Log in:  

Register

Veganism

Grab a short black and come join in the non-cycling discussion. Favourite books, movies, holiday destinations, other sports - chat about it all in the cafe.

Moderators: Eshnar, Irondan, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky

Re:

29 Jan 2019 19:09

King Boonen wrote:I will involve myself more when I get chance. The main reason I asked is because eating a plant-based diet and Veganism are two very different things. Similarly, if I decide to keep Kosher or Halal, that wouldn't make me Jewish or Muslim. Being vegan requires you to make every effort to do the least harm you can, across your whole life. What interests me in that regard is where people draw the line, how they determine what is least harm and so on.

I've previously posted in this thread about the mouse plague carried out in Australia (I think). This is done to preserve crops for people and, depending on your opinion and how you calculate things, can result in a vegan meal being more cruel than an omnivorous meal. Farming animals on only pasture is another interesting question. Does the husbandry and slaughter outweigh the ecological system this farming supports, effectively providing for many other animals, insects and so on? Do people value the life of an insect to the same level they value that of a cow? Surely a vegan must, otherwise they are doing the same thing they accuse omnivores of doing, determining which life is more important. (Lets not even get into the ridiculous discussion around plants being alive and so on, it's not even worth wasting time on).

This isn't about sitting in judgement and attempting to trip people up by the way. I'm well aware that anyone making a conscious effort to move towards eating less meat is almost certain to do less harm than someone who doesn't. Even those who research everything about an omnivorous diet, buy crops that are not treated to remove insects etc., only buy meat from farms raising animals on pasture and only locally to cut down on their carbon footprint and the damage to animals in this sense are still likely to do more harm than someone eating a plant based diet and doing something to remove animal products from other aspects of their lives.

As this is a cycling internet forum I'll point out 2 interesting areas where Veganism is relevant. Certain tyre manufacturers use animal products in their rubber (I think continental do). How many vegan cyclists would think to look this up and stop using these brands? What about computers/phones etc? Getting the raw materials to produce these things is incredibly destructive and kills countless animals. How many vegans only buy these items second hand and avoid purchasing anything unless they absolutely need it? I haven't contributed to this industry for about 5+ years I think (I've had a Kindle bought for me but all my other electronics are second-hand/provided by work as a requirement of my job). Does this make me more vegan than the person who eats a vegan diet but buys every console and game they can get their hands on, updates their phone every 6 months and is constantly replacing parts in their PC to improve its performance? Can they justify it by saying these things are necessary? I can see good arguments for and against this, after all science is the thing that keeps us alive, art is the things that makes us want to live.

I think the fundamental issue most people have with Veganism, at least the issue I see most in discussions, is that it's presented as an absolutism when simply explained/advertised, and this simply isn't the case.


Good post, thanks, and the "less harm" is what I think most thoughtful people are going for. You can't stop the harming of some number of animals in the harvesting of plants, but certainly the amount of damage being done is exponentially smaller if you eat plant-based. So that's well worth doing, obviously.

I have a slightly different take on the concept of absolutism. I think you're right to point it out as part of the reaction, but I would argue it's not the fundamental issue people have with veganism. I think the fundamental reaction is that veganism is felt as an ethical criticism of society's (and individuals') behavior, and people take umbrage with that implied ethical critique. It attacks one of the core behaviors of western society, it infringes on deeply held traditions, and most of all, it's different. Especially in America, people seem to fancy themselves as rugged individualists, who are self sufficient and who at least love the idea of killing their own game for food if they don't actually do it themselves. It's tied into the cultural ethos and ideas of manhood.

That it appears to be absolutist, is an angle people who are already offended use to argue against it. But arguing that because a way of life isn't perfect means it's not worth doing is pretty silly on its face, and no vegan I've ever spoken with fails to recognize that it's not perfect. Absolutism is a straw man the offended use to attack a lifestyle they are offended by.

