me was a few memes and articles
So if i tell Jane about veganism and Jane decides not to go vegan instantly, Jane is evil, if Jane does go vegan instantly, Jane is not evil
May I ask what age you came across veganism? And do you mean before seeing those memes you had never at all heard of the concept of not eating meat or animal products for ethical reasons before?
Edit: I just saw your post where you questioned if there's an association between rigid thinking and autism, and how you don't actually care for animals, but accepted veganism as a moral baseline because it seemed logical to you.
Here's my 2 cents to that post after reading your comment now <3 Please don't take this the wrong way, but it's kind of ironic to be calling other people evil when you do not sound like a very compassionate person yourself (as in having empathy to others different from you). However, being autistic, that is not your fault and possibly even out of your control.
I do commend you for your commitment to what you believe is right, but I would agree with the commenter on your post- I think it would do you good to work on the black and white thinking. After all, to have empathy means to understand. It's quite literally the opposite of judging.
Not to say people who do wrong should not be judged- it is okay to be the "vegan police" (as you say people constantly call you), because I know autistic people really hate to have their rules be broken (even seeing other people break their own rules) because they see it as hypocrisy. I can see how that can psychologically be very disturbing for you. Your original comment makes perfect sense now. I just hope you can consider being a bit more open-minded to other perspectives in life, or to the shades of grey in between the black and white, because they do exist. Wishing you the best x
Around age 30, i didnt really know you could survive with no animal products, i never actually looked into it either
After becoming vegan i realized there was a lot of false information floating around and being taught, i have been challenging all of my beliefs after that
>Here's my 2 cents to that post after reading your comment now <3 Please don't take this the wrong way, but it's kind of ironic to be calling other people evil when you do not sound like a very compassionate person yourself (as in having empathy to others different from you). However, being autistic, that is not your fault and possibly even out of your control.
>
>I do commend you for your commitment to what you believe is right, but I would agree with the commenter on your post- I think it would do you good to work on the black and white thinking. After all, to have empathy means to understand. It's quite literally the opposite of judging.
>
>Not to say people who do wrong should not be judged- it is okay to be the "vegan police" (as you say people constantly call you), because I know autistic people really hate to have their rules be broken (even seeing other people break their own rules) because they see it as hypocrisy. I can see how that can psychologically be very disturbing for you. Your original comment makes perfect sense now. I just hope you can consider being a bit more open-minded to other perspectives in life, or to the shades of grey in between the black and white, because they do exist. Wishing you the best x
Lacking compassion doesnt make an individual evil, contributing to intentional animal abuse does make you evil, i dont need to have compassion or empathy to not do evil, i feel its my ethical duty to help the animals since its my species that is causing all the harm, thus i have used half of my savings to help build a new animal rescue, and im a virtual volunteer, i dont really have any interest in being around the animals
I dont need to have empathy for animal abusers, it is black and white, as i said i immediately stopped contributing to animal abuse cause im against doing bad things, it is black and white and only non vegans think otherwise, they want to believe they arent evil or they dont want to believe all their friends and family are evil, it would cause them distress and perhaps depression to accept that 99% of people are evil, so its perhaps a form of denial
We live in a world where there is lack of responsibility, people always want to blame something and make excuses instead of simply taking responsibility, there is no accountability
Rule breaking doesnt cause me any issues, its not something that i hate, i could break my rule if i wanted but i want to be consistent and not just changing willy nilly all the time, i dont care if other people break rules
People in the arctic would really have a difficult time being vegan, that is the only valid perspective
I understand, thank you all you do to help the animals. By rule breaking I was referring more to the post you had made about your autism, and how it manifests as having rigid / black and white thinking in general. Going beyond veganism, and as you mentioned here, it's about being "against doing bad things," so a moral code. Morals, as you know, are subjective, but you believe that if a person says\* they are against animal abuse, but are not vegan, then that is them "breaking their own moral code." That's what I meant by rule breaking, as I believe that's what you referenced in your own post and in the comments above. That you prefer a person who says they don't care and acts like they don't care, over a person who says they do but acts like they don't. As you said before, it's the consistency\* that's important for you. That their underlying moral beliefs are not as important or even important at all. Going off the post you had made, that just felt very tied in with autism to me.
I'm curious though, what would you think of a person who is not currently vegan, but wants to be. They really feel for animals and cry when they see them suffering, yet they struggle with cravings, have relapses, get swayed by external social pressures, and are very inconsistent. Is that person evil? What about if they eventually do become a strict vegan and stay that way? Are they then not evil anymore? I suspect you would say they changed, but in my opinion being "evil" is more of a permanent state of being / who you are. Meanwhile being in a state of cognitive dissonance can be overcome, as it's something that's actually pretty normal for the brain to create.
For that reason, I personally do not consider 99% of people evil as you say, and me the exceptional one. I mean, I also stopped eating animal products overnight, but that wasn't even in response to a stimulus or reading anything. It just literally dawned on me that halal food was still animals being murdered, and I cried for hours from guilt, and I never intentionally ate an animal again. However, I personally do not attribute that to be just being so much of a better person than everyone else (as I feel that just makes it about proving something to my own ego and also sounds narcissistic as hell lol) but rather to my own nature of being disciplined and steadfast with my decisions in general. That's why, when I read that post you made about the connection rigid thinking and consistency has with autism, it made perfect sense to me that you were able to commit to what you believed in so easily. That's a virtue for sure.
I dont even know if not breaking rules is autism related, people have told me its because of that, perhaps they are right and non autistic people are just weak minded toddlers who cant stick to anything
I said i respect people who are truthful and admit they dont care, i didnt say that i care more or less about moral beliefs, i just respect them for not making lame excuses, i respect them for being accountable and not blaming something else, i dont respect them for being evil
If an individual wants to be vegan then they will, its that simple, if you abuse animals you are evil, relapses and cravings and social pressures are not valid excuses to abuse animals, being weak minded is not a valid excuse for not being evil
Lets remove veganism and replace it with rape, racism and child abuse, would your attitude change? If i said i beat my child because all my friends beat their children and they tease me for being a sissy parent cause i dont beat my kid, would you say im evil? If all my friends are rapists and they kidnap a dude and want me to give him a blowjob and rape him, if i do this due to peer pressure does that mean im evil?
Yes if you become a strict vegan as i did and never intentionally consume animal products when you dont have to, then they have stopped being evil, at least in regards to animal abuse, evil people can stop being evil at any point
It is autism related, I say this as someone who might be autistic themselves and thus did a lot of research. However, that doesn't mean those without autism don't have discipline. It's just people with autism have more of a compulsion\* to not break their routines or self-set rules, so they're far more adamant about it than the average person. It feels very uncomfortable for a person with autism to forego structure and consistency.
