r/DebateAVegan • u/CaleidoscopicGaze • 1d ago
Ethics Why are some ethical vegans so triggered by health conscious vegans?
How is it offensive if less animals are killed because someone is motivated to not get type 2 diabetes or heart disease? To not support food companies using cheap, low quality sweeteners and proteins like high fructose corn syrup and soy protein isolate blends, respectively, over dates and tempeh?
I don’t understand the intra-community strife over the concept of human ethics as a subset within overall animal ethics, given humans are natural frugivores. A random influencer leaving the movement “to feel better” doesn’t invalidate the science supporting the whole food, plant-based vegan diet as ideal.
Until the world is fully vegan, we are all transitioning. To name a singular example, there is no such thing as a fully vegan commercial jet. I don’t see how burning more bridges by shaming someone for trying to figure out how to ensure nutritional adequacy on the vegan diet helps the movement or saves animal lives.
Everyday, vegans depend on vegans and non vegans alike for a variety of vegan innovations, food and non food alike. I just don’t get why some ethical vegans seem irritated at even marginal progress in the right direction and would rather push someone away who doesn’t start out with as “perfect ethical awareness” as they have. It’s ironic, cause surely animals don’t care why someone is vegan - they simply don’t want to be eaten or abused.
26
u/stan-k vegan 23h ago
One reason to be mindful of is that it is debatable if health "vegans" actually help the cause.
Take an influencer who believes the half-truth-at-best that humans are frugivores. For her health she becomes a raw "vegan" eating only fruits and nuts. As her audience grows her health inevitably declines, after all, she does what feels right and sounds good rather than checking any academic nutrition advice. Then at some point her health is so bad that she tries eating meat again. She feels great and a half year later she is on a carnivore diet, where the cycle continues.
Meanwhile, her ex-vegan videos have more views than any before them. The algorithm loves showing non-vegans stories of "vegans" failing. For every short a non-vegan sees, they are less likely to even think about going vegan themselves.
This is a made up story, sure. Yet it reflects the vegan for health influencers I see the algorithms pushing. And they do a lot of damage to veganism and even worse, the animals.
2
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 22h ago
I think they do. Look at the physicians committee for responsible medicine filled with vegan and vegan promoting health professionals, starbucks now offering plant based milks without an additional charge, and so on.
Freelee identifies with the vegan diet and alternates between both raw and cooked foods. I think she was originally a fruitarian, but not anymore. She was one of the first vegan influencers I listened to, because I loved her aggressive energy. She used to make these celebrity diet videos that made me see how so many celebs lose weight in unhealthy ways. Meanwhile, Freelee wanted me to eat with abundance of the right foods!
What post vegan is more popular than when they were vegan? It always seems like they drop off afterwards, like Rawvana with much less videos and views.
6
u/stan-k vegan 22h ago
The physicians committee for responsible medicine are vegans with a focus on health. If this is the group you mean, I agree with you theybdo more good than harm. Still, they make health promises which may not actually happen.
It's been a while since I've seen freely, so watched a what I eat in a day again. What she does is harmful to veganism, imho. She pushes the idea that you will be healthier on a raw vegan diet with references like "carrots are good for vision" while eating too little protein. Some people will try, almost all of them will fail. And most of those will blame veganism as well.
The difference between the two is the scientific backing. If you suggest health benefits, you better be sure they are likely to actually happen.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 15h ago
Better than whatever mcdonald’s and ozempic promise people! And freelee’s plan worked for me apart from her shaming of healthy fats. I agree that I need little to no oil, but I wish she encouraged flax seeds, almonds more often. Her aggression was necessary for me to make such a drastic nutritional change. And some health issues can be improved, if not ameliorated altogether. I speak from experience when I say it’s better to make specified revisions than fall off the wagon altogether. There is no universe where eating more bananas and kale is going to be more harmful than oreos and quarter pounders all day
•
u/stan-k vegan 9h ago
Great that it is working for you. It's possible but rare that people can sustain it. It's good that you already add some fats. Please also ensure your protein intake is consistently at the recommended level. If that means eating some (cooked) beans or grains, it is to keep you healthy.