After that we get into "how do you get your protein" (easily, how do you get your fiber?) and other uniformed arguments about the diet. And in America we get to hear how God gave us dominion over the animals so we should be eating them. And other such nonsense.
User avatar red_flanders
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,163
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 06:45

29 Jan 2019 19:16

I think there’s another aspect as well: not just that it’s different, but it’s a rejection, refusal or turning away from pretty much commonplace conventions and status markers.
aphronesis
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,863
Joined: 30 Jul 2011 16:47

Re:

30 Jan 2019 03:19

aphronesis wrote:I think there’s another aspect as well: not just that it’s different, but it’s a rejection, refusal or turning away from pretty much commonplace conventions and status markers.

of which are perpetualised by advertising/marketing...
There was an ad series in the late 90's here that focused on a myriad of reasons for women feeling tired, drained, rundown, etc... not being for the regular reasons of work stress, family stress, kids, lack of sleep, busy lives, etc, but for a lack of iron. It then mentions lean meat to get that iron... Quietly, all sponsored by the meat industry, specifically beef.

There's a "tradition" here too, that on Australia Day you're supposed to have bbq'd lamb. It's complete tosh, as it was a push by the meat industry (again) back in the early 2000's.
Not to mention all the nonsense about 'bacon, bacon, bacon' thesedays... from memory, that too has been a relatively 'new' drive, which followed the 90's "get some pork on your fork" and "pork, the other white meat" advertising drives...

Wasn't it in the 80's that there was the whole "feed your man meat" push? Macho, macho, macho man... toxic masculinity much?
User avatar Archibald
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,802
Joined: 15 Jun 2009 17:03

30 Jan 2019 15:06

I've been mostly vegetarian for the last 15 years or so (I'm 38 now). I only eat meat very rarely, on occasions when it's just easier to do so. Veganism is quite rare here, but vegetarians or flexitarians are quite common. About a third of my colleagues (research group at university) hardly consume meat. The veggie-movement here (Belgium, Flanders) is actually spreading a message of 'try to reduce meat' rather than employ 'meat is murder' kind of tactics. I think this is smart - polarisation rarely helps. There are also quite popular campaigns on social media that try to stimulate cutting down on meat. It's working, as meat consumption is going down every year (fastest decline in Europe the past 5 years, in fact).
User avatar Jagartrott
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,600
Joined: 15 Apr 2014 13:37

30 Jan 2019 21:24

What exactly is the definition of a 'Flexitarian'? Is it just someone who sometimes doesn't eat meat - and other animal-based products?
Aka The Ginger One.
User avatar RedheadDane
Veteran
 
Posts: 10,011
Joined: 05 May 2010 13:47
Location: Viking Land! (Aros)

Re:

30 Jan 2019 21:36

RedheadDane wrote:What exactly is the definition of a 'Flexitarian'? Is it just someone who sometimes doesn't eat meat - and other animal-based products?


I don't think there is a hard definition, but I think it's generally accepted to be someone who eats a largely plant-based diet with small amounts of animal products (dairy, meat, eggs etc.). This is how I generally eat, although I wouldn't refer to myself as a flexitarian.
Vincenzo Nibali:
"I know how to ride a bike"

Reduce your carbon footprint, ride steel.
User avatar King Boonen
Administrator
 
Posts: 7,580
Joined: 25 Jul 2012 14:38

30 Jan 2019 21:42

Labels! We need to label people!
;-)
User avatar Jagartrott
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,600
Joined: 15 Apr 2014 13:37

Re: Re:

30 Jan 2019 21:56

red_flanders wrote:
King Boonen wrote:I will involve myself more when I get chance. The main reason I asked is because eating a plant-based diet and Veganism are two very different things. Similarly, if I decide to keep Kosher or Halal, that wouldn't make me Jewish or Muslim. Being vegan requires you to make every effort to do the least harm you can, across your whole life. What interests me in that regard is where people draw the line, how they determine what is least harm and so on.

I've previously posted in this thread about the mouse plague carried out in Australia (I think). This is done to preserve crops for people and, depending on your opinion and how you calculate things, can result in a vegan meal being more cruel than an omnivorous meal. Farming animals on only pasture is another interesting question. Does the husbandry and slaughter outweigh the ecological system this farming supports, effectively providing for many other animals, insects and so on? Do people value the life of an insect to the same level they value that of a cow? Surely a vegan must, otherwise they are doing the same thing they accuse omnivores of doing, determining which life is more important. (Lets not even get into the ridiculous discussion around plants being alive and so on, it's not even worth wasting time on).