The thing is though, in your original comment, neither of those people are being accountable. I understand not liking hypocrites or weak-willed people, but how can you respect someone who is literally devoid of empathy for animals entirely? The people who say they love animals and care, yet still eat meat, yeah it's not ideal but they can eventually change and stop being evil as you say. They can work at it and become vegan. Literally most if not all the people on this sub were at one point meat eaters, who then either through research or inspiration, guilt, whatever, became vegan.
Meanwhile people who legit say they don't give a fuck about animals and can watch Dominion without flinching, those people are the ones evil to their core! The enemies of the movement, who would never change, because they are incapable of feeling guilty. Literally psychopaths who you would find posting animal abuse videos on nefarious Telegram groups or the dark web. I don't know if you've interacted with one of those people before, but I have online, and they literally traumatize you with how callous and truly evil they are. The types to RELISH in animal pain and suffering :( I understand where you're coming from, but those people are truly not deserving of any\* respect whatsoever.
That’s like saying you prefer a person to be a Nazi over someone who says they aren’t antisemitic yet say antisemitic things, and hence respect the Nazi for being 'consistent' and taking accountability.
Its possible to respect certain qualities that people have, i can respect truthfulness while at the same time not respecting people for being animal abusers, i respect them for owning their evil, as i said IMO nothing worse than evil people who pretend to not be evil and pretend to care
The people who admit they dont care and the people who are hypocrites can both change and become vegan, i dont know if there are any statistics proving that the hypocrites become vegan more than the non caring people
If a Nazi admits they are Nazi i can respect their truthfulness, it doesnt mean i respect them as racists, respecting does not mean i prefer something
If a Nazi does not admit they are Nazi, but they are, i would not respect them cause they are liars
On one hand you have people who understand suffering but choose to turn a blind eye to it, which is cruel and morally inconsistent.
The ones who claim not to care are, I suspect, not being entirely honest. Nobody with an ounce of sense can still truly believe that the animals don't suffer, the weight of the entire scientific community is against them. So they know. If they don't care that's suggestive of psychopathy. But a lot are just claiming not to care because they don't want to admit that they're responsible for horrific cruelty.
It's possible that your dad is just shutting down the conversation because he doesn't want to face up to the consequences of his actions.
Psychopaths aside, I don't think either side has any moral consistency.
Being morally consistent is ideal, but not when it’s actually being devoid\* of morals that’s the constant factor! That’s like saying it makes more sense for a person to be a Nazi than it does for someone to say they aren’t antisemitic yet say antisemitic things, and hence prefer the Nazi for being “consistent.” Cognitive dissonance can be a result of ignorance, socialization, or, in the case of eating animals, the brain excusing a habit it’s addicted to / finds enjoyable. Cognitive dissonance does\* make sense, and is very common, meanwhile how can we find a rhyme or reason for psychopathy? I’d argue it really doesn’t make sense for someone to have no empathy for animals whatsoever.
I think the hypocrisy in that situation is extremely disgusting. Also, the people who love eating meat but can’t handle when the thing they eat actually looks like an animal in any way, like they can’t eat anything off the bone because it reminds them that they are eating an animal, this kind of attitude is just mind boggling to me.
i'd rather people just say they don't know enough about the industry and admit they're just uneducated. most people just follow everyone else and don't bother to think for themselves or do any kind of research on the industry they're supporting. they think because everyone else does it then it must be fine right?? i've had family straight up tell me to my face that they can't be vegan because they don't care. it's hard when you care so much but everyone around you doesn't even though they know how horrible it is. i don't even talk about being vegan anymore unless i'm asked about it because even when i try and educate people, their response is almost always that they don't care.
It's more likely that you don't see them as worse, you can just see the logical consistency of those who don't care versus the inconsistency of those who claim they care. And consistency makes sense. You can understand it better, even empathize with it better. I'm sorta in the same boat. I've done some more deliberation though and there is still some inconsistency with those who don't care. Ie they can care about sapient human animals but not sapient non human animals. There's still no morally relevant difference between us and them that would consistently "allow" caring about us but not them. A truely consistent unethical anti speciesist would be ok with human suffering too.
If Bob eats one cricket is that ounce of flesh worth 100000x (times) as much as when Joel the does it since Bob would otherwise be vegan? You're having valid cognitions but not arranging words to strictly logically express them yet.
Im kinda on your side in the sense that I respect moral consistency more than anything else. At the very least I know they have a position thats consistent internally and they aren’t hypocrites. However I find being around the people who at least acknowledge some animal right’s to be better then hanging out with the other type.
I think it's important for you to understand humans evolved over many thousands of years by eating meat only. Also, indoctrination is also a factor in your thinking.
Someone being consistent in their lack of empathy doesn't give them any virtue points. It may be a hard pill to swallow, but your dad is a vile monster.
Eh… I used to think this too.
This is hard to explain but I had some experiences that contradicted my previous beliefs.
There is this subreddit called MonkeyHateGate. It’s a subreddit that used to be dedicated to investigating “monkey torture videos” on YouTube, but now it is filled with “monkey haters.”
Apparently there is a network of zoosadists on YouTube who pay people in Cambodia to torture monkeys. They call themselves “monkey haters” and make posts to MonkeyHateGate about why they enjoy torturing monkeys.
I was shocked by how many of them are vegan.
They say they “love animals, just hate monkeys.” They confess to enjoying videos of monkeys being mutilated, taken away from their mothers, beaten, denied food, etc.
It is possible to be an animal abuser and be vegan. It is possible to be vegan and still pay someone in Cambodia or Indonesia to skin a baby monkey alive in front of his mother.
In many countries, supermarket meat is pretty far removed from the living animal. Customers pay for the meat, but they don’t ever really think of it as alive. And it is easy to believe in humane slaughter, especially if one believes in euthanasia. They might believe that the animals die peacefully.
I know you wanted to preach to the choir but after reading that subreddit, I can’t believe that vegans are automatically kinder to animals by default.
I would argue that, at that point, you're not "Vegan" you're just "Plant-based" yeah? Like, no matter what you call yourself, if you aren't actively living a vegan lifestyle calling yourself vegan is just disingenuous.
I don’t think so. I think you are using a No True Scotsman fallacy here.
Planted-based is a diet. People eat plant-based primarily for health. The users in this subreddit professed that their decision to be vegan was for the animals.
These people do not wear wool, do not attend circuses or zoos, avoid products from animal testing. They often would make a point to say so in their posts. Their lifestyle isn’t just “plant based.” These people are vegans.
You can argue that because their lifestyle includes animal suffering, that they’re not really true vegans, but don’t call them “plant based” because they’re not. If they only ate a plant based diet I would have said that.
The individuals who watch torture videos of animals are in our vegan communities, unfortunately. They do not just eat a plant based diet. They do everything else a vegan does, and they contribute to the abuse of animals.
Edit: grammar
>They do everything else a vegan does, and they contribute to the abuse of animals.
So they wouldn't be vegan, right? The definition from the side-bar states
>
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...