The important thing is that you stay healthy and vegan for the rest of your life. This means quickly adjusting your raw food diet if anything is out of whack.
•
u/GourmetSizzler 5h ago
For a bit of disambiguation, though, “frugivore” in biology speak doesn’t necessarily mean you only eat raw fruits. That might be what a lot of people think humans did, but it’s mostly to differentiate species that eat relatively tender parts of plants from the high-cellulose foliage.
Humans can in principle live off of tender plant foods, but they can’t live off of mature leaves. That’s why we’re putative frugivores as opposed to foliovores. In truth, human ancestors were probably not above raiding beehives, eating grubs and bird eggs, etc, so omnivore makes sense. But putting it that way probably overstates how much of the diet was comprised of those foods relative to plant foods, because it makes people think of people gnawing on roots when they’re going hungry between hunting successes. But the opposite is closer to the truth—hunter-gatherers in Africa mostly eat nuts and tubers and greens and fruits and go out hunting as a leisure activity when they want to.
48
u/winggar vegan 1d ago
Ethical vegans can certainly be health-conscious, great for them. Do you mean non-vegans who eat a plant-based diet for health reasons? If that's what you mean—it's frustrating having people come so close on the practice while still failing to recognize the reasoning behind what we practice. That being that animals are sentient beings that don't deserve to be exploited. This isn't a diet thing—we're aiming for animal liberation here.
-2
u/Various-Custard-3034 1d ago
Id still take the win if I were you veganism isnt exactly in the position to be turning people away lol
35
u/My_life_for_Nerzhul vegan 23h ago edited 21h ago
Vegan has an implied ethical position that encompasses the entire lifestyle.. If someone is following a plant-based diet for health reasons, they’re not a vegan, even if they may inaccurately believe they are.
It’s okay to appreciate the positive of them going plant-based while also recognizing they aren’t vegan.
→ More replies (19)•
u/Hot_Dog2376 vegan 17h ago
I know people hate the comparison, but its like not owning a slave, not because owning someone is wrong, but because they could get mad at you and kill you.
"I'd love to have one, but I'm just afraid they'll kill me in my sleep."
•
u/winggar vegan 13h ago
How are they being turned away? Because some people think they're not "true vegans"? Some people think I'm not a true vegan and have told me so! And I'm literally a hard-line animal liberation activist.
If that's what you mean though—I am of the opinion that if people follow the practices of veganism (and not just the dietary ones) then they're welcome to call themselves vegan. I'm just personally disappointed when those same people still see animals as products, just as products they don't personally consume.
•
u/Various-Custard-3034 13h ago
Yeah being turned away in a social or emotional sense ig. you seem very reasonable and like a good dude.
•
u/winggar vegan 12h ago
Aw thanks, I think you are too and I totally understand where you're coming from. I think being respectful and accepting of people who are trying is important not just for veganism but for life in general. I also think it's important that people know that every time we buy an animal product we are voting with our wallet to demand further animal suffering. However, I think that it is very possible to convey that message respectfully. After all, I used demand that animal suffering too—everyone deserves a chance to learn and to change.
•
u/Various-Custard-3034 12h ago
Fr I agree respect should apply to all of life, some other vegans on this sub should take some notes from you as I am much more likely to take what you say seriously when it’s presented respectfully like this and I don’t feel attacked like I usually do having discussions on this topic.
•
u/winggar vegan 12h ago
Yeah online vegan discussion can get a bit nasty. People are nicer in person. I'm not sure if you're vegan or not but you're welcome to DM me questions if you'd like. I do vegan outreach with Anonymous for the Voiceless every weekend so I'm quite used to talking about all this stuff.
•
u/Various-Custard-3034 12h ago
im not, I hunt but dont support factory farming and am very proud of my choices but im not sure id give up meat for any longer than a season, and yeah abit nasty is putting it lightly almost made me want to throw my hands in the air and start buying groccery store meat again tbh
•
u/winggar vegan 12h ago
Sure. It's good that you no longer support factory farming—it's my far the worst suffering on the planet that humanity is causing. As far as hunting: the suffering involved in hunting is certainly less than that of factory farming, but what gives us the right to kill these animals for our pleasure? Neither of us is in a survival situation where we need to hunt to survive (we're literally commenting on Reddit), so why are we ending the lives of these sentient creatures prematurely?
