You can have people understand that while eating less meat is better, it is not good enough
And if people stopped having this absurdly stupid behaviour of wanting to always look like they are perfect, they would be fine saying “yes, I know that I’m still eating bacon and that it’s immoral, but I’m working on improving and eliminating meat altogether from my diet eventually”, instead of “yeah I’m amazing because I’m vegan, but I still eat mean yknow”
I don’t know why it is so hard for people that they might do something immoral. We are in such a self-centered, obnoxious period of time that people seem to define morals on their behaviour, as long as they do something they will have to justify that it’s moral one way or the other.
I’m not a vegan because I don’t think I can be right now. Yes, it’s immoral of me to give money that exploits and abuses animals, and if and when I can I try to minimize it.
Am I going to start pretending that it’s fine? No, of course not. But not everything can be magically and instantly perfect. What matters is to admit it, which is exactly the opposite of what this post (and almost all the comments) do.
Getting the whole world on a 95% plant based diet is effectively the same as getting 95% of the world to be vegan. Which do you think is more immediately achievable when there is always this much push back from meat eaters?
You think the majority dictates whether an industry or law exists? Why aren’t private planes illegal yet? Why are we still dependant on oil? Why don’t women have the same rights as men? Why do police have juducial immunity to murder? Why does the military industrial complex exist? There are systems and forces greater than just a majority.
Excuse the idiom, but we have to boil a frog, and it’s easier to do it through slowly turning up the temp. To get someone to move to a mostly vegetarian is easier when you tell them “sure you can still eat meat.” Then, when meat isn’t a staple of the dish, it’s much easier to transition them to full vegetarianism/veganism.
On top of that, the meat industry (who is actually dictating how much meat is in the US diet) would collapse if people are eating meat less than 2 days a month.
All these examples typically don’t have a majority agreeing on it. You think that there is a majority that strongly wants to ban private planes, stop sexism, or so? Nah, most people don’t care. But veganism is actively, strongly opposed to animal abuse, so if a majority is vegan, things would change.
And I never said that people who eat meat should be bullied, my point is that eating meat shouldn’t be seen as completely fine, and especially not as compatible with veganism.
It’s like saying “yeah, I’m antifa+nazi”, it doesn’t make sense and only weakens the concept of veganism
You can have people understand that while eating less meat is better, it is not good enough
And if people stopped having this absurdly stupid behaviour of wanting to always look like they are perfect, they would be fine saying “yes, I know that I’m still eating bacon and that it’s immoral, but I’m working on improving and eliminating meat altogether from my diet eventually”, instead of “yeah I’m amazing because I’m vegan, but I still eat mean yknow”
I don’t know why it is so hard for people that they might do something immoral. We are in such a self-centered, obnoxious period of time that people seem to define morals on their behaviour, as long as they do something they will have to justify that it’s moral one way or the other.
I’m not a vegan because I don’t think I can be right now. Yes, it’s immoral of me to give money that exploits and abuses animals, and if and when I can I try to minimize it. Am I going to start pretending that it’s fine? No, of course not. But not everything can be magically and instantly perfect. What matters is to admit it, which is exactly the opposite of what this post (and almost all the comments) do.
Getting the whole world on a 95% plant based diet is effectively the same as getting 95% of the world to be vegan. Which do you think is more immediately achievable when there is always this much push back from meat eaters?
What?
If 100% of people eat 5% meat, meat consumption continues.
If only 50% (or even less) of people are vegan, meat production gets banned.
How can you believe it would ever be the same? The world cannot be reduced to a single percentage, this argument is really absurd.
You think the majority dictates whether an industry or law exists? Why aren’t private planes illegal yet? Why are we still dependant on oil? Why don’t women have the same rights as men? Why do police have juducial immunity to murder? Why does the military industrial complex exist? There are systems and forces greater than just a majority.
Excuse the idiom, but we have to boil a frog, and it’s easier to do it through slowly turning up the temp. To get someone to move to a mostly vegetarian is easier when you tell them “sure you can still eat meat.” Then, when meat isn’t a staple of the dish, it’s much easier to transition them to full vegetarianism/veganism.
On top of that, the meat industry (who is actually dictating how much meat is in the US diet) would collapse if people are eating meat less than 2 days a month.
All these examples typically don’t have a majority agreeing on it. You think that there is a majority that strongly wants to ban private planes, stop sexism, or so? Nah, most people don’t care. But veganism is actively, strongly opposed to animal abuse, so if a majority is vegan, things would change.
And I never said that people who eat meat should be bullied, my point is that eating meat shouldn’t be seen as completely fine, and especially not as compatible with veganism. It’s like saying “yeah, I’m antifa+nazi”, it doesn’t make sense and only weakens the concept of veganism
So what about the post do you disagree with?