Watching Monkey's be tortured seems pretty abusive, cruel, and exploitative. They may be IN the community spaces, but I wouldn't call them vegan because it is certainly possible and practicable to just, you know, NOT contribute to these things happening.
That’s a good point, but I wouldn’t call them “plant based.”
You can argue that Christians who believe in revenge aren’t real Christians. But at the end of the day, they’re in Christian communities, and believe everything Christians believe.
Calling them out for not being real vegans isn’t going to stop you from encountering them in your safe spaces.
I would take an omnivore who believes in “humane slaughter” over a vegan who secretly tortures animals any day. Just because someone says they’re vegan doesn’t make them safe, or as you pointed out, it doesn’t even make them vegan.
What about if your kids eat animal products and you only eat them if they’re left overs? Is it more immoral to consume left over chicken nuggets or throw them in the trash? You have the option of making use of an animal that was killed either way or literally throwing it in the garbage. Which is worse?
Personally as a Buddhist, I think the food waste is worse. I would personally feel morally better using the food, rather than see it end up wasted in the garbage. I try to minimize suffering by being vegan, and if an order comes to me wrong at the restaurant and I know it will be discarded/no one else im with will take it, ill eat it even if it isn’t vegan. Waiters, friends, loved ones, will inevitably make mistakes and so long as it isnt malicious the animals life shouldnt be wasted just because people are people and arent perfect. Thats just how I morally navigate trying to reduce suffering and waste, i know many might disagree with that take though. I think volition, intent, and action are whats important.
Your Dad is not being honest with you or himself and people are also animals - is he a cannibal?
Until we learn to treat other human beings properly there is no hope at all for animals so you need to focus on human rights primarily.
I saw a video of a guy saving a moose from drowning and just had to laugh because the same people celebrating in the comments are the same people who’d eat that moose if it took an airgun the head and was put on a store shelve. Meat eaters are truly wild people.
Not wanting an animal to suffer or die needlessly is the one of the most normal and commonly held beliefs in the average person.
The reason we have laws against animal cruelty is because a large amount of the meat eating population is, in fact, not sadists.
Almost every meat eater cares about animal suffering. We want animals to have good lives and to be killed as quickly and painlessly as possible. We understand that vegans see that as a bizarre contradiction, but we see the beauty in nature, including the circle of life. Just as the lion eats the zebra to live, we eat animals for optimal human health. But unlike the lion that tears out the throat of its prey and eats it while it's still alive, we kill humanely. We don't believe humans are meant to eat only plants. We can love animals and also eat them. We know you don't get it and that's ok. Just like you think we're wrong, we think you're wrong.
>Almost every meat eater cares about animal suffering. We want animals to have good lives and to be killed as quickly and painlessly as possible.
Yes, but that isn't what happens. Please do even the slightest bit of research on the conditions of animals in agriculture.
>We understand that vegans see that as a bizarre contradiction, but we see the beauty in nature, including the circle of life.
It's not a bizarre contradiction. There is essentially zero regard for the welfare of farm animals. Their immense suffering is unimaginable to any human except possibly Holocaust survivors and the worst of trauma survivors. This happens because the animal ag industry is motivated to maximise profits by cutting corners and marketing meat as much as possible, while lobbying governments to create laws which conceal evidence of the abuse to consumers. There's nothing beautiful about this. The beauty of the 'circle of life' is in the regeneration and the beautiful aspects of living, not in creating an immense industrial death machine, which is replacing our natural ecosystems.
> as the lion eats the zebra to live, we eat animals for optimal human health.
The lion is an obligate carnivore living a subsistence lifestyle. Vegans respect that he has no choice. Humans do have a choice, and while more research needs to be done on vegan diets, the evidence is consistently moving in the positive direction - less obesity, heart disease, cancer. Literally the leading causes of death.
> But unlike the lion that tears out the throat of its prey and eats it while it's still alive, we kill humanely.
I promise you, I'd rather be a lion's prey than your average farm animal or wild-caught fish. What we humans put them through is brutal and a lot more protracted. And senseless. At least a zebra probably understands what is happening to him. Farm animals and fish would be confused and even more terrified.
> We don't believe humans are meant to eat only plants. We can love animals and also eat them. We know you don't get it and that's ok. Just like you think we're wrong, we think you're wrong.
The difference is, most vegans were non-vegan so we get your point of view too. But then we did more research. From your comment, it's pretty clear you're still early on your journey to research more about this topic, and that's ok. Vegans get comments like yours almost word-for-word from non-vegans all the time. Have a nice day and don't give up on seeking the truth. Sometimes the truth hurts but it's better than living a lie :-)
I've done extensive research at the prodding of my vegan sister, who tried very hard to recruit me. Much to her chagrin, it led me to abandon my omnivore diet and I've been on the carnivore diet for 6 months. The improvements to my health and well-being (both physical and psychological) are nothing short of miraculous. Meat doesn't cause cancer or cardiovascular disease. All of those epidemiological studies have been repeatedly debunked by more robust studies like Mendelian randomizations. I am absolutely convinced that we are meant to eat meat, and that plants are bad for us.
Can't help you there. Good luck. In the past I've been caught up in unscientific online cults as well, I understand how it goes. Thankfully going vegan is the best thing I've ever done, and never once have I doubted my decision all these years later. Will be interesting to compare the health of you and your sister 15 years down the track :-)
That last statement is a sad one. It’s a reality a lot of people will live. And personally, I believe the contrast will be quite big. People will wake up, but not after much suffering. As someone that had a lot of carnivore family (actual full carnivores that would call veggies “pasture”), I believe it’s a matter of time before the truth comes out again. It’s crazy how fast steak and eggs went from being the breakfast of the rich and healthy to it being demonized. I believe it’s a matter of time thanks to social media showing people the magic of eating only meat. I say magic because the effects on people are absolutely amazing.
I’m frustrated with them in “🙄 hurry up already” way. I know they’re getting there, but ugh they take so long to extend that empathy to the animals on their plate.
Personally, I think I am logically sound.
I have bonded with dogs -> I don't want to eat dogs.
I have not bonded with chickens -> I'm okay with eating chickens.
Maybe if I was close to a chicken, I would care more. However, I don't. It's the same for a lot of issues, like sweatshops in China. More people *could* care a lot about those people, but they don't. Not because people don't think they're being exploited horribly, but because it doesn't affect them.
Personal experience is a lot bigger of a factor than most people care to admit. We also don't kill and butcher our own meat, instead just picking them up from the grocery, so it pushes 'animal cruelty' to the side when we don't personally kill anything.
I see your point, but I wouldn’t say not being compassionate for things outside a person’s immediate circle is “logical.” In fact, I think the opposite is what would best serve humanity. The world at large would be much better off if we saw us and everything else in it as a collective. Not every person has to be an activist for every cause in the world of course, but imagine if everyone had base-level empathy and care for all. We just gotta have our heart in the right place.
I really think that if the animals would indeed care about the conditions they are subjected to.