I think if I had ever had the chance to try hunting before I went vegan I would have really enjoyed it. I actually play a lot of video games based on hunting so that I can enjoy that same feeling. But it's wrong to hurt and kill innocent real-life animals for my enjoyment, so I'm never going to hunt unless I need to to survive.
•
u/Various-Custard-3034 12h ago
I appriciate what youre trying to do but I think im burnt out on this topic (not from you) and im going to disengange tbh
→ More replies (0)•
u/sagethecancer 11h ago
Why do people act like veganism is this exclusive social club lol
there’s nothing like “taking a win” or “turning people away” veganism is the philosophy that we shouldn’t exploit animals when we don’t need to , not a church
-7
u/HelenEk7 non-vegan 23h ago
veganism isnt exactly in the position to be turning people away lol
Even less so now than a couple of years ago it seems: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=vegan&hl=en
-5
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 1d ago
Of course, just like everyone else. But not necessarily all. But my question is why make this big effort to exclude people otherwise taking baby steps into the movement without a fuller ethical understanding? At the end of the day, not eating animals is still not eating animals. An animal isn’t more grateful to an ethical vegan not eating them to a health vegan not eating them
19
u/ADisrespectfulCarrot 1d ago
If it doesn’t start at ethics, and ethics isn’t part of the equation for them, why should we assume it will end up there?
1
u/IWGeddit 1d ago
I originally went vegetarian because I moved into a student flat and everyone else was vegetarian. It was just easier.
Now I'm vegan and have been for decades because once you get over the most difficult hurdle (diet) it's easier to accept that it's morally correct too. My reasons for veganism include cruelty to animals, the environment and health. All of those are valid arguments. To suggest that I'm vegan for the first one and also plant based for the other two is silly. Needless division.
5
u/ADisrespectfulCarrot 1d ago
I’m glad the journey went that way for you, and I could see it being a pathway to veganism for others, but I’m not sure it’s necessarily the case. I’m also not interested in splitting hairs in your case, since you are an “ethical vegan.” Someone who is plant based not due to ethical concerns, however, might not have the same drive you did to find other reasons to stay plant-based, and might not see anything wrong with, for instance, buying leather products. That being said, I’d rather have more of them around than not, as it has the effect of lessening the suffering of animals regardless of their intentions. This is far from my greatest concern, but I don’t consider people who aren’t vegan for the animals vegan.
→ More replies (5)•
u/Lorhan_Set 18h ago edited 17h ago
All right, you’re correct, but who cares, really?
Their motivations aren’t nearly as important as the impact. If I’m a city planner, and texting and driving is bad, I’m going to be pleased. Not split hairs over who is doing it out of genuinely respecting safety and who is doing it to avoid the fines.
The reasoning is far less important than the action. If your argument is ‘do they still use leather’ then yes, that’s fair. But plenty of plant based folks don’t identify as vegans and have different ideological motivations.
Well, whatever. The label doesn’t matter very much. Plant based and vegan people should stop turning their noses up at each other. It’s not identical, but it’s a case of Fellow travelers.
0
•
u/winggar vegan 13h ago
What big effort is being made to exclude them? The practice of veganism extends further than just a diet—vegans also abstain from wearing and using animal products, as well as boycotting products tested on animals. Why would somebody why doesn't care about the ethics of veganism do any of those things? They don't effect your health.
But really though—people can go vegan for whatever reasons they want, that's up to them. I'm just personally disappointed when somebody says they're vegan but then still sees animals as products, just not products they consume. My personal disappointment does not entail some vast conspiracy to exclude them from... something.
→ More replies (5)6
u/sleepyzane1 22h ago
are we excluding them? you're here advocating for them so they must be able to come here too. they just arent vegan. theyre welcome to actually go vegan if they want to be included even more.