This isn't about sitting in judgement and attempting to trip people up by the way. I'm well aware that anyone making a conscious effort to move towards eating less meat is almost certain to do less harm than someone who doesn't. Even those who research everything about an omnivorous diet, buy crops that are not treated to remove insects etc., only buy meat from farms raising animals on pasture and only locally to cut down on their carbon footprint and the damage to animals in this sense are still likely to do more harm than someone eating a plant based diet and doing something to remove animal products from other aspects of their lives.

As this is a cycling internet forum I'll point out 2 interesting areas where Veganism is relevant. Certain tyre manufacturers use animal products in their rubber (I think continental do). How many vegan cyclists would think to look this up and stop using these brands? What about computers/phones etc? Getting the raw materials to produce these things is incredibly destructive and kills countless animals. How many vegans only buy these items second hand and avoid purchasing anything unless they absolutely need it? I haven't contributed to this industry for about 5+ years I think (I've had a Kindle bought for me but all my other electronics are second-hand/provided by work as a requirement of my job). Does this make me more vegan than the person who eats a vegan diet but buys every console and game they can get their hands on, updates their phone every 6 months and is constantly replacing parts in their PC to improve its performance? Can they justify it by saying these things are necessary? I can see good arguments for and against this, after all science is the thing that keeps us alive, art is the things that makes us want to live.

I think the fundamental issue most people have with Veganism, at least the issue I see most in discussions, is that it's presented as an absolutism when simply explained/advertised, and this simply isn't the case.


Good post, thanks, and the "less harm" is what I think most thoughtful people are going for. You can't stop the harming of some number of animals in the harvesting of plants, but certainly the amount of damage being done is exponentially smaller if you eat plant-based. So that's well worth doing, obviously.

I have a slightly different take on the concept of absolutism. I think you're right to point it out as part of the reaction, but I would argue it's not the fundamental issue people have with veganism. I think the fundamental reaction is that veganism is felt as an ethical criticism of society's (and individuals') behavior, and people take umbrage with that implied ethical critique. It attacks one of the core behaviors of western society, it infringes on deeply held traditions, and most of all, it's different. Especially in America, people seem to fancy themselves as rugged individualists, who are self sufficient and who at least love the idea of killing their own game for food if they don't actually do it themselves. It's tied into the cultural ethos and ideas of manhood.

That it appears to be absolutist, is an angle people who are already offended use to argue against it. But arguing that because a way of life isn't perfect means it's not worth doing is pretty silly on its face, and no vegan I've ever spoken with fails to recognize that it's not perfect. Absolutism is a straw man the offended use to attack a lifestyle they are offended by.

After that we get into "how do you get your protein" (easily, how do you get your fiber?) and other uniformed arguments about the diet. And in America we get to hear how God gave us dominion over the animals so we should be eating them. And other such nonsense.


I think we're generally saying the same thing here. It's the perceived absolutism that people see as an attack on their morals and ethics, but the fact that it isn't an absolutism is ignored/not understood by most. I also agree that's it's the thing most will us to try and pick apart someone's veganism by begging the question "What about this?", "Have you considered this?", "Aren't plants alive too?" and other nonsense.

If they were truly interested they would be asking how you ensure you get enough lysine and threonine to try it themselves. But most of them don't actually understand what protein is.
Vincenzo Nibali:
"I know how to ride a bike"

Reduce your carbon footprint, ride steel.
User avatar King Boonen
Administrator
 
Posts: 7,580
Joined: 25 Jul 2012 14:38

30 Jan 2019 22:30

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/shortcuts/2019/jan/30/farmers-vegan-science-behind-changing-your-mind
When farmers go vegan: the science behind changing your mind


There's apparently a thing about not giving farm animals names as that makes eating them more difficult. Personally, I became vegan through enviromentalism years ago.
"Are you going to believe me or what you see with your own eyes?"