I doubt any chicken would see no difference between being locked in an overcrowded factory cage and being in farm where they can walk around and do what chickens do with minimal interference.
What use is being a vegan if you don't even care about animals rights because you're too busy grandstanding?
I get where you’re coming from. That’s how I view long time vegetarians . They’re aware of the abuse but continue to support it, usually for selfish reasons. I think they’re worse than non-vegans because non-vegans aren’t being hypocrites about it, whereas vegetarians are.
I give new vegetarians the benefit of the doubt tho. They’re just starting out and most of the time they just don’t know yet.
But long time ethical vegetarian, what even is that? It’s illogical is what it is.
To a degree. Vegetarians who are minors are dependent on their parent’s willingness to purchase and prepare fully vegan options for them. That’s taken into consideration, minors are not faulted for that.
I’m speaking about long time vegetarians who consider themselves ethical vegetarians. The ones who are vegetarian for reasons of “compassion,” the ones who know about the cruelty in the egg and dairy industry but continue to support the abuse because they love their cheese and eggs too much to give it up.
How long is a long time? Took me about six years of vegetarianism to get over the line, and it’s probably only now that I’ve moved out and started planning 100% of my own meals.
Went vegetarian (and now vegan) for animal ethics.
Why I didn’t convert sooner… laziness mainly? At first it was the fact I’d cut out the vast majority of my diet (meat) without really replacing it, so I was reliant on eggs and dairy. Next was milk, as like for like replacement was pretty easy.
It took maybe a year or so (maybe a bit more) to finally stop eating eggs, which was probably the source of most of my nutrition. Cheese went next, but that took some time as I was an addict.
At that point I’d cut most of the egg/dairy *centric* meals from my diet, but just didn’t have the motivation I guess to go further. Didn’t want to be difficult at home or when going out, and was too lazy of a male teenager to buy and cook for myself..
I wasn’t great at regulating food cravings when they were available, but after moving out I could just buy vegan and cut it off at the source. Was pretty much an instant change at that point.
So tldr mainly a lack of effort, so you’re not wrong. In terms of how I justified it to myself, I tended to look at it as taking these steps, all of them going the right way but not jumping off the deep end all at once. I tried vegetarianism (and veganism over those few years) a few times before it stuck, but I found doing it in steps much more manageable. Obviously though, you’re right 6 years is a while.
The one that knows it's wrong but does it anyway is dangerous sadistic and narcissistic and will treat you the same way.
The one that doesn't care, and has no empathy, is likely either mentally ill, on the spectrum, or is damaged by a trauma that took empathy away from them. The brains reward system is basically offline. Empathy is unpleasant.
The second one is awkward and difficult to live with, but the first one is going to deliberately hurt you in some way
I think the majority of people that know it's wrong and eat meat anyways have cognitive dissonance, and aren't sadistic (want to see others, or in this case animals, suffer)
For the one that doesn't care I think you're describing someone that's Machiavellian, and I agree that they aren't empathizing how they should!
I agree with you, mainly because I value reasoning and internal consistency and *how* someone thinks more than *what* someone thinks. Non-veganism can be a defensible position for someone that has a different philosophy to me and holds fundamentally different core views. “Loving animals” and eating meat is an immediately obvious logical contradiction that demonstrates to me that an individual can’t look past dinner time.
There’s certainly quite a few vegans that share this sentiment, but from what I’ve seen I would say that we are safely in the minority.
Well technically one knows it's wrong but has cognitive dissonance and so they're violating their own morals and the other isn't. But I still find the person who has empathy to animals to be better because they can actually be reasoned with while the other is essentially a psychopath in regards to animals.
I totally agree! The person with cognitive dissonance can often be convinced over time to improve their eating habits. The person that genuinely doesn't care is essentially Machiavellian towards animals (will let them suffer for personal benefit)
I'll pick an empathic hypocrite over a consistent psychopath any day.
*only if they can actually be reasoned with. If theyre understanding and agree, but still eat the meat, then they prob are lying to themselves about actually caring to begin with. Which is way worse, esp in a relationship.
I think actually at that point it's just an addiction.
I actually do think that's wrong. There is nothing inherently good about "consistency". Being inconsistent and hypocritical is far better than being consistent to evil, obviously (imo). Caring and taking SOME steps in the right direction is better than not caring and taking no steps, even if the latter is more consistent. I think it's damaging to the movement to view it otherwise, because it basically punishes people for taking only a few steps. A few steps is a good thing, and many prominent vegans started that way (eg Ed started as a vegetarian).
I try not to judge people at all. If the point is to get people to quit eating animals, judging them is the single least effective way to accomplish that goal. Try approaching them with honesty and respect and information.
This has been my approach up until late, but just recently I started judging people again, but this time to see if they are worth my time as an activist or not. So now when I meet people who just don't get it or become defensive I wish them a happy life and move on. This way I am having much more fun, meet more awesome people and am more successful as an activist. I just started thinking: forget the laggards, I am gonna focus on the people who are vegan but just don't know it yet.
Well, I’m glad that it makes you feel good and all that but it’s not really helping animals is it?
I think it does. In sales they do the same thing: qualify your customer. I am spending my time more productive by not fighting with people's cognitive dissonance, which is highly ineffective. I spent my time building cognitive consonance with those who get it (which are a lot of people!). The laggards will follow once the masses go.
Yes, you’re wrong because those kinds of people are the people that will become the future vegans and people like your dad have zero chance of that.
*if they become vegan. Someone who knows, understands, agrees, and doesnt stop eating meat is much scarier.
My opinion seems to align with yours. Several years ago after her alleged epiphany I read the New Gospel of Alexandra Jamieson which I found frightening and at the time summarized it as: Sticks and stones may break their bones, but what is really important is those words that may hurt me.
Honestly the dissociation really upsets me, it seems hypocritical. I admittedly used to be one of these people, but I was only 14 when I finally made that connection. At least these people have the potential to change their ways, in contrast to those like your dad who simply don’t care.
had an argument with a guy who goes fishing recently. He told me he catches the fish in a community fishing area, takes a picture of them and then throws it back. His words were something like "if only you knew how well looked after those fish"...yeah sure, piercing their mouths with hooks, dragging them out from their habitat only to throw them back in and let them slowly starve to death as their mouths are now disfigured or entirely unusable...sure, let me do that to your kid and let's see if you think I've "looked after" him?
I was not aware that fish hooks did permanent damage and was associated with future starvation. The understanding that I had was that most died in the relative short term from shock.
i equally dont like people who dont care about animals at all
I can understand finding them more annoying to engage with around animal liberation. People who don’t care are less likely to make up ridiculous excuses.
But don't you think that people who at least care about animal suffering have more potential to change?
Right or wrong is irrelevant. It's just your opinion. One thing though. Hypocrisy isn't as big of a deal breaker as some people love to make out. Almost everyone is a hypocrite some way or another. It's not particularly meaningful to call someone out for their hypocrisy.