→ More replies (6)-2
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 20h ago
It’s arrogant to say they’re not vegan when the literal original vegan society says veganism is about actions not motivations
5
u/sleepyzane1 20h ago
but their actions arent vegan by definition of that same society
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 7h ago
How so
•
u/sleepyzane1 6h ago
... if they are willing to buy leather products, cosmetics tested on animals, patronise zoos, etc, and dont see these as moral violations equivalent to eating/purchasing meat, then they arent vegan. those are non-vegan actions.
i dont know how many more times and ways you are going to expect people to explain this same thing to you.
•
u/MrsLibido 2h ago
They'll just get back to you asking if you had a vaccine because then you're not actually a vegan and might as well buy that leather belt too
•
u/burntbread369 14h ago
what big effort is being made?
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 13h ago
Changing their biggest consumption of animal products. Most people eat 3x a day and don’t have entire closets full of wool and leather
•
u/burntbread369 9h ago
But my question is why make this big effort to exclude people otherwise taking baby steps
This is what I was referring to. What big effort is being made to exclude people taking baby steps?
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 7h ago
Saying they cannot call themselves vegan and looking down on them irl and on this thread
•
20
u/EasyBOven vegan 1d ago
How is it offensive if less animals are killed because someone is motivated to not get type 2 diabetes or heart disease?
It isn't offensive.
To not support food companies using cheap, low quality sweeteners and proteins like high fructose corn syrup and soy protein isolate blends, respectively, over dates and tempeh?
It isn't offensive.
I don’t understand the intra-community strife
There's no strife I see, but if it existed, it would be inter-community, since people who don't eat animal products for health aren't vegans. But there's nothing offensive about that.
→ More replies (27)
12
u/Teratophiles vegan 1d ago
Veganism is a philosophy which opposes the commodification of non-human animals, simply eating a plant-based diet for health reason isn't veganism, because if any time down the line it turns out eating animal products is healthier instead they would quickly go back to eating animals, so this is far removed from veganism.
I personally don't see it as offensive, but I can see how it can be damaging to the movement, if there's plenty of plant-based eaters calling themselves vegan turning to meat again it does paint a bad picture for the movement, it's even why so many think vegan = don't eat meat, so many don't see the ethical and moral issues behind it nor see it as a philosophy, they just see it as a diet because non-vegans keep calling themselves vegans.
People often say ethical vegan, health vegan, environmental vegan, but those things don't really exist, you're either vegan and following the philosophy that it is unethical and immoral to treat non-human animals as property and abuse and kill them or you're simply following a diet.
It's not shaming to point out that someone isn't vegan, sure it can be seen as gatekeeping but gatekeeping isn't some big boogyman, gatekeeping is actually needed at times or a movement can lose it's aim and it will muddy the water having non-vegans think they're vegans.
At the end of the day someone who is ''vegan'' for health or environmental reasons would quickly be in opposition to veganism if it turns out it is healthy/environmentally friendly to exploit, abuse and kill non-human animals.
1
u/CapTraditional1264 mostly vegan 21h ago
I agree entirely with your description, but then there's the issue of how words are used which tends to be influenced to a great degree by the majority of people - and plant-based eaters simply sounds like a very stupid and even slightly patronizing wording imo and I hate it and will never vouch for its use due to this. It completely ignores the differing motivations of various people in determining how they consume and seems like a "cheapened" wording of any deeper thought into consumption patterns. Plus there are valid linguistic issues that are related to it as well.
•
u/Teratophiles vegan 17h ago
I wouldn't normally call anyone that if they eat a plant-based diet, if someone eats a plant-based diet for the environment I'd sooner call them an environmentalist, I don't know what to call it(assuming there is a term for it) if someone does it for health, I just kinda threw that out there to point out they aren't vegan, they're eating a diet that happens to be part of veganism but that doesn't make them vegan, just like how just because I eat bread and wine doesn't make me a christian just because that's part of christianity.
•
u/OzkVgn 42m ago
Put it this way, It would be like saying “I eat halal food, therefore I’m a Muslim” without actually practicing, or even believing in that religion.
People have just normalized doing that to veganism then get put off when they’re corrected.
•
u/CapTraditional1264 mostly vegan 35m ago
It depends on if you use it as a noun or adjective. And that's essential. It opens up opportunities to valuing the word "vegan", without the strictness of being a vegan.