Occam's razor - the best a man can get!
User avatar Robert5091
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,630
Joined: 29 Mar 2016 08:56
Location: stockholm, sweden

04 Feb 2019 03:36

I did the strict vegan thing for a while and found it extremely draining. Diet side of if it easy, but it's the other stuff that just wears you out. It just takes too much effort, time and money for something that yields no personal gain and living in a place where meat consumption is on the rise it really makes you feel like you're wasting your time. Also, though I've never been vocal about being vegan, it seemed to matter a whole lot to my friends/family. They would wait for a moment to say "THAT'S NOT VEGAN YOU CAN'T DO THAT" and social gatherings became a source of stress.

It really pisses you off when you're riding your bike in -25C through 5 inches of snow and then you get critiqued for eating candy that has some insect ingredients in it all the while they're chugging down ounces of meat. Being vegan is like bailing water out of a boat while everybody else is pissing on it.

Nowadays I'm in the plant-based diet camp and feel much better. I stopped fretting about the small stuff and not trying to fit under a label like when I was vegan has eased the pressure.
Nastyy
Junior Member
 
Posts: 250
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 13:59

Re: Re:

12 Feb 2019 10:00

King Boonen wrote:
red_flanders wrote:
King Boonen wrote:I will involve myself more when I get chance. The main reason I asked is because eating a plant-based diet and Veganism are two very different things. Similarly, if I decide to keep Kosher or Halal, that wouldn't make me Jewish or Muslim. Being vegan requires you to make every effort to do the least harm you can, across your whole life. What interests me in that regard is where people draw the line, how they determine what is least harm and so on.

I've previously posted in this thread about the mouse plague carried out in Australia (I think). This is done to preserve crops for people and, depending on your opinion and how you calculate things, can result in a vegan meal being more cruel than an omnivorous meal. Farming animals on only pasture is another interesting question. Does the husbandry and slaughter outweigh the ecological system this farming supports, effectively providing for many other animals, insects and so on? Do people value the life of an insect to the same level they value that of a cow? Surely a vegan must, otherwise they are doing the same thing they accuse omnivores of doing, determining which life is more important. (Lets not even get into the ridiculous discussion around plants being alive and so on, it's not even worth wasting time on).

This isn't about sitting in judgement and attempting to trip people up by the way. I'm well aware that anyone making a conscious effort to move towards eating less meat is almost certain to do less harm than someone who doesn't. Even those who research everything about an omnivorous diet, buy crops that are not treated to remove insects etc., only buy meat from farms raising animals on pasture and only locally to cut down on their carbon footprint and the damage to animals in this sense are still likely to do more harm than someone eating a plant based diet and doing something to remove animal products from other aspects of their lives.

As this is a cycling internet forum I'll point out 2 interesting areas where Veganism is relevant. Certain tyre manufacturers use animal products in their rubber (I think continental do). How many vegan cyclists would think to look this up and stop using these brands? What about computers/phones etc? Getting the raw materials to produce these things is incredibly destructive and kills countless animals. How many vegans only buy these items second hand and avoid purchasing anything unless they absolutely need it? I haven't contributed to this industry for about 5+ years I think (I've had a Kindle bought for me but all my other electronics are second-hand/provided by work as a requirement of my job). Does this make me more vegan than the person who eats a vegan diet but buys every console and game they can get their hands on, updates their phone every 6 months and is constantly replacing parts in their PC to improve its performance? Can they justify it by saying these things are necessary? I can see good arguments for and against this, after all science is the thing that keeps us alive, art is the things that makes us want to live.

I think the fundamental issue most people have with Veganism, at least the issue I see most in discussions, is that it's presented as an absolutism when simply explained/advertised, and this simply isn't the case.


Good post, thanks, and the "less harm" is what I think most thoughtful people are going for. You can't stop the harming of some number of animals in the harvesting of plants, but certainly the amount of damage being done is exponentially smaller if you eat plant-based. So that's well worth doing, obviously.

I have a slightly different take on the concept of absolutism. I think you're right to point it out as part of the reaction, but I would argue it's not the fundamental issue people have with veganism. I think the fundamental reaction is that veganism is felt as an ethical criticism of society's (and individuals') behavior, and people take umbrage with that implied ethical critique. It attacks one of the core behaviors of western society, it infringes on deeply held traditions, and most of all, it's different. Especially in America, people seem to fancy themselves as rugged individualists, who are self sufficient and who at least love the idea of killing their own game for food if they don't actually do it themselves. It's tied into the cultural ethos and ideas of manhood.