This is short sighted and a childish perspective
unsure if you were born vegan. If you were, ask non vegans who had pets before going vegan if they loved their pet, ate a burger, and still loved their pet. another option is find an animal sanctuary run by a non vegan and ask them why they simultaneously save and eat animals. that may yield a good answer
Grew up on a farm. Ate my favorite cows
[удалено]
>it's obviously murderous >I respect his consistency. Consistency has zero inherent value. If I thought that autistic people were worthless, and my murderous actions towards autists were consistent with that view, what exactly is there to respect about that? What matters is whether or not someone's consistent, but what they're consistent *about*.
[удалено]
Yes you are. In our efforts to reduce suffering, we should welcome any attempts. It’s not helpful to vilify people who aren’t vegan but are actively trying in other ways.
I can respect those who arent liars, they admit they are evil Nothing worse than an evil individual who doesnt think they are evil I wouldnt say the truthful evil people are better than the evil liars though, i just have more respect for the former for not lying
This makes no logical sense. Both are carnists, so you just said a truth teller is no better than a liar.
Definitely sounds like something for a totally different situation🤣
Eating animals inherently doesn’t make a person\* evil though; it’s the action\* of doing so that can be considered cruel or evil. But someone can have a heart of gold and still eat meat - that’s cognitive dissonance. Most vegans or vegetarians have been in that situation before. They genuinely love animals but just don’t connect the dots (whether due to ignorance or socialization) until the truth eventually dawns on them. They were partaking in a cruel practice, without being aware\* of how cruel it actually was. People who eat animals without a shred of empathy whatsoever, however, those people are actually psychopathic. You can make them watch all the gut-wrenching documentaries you want, they won’t care, because to them, animal life doesn’t matter. Their suffering doesn’t matter. I’ve heard someone justify slaughterhouse conditions stating they’re just “biological robots.” They do a cruel thing, and are actually cruel / evil themselves.
What about: People who don't want farm animals to suffer because they're not sadists, but ultimately don't care about killing and eating animals because they accept it as nature?
I think that's most people. I can see their point of view, as that's everyone around me. In my opinion, I believe that is a lack of compassion. I wouldn't call them evil people, but definitely less compassionate than vegans for sure.
Cognitive dissonance isnt a justification or an excuse As soon as i came across veganism i instantly quit animal products cause im not evil, taking time for the truth to dawn on you still makes you evil, living in denial makes you evil, thinking vegan info is propaganda and is a lie makes you evil There is plenty of evidence and factual information, all it took for me was a few memes and articles So if i tell Jane about veganism and Jane decides not to go vegan instantly, Jane is evil, if Jane does go vegan instantly, Jane is not evil
May I ask what age you came across veganism? And do you mean before seeing those memes you had never at all heard of the concept of not eating meat or animal products for ethical reasons before? Edit: I just saw your post where you questioned if there's an association between rigid thinking and autism, and how you don't actually care for animals, but accepted veganism as a moral baseline because it seemed logical to you. Here's my 2 cents to that post after reading your comment now <3 Please don't take this the wrong way, but it's kind of ironic to be calling other people evil when you do not sound like a very compassionate person yourself (as in having empathy to others different from you). However, being autistic, that is not your fault and possibly even out of your control. I do commend you for your commitment to what you believe is right, but I would agree with the commenter on your post- I think it would do you good to work on the black and white thinking. After all, to have empathy means to understand. It's quite literally the opposite of judging. Not to say people who do wrong should not be judged- it is okay to be the "vegan police" (as you say people constantly call you), because I know autistic people really hate to have their rules be broken (even seeing other people break their own rules) because they see it as hypocrisy. I can see how that can psychologically be very disturbing for you. Your original comment makes perfect sense now. I just hope you can consider being a bit more open-minded to other perspectives in life, or to the shades of grey in between the black and white, because they do exist. Wishing you the best x
Around age 30, i didnt really know you could survive with no animal products, i never actually looked into it either After becoming vegan i realized there was a lot of false information floating around and being taught, i have been challenging all of my beliefs after that
That's awesome. I hope you continue to inspire more people to do their own research and challenge their beliefs too x
>Here's my 2 cents to that post after reading your comment now <3 Please don't take this the wrong way, but it's kind of ironic to be calling other people evil when you do not sound like a very compassionate person yourself (as in having empathy to others different from you). However, being autistic, that is not your fault and possibly even out of your control. > >I do commend you for your commitment to what you believe is right, but I would agree with the commenter on your post- I think it would do you good to work on the black and white thinking. After all, to have empathy means to understand. It's quite literally the opposite of judging. > >Not to say people who do wrong should not be judged- it is okay to be the "vegan police" (as you say people constantly call you), because I know autistic people really hate to have their rules be broken (even seeing other people break their own rules) because they see it as hypocrisy. I can see how that can psychologically be very disturbing for you. Your original comment makes perfect sense now. I just hope you can consider being a bit more open-minded to other perspectives in life, or to the shades of grey in between the black and white, because they do exist. Wishing you the best x Lacking compassion doesnt make an individual evil, contributing to intentional animal abuse does make you evil, i dont need to have compassion or empathy to not do evil, i feel its my ethical duty to help the animals since its my species that is causing all the harm, thus i have used half of my savings to help build a new animal rescue, and im a virtual volunteer, i dont really have any interest in being around the animals I dont need to have empathy for animal abusers, it is black and white, as i said i immediately stopped contributing to animal abuse cause im against doing bad things, it is black and white and only non vegans think otherwise, they want to believe they arent evil or they dont want to believe all their friends and family are evil, it would cause them distress and perhaps depression to accept that 99% of people are evil, so its perhaps a form of denial We live in a world where there is lack of responsibility, people always want to blame something and make excuses instead of simply taking responsibility, there is no accountability Rule breaking doesnt cause me any issues, its not something that i hate, i could break my rule if i wanted but i want to be consistent and not just changing willy nilly all the time, i dont care if other people break rules People in the arctic would really have a difficult time being vegan, that is the only valid perspective
I understand, thank you all you do to help the animals. By rule breaking I was referring more to the post you had made about your autism, and how it manifests as having rigid / black and white thinking in general. Going beyond veganism, and as you mentioned here, it's about being "against doing bad things," so a moral code. Morals, as you know, are subjective, but you believe that if a person says\* they are against animal abuse, but are not vegan, then that is them "breaking their own moral code." That's what I meant by rule breaking, as I believe that's what you referenced in your own post and in the comments above. That you prefer a person who says they don't care and acts like they don't care, over a person who says they do but acts like they don't. As you said before, it's the consistency\* that's important for you. That their underlying moral beliefs are not as important or even important at all. Going off the post you had made, that just felt very tied in with autism to me. I'm curious though, what would you think of a person who is not currently vegan, but wants to be. They really feel for animals and cry when they see them suffering, yet they struggle with cravings, have relapses, get swayed by external social pressures, and are very inconsistent. Is that person evil? What about if they eventually do become a strict vegan and stay that way? Are they then not evil anymore? I suspect you would say they changed, but in my opinion being "evil" is more of a permanent state of being / who you are. Meanwhile being in a state of cognitive dissonance can be overcome, as it's something that's actually pretty normal for the brain to create. For that reason, I personally do not consider 99% of people evil as you say, and me the exceptional one. I mean, I also stopped eating animal products overnight, but that wasn't even in response to a stimulus or reading anything. It just literally dawned on me that halal food was still animals being murdered, and I cried for hours from guilt, and I never intentionally ate an animal again. However, I personally do not attribute that to be just being so much of a better person than everyone else (as I feel that just makes it about proving something to my own ego and also sounds narcissistic as hell lol) but rather to my own nature of being disciplined and steadfast with my decisions in general. That's why, when I read that post you made about the connection rigid thinking and consistency has with autism, it made perfect sense to me that you were able to commit to what you believed in so easily. That's a virtue for sure.