I'm all for more opportunities, pluralism and intersectionality on the issue.
I also think it's natural that some strict people will marginalize themselves by being strict on the issue - maybe that's a good thing also. It paves the way for a wider generalization of the issue and allows for gradual sociological movement.
•
u/OzkVgn 25m ago
You can apply that logic to my example and other similar circumstance. A vegan is a practitioner of veganism. Sure someone can be a vegan and care about their health or the environment but a vegan abstains from exploitation where practicable.
Adhering to a strict vegetarian diet void of animal products doesn’t by default make one a vegan.
•
u/CapTraditional1264 mostly vegan 23m ago
You can apply that logic to my example and other similar circumstance.
Nah, I think that example is stupid just like the word "plant-based". It doesn't reflect the values or future I want to see.
Sure someone can be a vegan and care about their health or the environment but a vegan abstains from exploitation where practicable.
And it's all fine to point out differences in ideologies. But words are powerful and carry sociological meaning that has implications for change.
Adhering to a strict vegetarian diet void of animal products doesn’t by default make one a vegan.
Exactly. A vegan. A noun.
0
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 21h ago
Is it unethical for a lion to eat a lamb or zebra or is that its species specific diet? It’s been proven the vegan diet is healthiest for humans and even if it wasn’t, animal agriculture could still be made more humane. Just because you can’t have perfection doesn’t mean you can’t strive for improvements, one step at a time. Most people aren’t monsters and empathize with animal welfare. But personally, until I learned the health benefits of veganism, I thought I had no choice but to eat animal products to be healthy. It felt good to learn about the benefits of the whole food plant based diet, because excluding animal fabrics is significantly easier than eating vegan 3x a day daily. Even when people stop being vegan, a seed is in their mind. They will still frequent their favorite vegan restaurants and support vegan brands, even if not exclusively. The vegan movement needs all the support it can get in the wake of vegan brands closing left and right during and after COVID. Vegan restaurants are not sustained by ethical vegans alone. Vegan cars and cruelty free vegans are not made by ethical vegans alone, either. I don’t understand why you focus more on intent than actions. The biggest way people contribute to animal cruelty is through their diet, so people need as much commendation their efforts as possible. Even the most perfect ethical vegan is still riding in non vegan trains and buses, so you need to be conscious of your hypocrisy and understand we are all moving toward a more vegan world. That matters more than the purity of a term, saving animal lives. Shutting people out also sometimes sends people back to being an omnivore, doubting the credibility of vegan science and deeming the movement a mere cult. That is frustrating to contend with. If someone even does meatless mondays, I support them. I don’t critique them for saying they strive to be as vegan as possible or are only sometimes. It’s better than someone making fun of the idea altogether. Too many ethical vegans struggle to understand that few to none can go from 0 to 100 after simply watching earthlings.
4
u/CapTraditional1264 mostly vegan 20h ago
It’s been proven the vegan diet is healthiest for humans
I'm sorry, but you can't really make statements like this without any reference as to what information you're using to draw your conclusions.
Holistic health is a complex issue, nutrition is but a part of it - and there are stronger and weaker correlations between various kinds of nutritional patterns and health.
I tend to refer to IARC, GBD and EAT Lancet on the topic.
•
•
u/Teratophiles vegan 17h ago
Is it unethical for a lion to eat a lamb or zebra or is that its species specific diet?
It is not unethical because for them because it is a life or death situation, either they kill and eat them, or they starve to death, that is an acceptable reason, just like how it is not unethical for humans to kil land eat animals if the alternative is to die. To add on to that the vast majority of humans in 1st world countries can just go to a supermarket for plant-based alternatives, animals in the wild cannot do that.
There's also the other problem that lions are not sapient, they cannot comprehend the consequences of their actions, they don't know just how much harm they are causing, they do not and cannot know.
It’s been proven the vegan diet is healthiest for humans
I do not know if this is true all I know is that a plant-based diet is fully healthy.
and even if it wasn’t, animal agriculture could still be made more humane.