That it appears to be absolutist, is an angle people who are already offended use to argue against it. But arguing that because a way of life isn't perfect means it's not worth doing is pretty silly on its face, and no vegan I've ever spoken with fails to recognize that it's not perfect. Absolutism is a straw man the offended use to attack a lifestyle they are offended by.

After that we get into "how do you get your protein" (easily, how do you get your fiber?) and other uniformed arguments about the diet. And in America we get to hear how God gave us dominion over the animals so we should be eating them. And other such nonsense.


I think we're generally saying the same thing here. It's the perceived absolutism that people see as an attack on their morals and ethics, but the fact that it isn't an absolutism is ignored/not understood by most. I also agree that's it's the thing most will us to try and pick apart someone's veganism by begging the question "What about this?", "Have you considered this?", "Aren't plants alive too?" and other nonsense.

If they were truly interested they would be asking how you ensure you get enough lysine and threonine to try it themselves. But most of them don't actually understand what protein is.


As has been mentioned, the importance of labelling - either by the individual or by others - is rather rife in human society. And to simplify the groups as much as possible. Hence, meat eater - vegetarian - vegan, is the natural stepping stone that society sort of insists upon. I like the explanation of "plant based diet" (though could I change the words around so that I could simplify it to PDB? :D ) and feel that I will try to use this term more for myself, though I am not the type who wants to talk about it all that much to most people. Overseas at the moment, I am telling people that I am vegetarian, and even that is only when I have to (I am in Norway and have been asked if I would like some fish, which is apparently very delicious, and fishing is obviously a deeply held tradition here). I feel that even saying that comes with a hint of, "Why do you eat meat?", at least from their listening perspective.

The electronics point is a good one. I have had only a couple of phones in the last eight years or so, though I have also gone through quite a number of cheap laptops :(
User avatar gregrowlerson
Member
 
Posts: 1,893
Joined: 06 Aug 2010 05:46

Re:

12 Feb 2019 10:02

Nastyy wrote:I did the strict vegan thing for a while and found it extremely draining. Diet side of if it easy, but it's the other stuff that just wears you out. It just takes too much effort, time and money for something that yields no personal gain and living in a place where meat consumption is on the rise it really makes you feel like you're wasting your time. Also, though I've never been vocal about being vegan, it seemed to matter a whole lot to my friends/family. They would wait for a moment to say "THAT'S NOT VEGAN YOU CAN'T DO THAT" and social gatherings became a source of stress.

It really pisses you off when you're riding your bike in -25C through 5 inches of snow and then you get critiqued for eating candy that has some insect ingredients in it all the while they're chugging down ounces of meat. Being vegan is like bailing water out of a boat while everybody else is pissing on it.

Nowadays I'm in the plant-based diet camp and feel much better. I stopped fretting about the small stuff and not trying to fit under a label like when I was vegan has eased the pressure.


Great post. I particularly like what I bolded!
User avatar gregrowlerson
Member
 
Posts: 1,893
Joined: 06 Aug 2010 05:46

13 Feb 2019 14:01

aphronesis
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,863
Joined: 30 Jul 2011 16:47

14 Feb 2019 10:28

RedheadDane wrote:What exactly is the definition of a 'Flexitarian'? Is it just someone who sometimes doesn't eat meat - and other animal-based products?


i think it's someone whom lacks commitment but still has need of appearing superior to others...........
User avatar ebandit
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,159
Joined: 02 Aug 2012 18:24

Re:

15 Feb 2019 18:47

ebandit wrote:
RedheadDane wrote:What exactly is the definition of a 'Flexitarian'? Is it just someone who sometimes doesn't eat meat - and other animal-based products?


i think it's someone whom lacks commitment but still has need of appearing superior to others...........


Consider asking why people actually become vegans, vegetarians, flexitarians, etc. If you honestly think the answer is "to feel superior", I'd suggest the problem lies...

...not with the people eating differently.
User avatar red_flanders
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,163
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 06:45

Previous

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests

Back to top