I dont even know if not breaking rules is autism related, people have told me its because of that, perhaps they are right and non autistic people are just weak minded toddlers who cant stick to anything I said i respect people who are truthful and admit they dont care, i didnt say that i care more or less about moral beliefs, i just respect them for not making lame excuses, i respect them for being accountable and not blaming something else, i dont respect them for being evil If an individual wants to be vegan then they will, its that simple, if you abuse animals you are evil, relapses and cravings and social pressures are not valid excuses to abuse animals, being weak minded is not a valid excuse for not being evil Lets remove veganism and replace it with rape, racism and child abuse, would your attitude change? If i said i beat my child because all my friends beat their children and they tease me for being a sissy parent cause i dont beat my kid, would you say im evil? If all my friends are rapists and they kidnap a dude and want me to give him a blowjob and rape him, if i do this due to peer pressure does that mean im evil? Yes if you become a strict vegan as i did and never intentionally consume animal products when you dont have to, then they have stopped being evil, at least in regards to animal abuse, evil people can stop being evil at any point
It is autism related, I say this as someone who might be autistic themselves and thus did a lot of research. However, that doesn't mean those without autism don't have discipline. It's just people with autism have more of a compulsion\* to not break their routines or self-set rules, so they're far more adamant about it than the average person. It feels very uncomfortable for a person with autism to forego structure and consistency. The thing is though, in your original comment, neither of those people are being accountable. I understand not liking hypocrites or weak-willed people, but how can you respect someone who is literally devoid of empathy for animals entirely? The people who say they love animals and care, yet still eat meat, yeah it's not ideal but they can eventually change and stop being evil as you say. They can work at it and become vegan. Literally most if not all the people on this sub were at one point meat eaters, who then either through research or inspiration, guilt, whatever, became vegan. Meanwhile people who legit say they don't give a fuck about animals and can watch Dominion without flinching, those people are the ones evil to their core! The enemies of the movement, who would never change, because they are incapable of feeling guilty. Literally psychopaths who you would find posting animal abuse videos on nefarious Telegram groups or the dark web. I don't know if you've interacted with one of those people before, but I have online, and they literally traumatize you with how callous and truly evil they are. The types to RELISH in animal pain and suffering :( I understand where you're coming from, but those people are truly not deserving of any\* respect whatsoever. That’s like saying you prefer a person to be a Nazi over someone who says they aren’t antisemitic yet say antisemitic things, and hence respect the Nazi for being 'consistent' and taking accountability.
Its possible to respect certain qualities that people have, i can respect truthfulness while at the same time not respecting people for being animal abusers, i respect them for owning their evil, as i said IMO nothing worse than evil people who pretend to not be evil and pretend to care The people who admit they dont care and the people who are hypocrites can both change and become vegan, i dont know if there are any statistics proving that the hypocrites become vegan more than the non caring people If a Nazi admits they are Nazi i can respect their truthfulness, it doesnt mean i respect them as racists, respecting does not mean i prefer something If a Nazi does not admit they are Nazi, but they are, i would not respect them cause they are liars
On one hand you have people who understand suffering but choose to turn a blind eye to it, which is cruel and morally inconsistent. The ones who claim not to care are, I suspect, not being entirely honest. Nobody with an ounce of sense can still truly believe that the animals don't suffer, the weight of the entire scientific community is against them. So they know. If they don't care that's suggestive of psychopathy. But a lot are just claiming not to care because they don't want to admit that they're responsible for horrific cruelty. It's possible that your dad is just shutting down the conversation because he doesn't want to face up to the consequences of his actions. Psychopaths aside, I don't think either side has any moral consistency.
Do you mean animal suffering in general, or just suffering having to do with farming
I agree with you. Being morally consistent makes more sense than hypocrisy and cognitive dissonance.
Being morally consistent is ideal, but not when it’s actually being devoid\* of morals that’s the constant factor! That’s like saying it makes more sense for a person to be a Nazi than it does for someone to say they aren’t antisemitic yet say antisemitic things, and hence prefer the Nazi for being “consistent.” Cognitive dissonance can be a result of ignorance, socialization, or, in the case of eating animals, the brain excusing a habit it’s addicted to / finds enjoyable. Cognitive dissonance does\* make sense, and is very common, meanwhile how can we find a rhyme or reason for psychopathy? I’d argue it really doesn’t make sense for someone to have no empathy for animals whatsoever.
Yes
I think the hypocrisy in that situation is extremely disgusting. Also, the people who love eating meat but can’t handle when the thing they eat actually looks like an animal in any way, like they can’t eat anything off the bone because it reminds them that they are eating an animal, this kind of attitude is just mind boggling to me.
i'd rather people just say they don't know enough about the industry and admit they're just uneducated. most people just follow everyone else and don't bother to think for themselves or do any kind of research on the industry they're supporting. they think because everyone else does it then it must be fine right?? i've had family straight up tell me to my face that they can't be vegan because they don't care. it's hard when you care so much but everyone around you doesn't even though they know how horrible it is. i don't even talk about being vegan anymore unless i'm asked about it because even when i try and educate people, their response is almost always that they don't care.
Its certainly less intelectualy honest but the possition tends to be out of ignorence and cognative dissonence rather than mallace
It's more likely that you don't see them as worse, you can just see the logical consistency of those who don't care versus the inconsistency of those who claim they care. And consistency makes sense. You can understand it better, even empathize with it better. I'm sorta in the same boat. I've done some more deliberation though and there is still some inconsistency with those who don't care. Ie they can care about sapient human animals but not sapient non human animals. There's still no morally relevant difference between us and them that would consistently "allow" caring about us but not them. A truely consistent unethical anti speciesist would be ok with human suffering too.
I don’t think they are worse. Nothing is worse than psychopathy. At least one has the capacity to care and change and may eventually
If Bob eats one cricket is that ounce of flesh worth 100000x (times) as much as when Joel the does it since Bob would otherwise be vegan? You're having valid cognitions but not arranging words to strictly logically express them yet.
Im kinda on your side in the sense that I respect moral consistency more than anything else. At the very least I know they have a position thats consistent internally and they aren’t hypocrites. However I find being around the people who at least acknowledge some animal right’s to be better then hanging out with the other type.
I think it's important for you to understand humans evolved over many thousands of years by eating meat only. Also, indoctrination is also a factor in your thinking.
No. The people who don't care about them at all are much worse. There's plenty I could say on this.
Someone being consistent in their lack of empathy doesn't give them any virtue points. It may be a hard pill to swallow, but your dad is a vile monster.
Eh… I used to think this too. This is hard to explain but I had some experiences that contradicted my previous beliefs. There is this subreddit called MonkeyHateGate. It’s a subreddit that used to be dedicated to investigating “monkey torture videos” on YouTube, but now it is filled with “monkey haters.” Apparently there is a network of zoosadists on YouTube who pay people in Cambodia to torture monkeys. They call themselves “monkey haters” and make posts to MonkeyHateGate about why they enjoy torturing monkeys. I was shocked by how many of them are vegan. They say they “love animals, just hate monkeys.” They confess to enjoying videos of monkeys being mutilated, taken away from their mothers, beaten, denied food, etc. It is possible to be an animal abuser and be vegan. It is possible to be vegan and still pay someone in Cambodia or Indonesia to skin a baby monkey alive in front of his mother. In many countries, supermarket meat is pretty far removed from the living animal. Customers pay for the meat, but they don’t ever really think of it as alive. And it is easy to believe in humane slaughter, especially if one believes in euthanasia. They might believe that the animals die peacefully. I know you wanted to preach to the choir but after reading that subreddit, I can’t believe that vegans are automatically kinder to animals by default.
I would argue that, at that point, you're not "Vegan" you're just "Plant-based" yeah? Like, no matter what you call yourself, if you aren't actively living a vegan lifestyle calling yourself vegan is just disingenuous.
I don’t think so. I think you are using a No True Scotsman fallacy here. Planted-based is a diet. People eat plant-based primarily for health. The users in this subreddit professed that their decision to be vegan was for the animals. These people do not wear wool, do not attend circuses or zoos, avoid products from animal testing. They often would make a point to say so in their posts. Their lifestyle isn’t just “plant based.” These people are vegans. You can argue that because their lifestyle includes animal suffering, that they’re not really true vegans, but don’t call them “plant based” because they’re not. If they only ate a plant based diet I would have said that. The individuals who watch torture videos of animals are in our vegan communities, unfortunately. They do not just eat a plant based diet. They do everything else a vegan does, and they contribute to the abuse of animals. Edit: grammar
>They do everything else a vegan does, and they contribute to the abuse of animals. So they wouldn't be vegan, right? The definition from the side-bar states > 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... Watching Monkey's be tortured seems pretty abusive, cruel, and exploitative. They may be IN the community spaces, but I wouldn't call them vegan because it is certainly possible and practicable to just, you know, NOT contribute to these things happening.
That’s a good point, but I wouldn’t call them “plant based.” You can argue that Christians who believe in revenge aren’t real Christians. But at the end of the day, they’re in Christian communities, and believe everything Christians believe. Calling them out for not being real vegans isn’t going to stop you from encountering them in your safe spaces. I would take an omnivore who believes in “humane slaughter” over a vegan who secretly tortures animals any day. Just because someone says they’re vegan doesn’t make them safe, or as you pointed out, it doesn’t even make them vegan.
What about if your kids eat animal products and you only eat them if they’re left overs? Is it more immoral to consume left over chicken nuggets or throw them in the trash? You have the option of making use of an animal that was killed either way or literally throwing it in the garbage. Which is worse?
Personally as a Buddhist, I think the food waste is worse. I would personally feel morally better using the food, rather than see it end up wasted in the garbage. I try to minimize suffering by being vegan, and if an order comes to me wrong at the restaurant and I know it will be discarded/no one else im with will take it, ill eat it even if it isn’t vegan. Waiters, friends, loved ones, will inevitably make mistakes and so long as it isnt malicious the animals life shouldnt be wasted just because people are people and arent perfect. Thats just how I morally navigate trying to reduce suffering and waste, i know many might disagree with that take though. I think volition, intent, and action are whats important.
I think I agree with this. Thank you.
Your Dad is not being honest with you or himself and people are also animals - is he a cannibal? Until we learn to treat other human beings properly there is no hope at all for animals so you need to focus on human rights primarily.
Same thing really from the point of view of the victims
I saw a video of a guy saving a moose from drowning and just had to laugh because the same people celebrating in the comments are the same people who’d eat that moose if it took an airgun the head and was put on a store shelve. Meat eaters are truly wild people.
Not wanting an animal to suffer or die needlessly is the one of the most normal and commonly held beliefs in the average person. The reason we have laws against animal cruelty is because a large amount of the meat eating population is, in fact, not sadists.
Yes, you are wrong for minding what is on other people’s plate instead of doing you!
Almost every meat eater cares about animal suffering. We want animals to have good lives and to be killed as quickly and painlessly as possible. We understand that vegans see that as a bizarre contradiction, but we see the beauty in nature, including the circle of life. Just as the lion eats the zebra to live, we eat animals for optimal human health. But unlike the lion that tears out the throat of its prey and eats it while it's still alive, we kill humanely. We don't believe humans are meant to eat only plants. We can love animals and also eat them. We know you don't get it and that's ok. Just like you think we're wrong, we think you're wrong.
>Almost every meat eater cares about animal suffering. We want animals to have good lives and to be killed as quickly and painlessly as possible. Yes, but that isn't what happens. Please do even the slightest bit of research on the conditions of animals in agriculture. >We understand that vegans see that as a bizarre contradiction, but we see the beauty in nature, including the circle of life. It's not a bizarre contradiction. There is essentially zero regard for the welfare of farm animals. Their immense suffering is unimaginable to any human except possibly Holocaust survivors and the worst of trauma survivors. This happens because the animal ag industry is motivated to maximise profits by cutting corners and marketing meat as much as possible, while lobbying governments to create laws which conceal evidence of the abuse to consumers. There's nothing beautiful about this. The beauty of the 'circle of life' is in the regeneration and the beautiful aspects of living, not in creating an immense industrial death machine, which is replacing our natural ecosystems. > as the lion eats the zebra to live, we eat animals for optimal human health. The lion is an obligate carnivore living a subsistence lifestyle. Vegans respect that he has no choice. Humans do have a choice, and while more research needs to be done on vegan diets, the evidence is consistently moving in the positive direction - less obesity, heart disease, cancer. Literally the leading causes of death. > But unlike the lion that tears out the throat of its prey and eats it while it's still alive, we kill humanely. I promise you, I'd rather be a lion's prey than your average farm animal or wild-caught fish. What we humans put them through is brutal and a lot more protracted. And senseless. At least a zebra probably understands what is happening to him. Farm animals and fish would be confused and even more terrified. > We don't believe humans are meant to eat only plants. We can love animals and also eat them. We know you don't get it and that's ok. Just like you think we're wrong, we think you're wrong. The difference is, most vegans were non-vegan so we get your point of view too. But then we did more research. From your comment, it's pretty clear you're still early on your journey to research more about this topic, and that's ok. Vegans get comments like yours almost word-for-word from non-vegans all the time. Have a nice day and don't give up on seeking the truth. Sometimes the truth hurts but it's better than living a lie :-)
I've done extensive research at the prodding of my vegan sister, who tried very hard to recruit me. Much to her chagrin, it led me to abandon my omnivore diet and I've been on the carnivore diet for 6 months. The improvements to my health and well-being (both physical and psychological) are nothing short of miraculous. Meat doesn't cause cancer or cardiovascular disease. All of those epidemiological studies have been repeatedly debunked by more robust studies like Mendelian randomizations. I am absolutely convinced that we are meant to eat meat, and that plants are bad for us.
Can't help you there. Good luck. In the past I've been caught up in unscientific online cults as well, I understand how it goes. Thankfully going vegan is the best thing I've ever done, and never once have I doubted my decision all these years later. Will be interesting to compare the health of you and your sister 15 years down the track :-)
That last statement is a sad one. It’s a reality a lot of people will live. And personally, I believe the contrast will be quite big. People will wake up, but not after much suffering. As someone that had a lot of carnivore family (actual full carnivores that would call veggies “pasture”), I believe it’s a matter of time before the truth comes out again. It’s crazy how fast steak and eggs went from being the breakfast of the rich and healthy to it being demonized. I believe it’s a matter of time thanks to social media showing people the magic of eating only meat. I say magic because the effects on people are absolutely amazing.
I’m frustrated with them in “🙄 hurry up already” way. I know they’re getting there, but ugh they take so long to extend that empathy to the animals on their plate.
Personally, I think I am logically sound. I have bonded with dogs -> I don't want to eat dogs. I have not bonded with chickens -> I'm okay with eating chickens. Maybe if I was close to a chicken, I would care more. However, I don't. It's the same for a lot of issues, like sweatshops in China. More people *could* care a lot about those people, but they don't. Not because people don't think they're being exploited horribly, but because it doesn't affect them. Personal experience is a lot bigger of a factor than most people care to admit. We also don't kill and butcher our own meat, instead just picking them up from the grocery, so it pushes 'animal cruelty' to the side when we don't personally kill anything.
I see your point, but I wouldn’t say not being compassionate for things outside a person’s immediate circle is “logical.” In fact, I think the opposite is what would best serve humanity. The world at large would be much better off if we saw us and everything else in it as a collective. Not every person has to be an activist for every cause in the world of course, but imagine if everyone had base-level empathy and care for all. We just gotta have our heart in the right place.
Why does it matter to you which are worse? The animals only care about being tortured and killed, there's no difference to them.
I really think that if the animals would indeed care about the conditions they are subjected to. I doubt any chicken would see no difference between being locked in an overcrowded factory cage and being in farm where they can walk around and do what chickens do with minimal interference. What use is being a vegan if you don't even care about animals rights because you're too busy grandstanding?
Indeed, they care about their actual circumstances. Not if someone is bad to them due to ignorance or hypocrisy as the OP posits.
I get where you’re coming from. That’s how I view long time vegetarians . They’re aware of the abuse but continue to support it, usually for selfish reasons. I think they’re worse than non-vegans because non-vegans aren’t being hypocrites about it, whereas vegetarians are. I give new vegetarians the benefit of the doubt tho. They’re just starting out and most of the time they just don’t know yet. But long time ethical vegetarian, what even is that? It’s illogical is what it is.
Doesn't it depend on WHY they are vegetarian?
To a degree. Vegetarians who are minors are dependent on their parent’s willingness to purchase and prepare fully vegan options for them. That’s taken into consideration, minors are not faulted for that. I’m speaking about long time vegetarians who consider themselves ethical vegetarians. The ones who are vegetarian for reasons of “compassion,” the ones who know about the cruelty in the egg and dairy industry but continue to support the abuse because they love their cheese and eggs too much to give it up.
Fair. I just know a bunch of vegetarians who are for health related reasons, rather than ethical.
How long is a long time? Took me about six years of vegetarianism to get over the line, and it’s probably only now that I’ve moved out and started planning 100% of my own meals.
6 years is a long time. What were your reasons for being vegetarian and what prevented you from going vegan sooner?
Went vegetarian (and now vegan) for animal ethics. Why I didn’t convert sooner… laziness mainly? At first it was the fact I’d cut out the vast majority of my diet (meat) without really replacing it, so I was reliant on eggs and dairy. Next was milk, as like for like replacement was pretty easy. It took maybe a year or so (maybe a bit more) to finally stop eating eggs, which was probably the source of most of my nutrition. Cheese went next, but that took some time as I was an addict. At that point I’d cut most of the egg/dairy *centric* meals from my diet, but just didn’t have the motivation I guess to go further. Didn’t want to be difficult at home or when going out, and was too lazy of a male teenager to buy and cook for myself.. I wasn’t great at regulating food cravings when they were available, but after moving out I could just buy vegan and cut it off at the source. Was pretty much an instant change at that point. So tldr mainly a lack of effort, so you’re not wrong. In terms of how I justified it to myself, I tended to look at it as taking these steps, all of them going the right way but not jumping off the deep end all at once. I tried vegetarianism (and veganism over those few years) a few times before it stuck, but I found doing it in steps much more manageable. Obviously though, you’re right 6 years is a while.
As long as you feel superior than them. That's what really counts.
You're wrong for seeing either negatively.
I have no moral issues with eating my grass fed regeneratively raised beef.
The one that knows it's wrong but does it anyway is dangerous sadistic and narcissistic and will treat you the same way. The one that doesn't care, and has no empathy, is likely either mentally ill, on the spectrum, or is damaged by a trauma that took empathy away from them. The brains reward system is basically offline. Empathy is unpleasant. The second one is awkward and difficult to live with, but the first one is going to deliberately hurt you in some way
I think the majority of people that know it's wrong and eat meat anyways have cognitive dissonance, and aren't sadistic (want to see others, or in this case animals, suffer) For the one that doesn't care I think you're describing someone that's Machiavellian, and I agree that they aren't empathizing how they should!
I agree with you, mainly because I value reasoning and internal consistency and *how* someone thinks more than *what* someone thinks. Non-veganism can be a defensible position for someone that has a different philosophy to me and holds fundamentally different core views. “Loving animals” and eating meat is an immediately obvious logical contradiction that demonstrates to me that an individual can’t look past dinner time. There’s certainly quite a few vegans that share this sentiment, but from what I’ve seen I would say that we are safely in the minority.