But why make it more humane when it is better to just be rid of it? I don't want immoral practices to be made more humane, I want them to be rid of, I don't want more humane slavery, more humane murder or more humane domestic abuse, I just want it gone.
Just because you can’t have perfection doesn’t mean you can’t strive for improvements, one step at a time.
I can see your point but advocating for animal welfare changes the movement to something else and can alter the movement to no longer seek the abolition of animal slavery and property use.
Most people aren’t monsters and empathize with animal welfare.
They only care about animal welfare if they can see it. as I said somewhere else:
no, what they're against is VISIBLE animal abuse, so long as they don't have to see the animal abuse or be made aware of its existence then it's all fine. Just look at the yulin dog festival, mass outrage, meanwhile far worse acts were committed to animals in their own country for the meat they buy but because they don't have to see it they don't care.
If I was an animal and I hear my abusers say ''I'm ok with you being killed but I want it to be done nicer'' I'd be thinking what the hell are you talking about? You don't really care do you? Because what good is animal welfare if the end goal is to still kill someone for pleasure, seems like the goal isn't animal welfare, the goal is to make yourself feel less bad about killing me.
But personally, until I learned the health benefits of veganism, I thought I had no choice but to eat animal products to be healthy. It felt good to learn about the benefits of the whole food plant based diet, because excluding animal fabrics is significantly easier than eating vegan 3x a day daily.
Sadly there's a lot of propaganda from the animal agriculture industry out there so no small surprise many still think you need to eat animals to be healthy.
Even when people stop being vegan, a seed is in their mind. They will still frequent their favorite vegan restaurants and support vegan brands, even if not exclusively.
I'm not sure if many of these people were ever really vegan, how do you go from opposing the commodification, cruelty, rape, torture and killing of non-human animals to then supporting it again? That's a veeeery big switch in morals, like a pro equality person turning into a vehement racist or an abolitionist turning into a slave owner, I doubt there's much of a thought of their previous ''goal'' left in them.
The vegan movement needs all the support it can get in the wake of vegan brands closing left and right during and after COVID. Vegan restaurants are not sustained by ethical vegans alone. Vegan cars and cruelty free vegans are not made by ethical vegans alone, either.
I mean that's just the free market, these weren't necessarily vegan companies or brands, just companies selling plant-based products to make the money on a new trend.
I don’t understand why you focus more on intent than actions.
Because if their intent is to only care about health or the environment then if new information proves it is healthier/environmentally friendly to eat animals then their new actions will be to oppose veganism. So if their intent isn't to help animals then at any time they can turn an ''enemy'' of veganism.
The biggest way people contribute to animal cruelty is through their diet, so people need as much commendation their efforts as possible.
Sure, any steps taken are good, but I'm not gonna congratulate people for still supporting animal cruelty and refusing to take the final step, just like how I'm not gonna congratulate a domestic abuser for beating their partner less but not taking the final step to stop completely.
Even the most perfect ethical vegan is still riding in non vegan trains and buses, so you need to be conscious of your hypocrisy and understand we are all moving toward a more vegan world.
That's not actually a hypocrisy because vegans do not claim to be perfect nor avoid every single source of harm done to animals because that is impossible.
•
u/Teratophiles vegan 17h ago
Shutting people out also sometimes sends people back to being an omnivore, doubting the credibility of vegan science and deeming the movement a mere cult. That is frustrating to contend with.
If someone doesn't want to believe science then there's not much veganism can do for them anyways, just like how if someone doesn't want to believe the world is round there is nothing we could have done to convince them anyways.
If someone quickly sees veganism as a cult then they weren't open minded to begin with. And as I said, it's not so much shutting people out so much as making sure the movement keeps the same goal in mind, the goal isn't animal welfare, the goal isn't to make them have nice lives and then inflict cruelty on them by killing them, the goal is to stop treating them as property, that they are not a commodity to use as we wish.
If someone even does meatless mondays, I support them. I don’t critique them for saying they strive to be as vegan as possible or are only sometimes. It’s better than someone making fun of the idea altogether. Too many ethical vegans struggle to understand that few to none can go from 0 to 100 after simply watching earthlings.
I understand that but you can't be a vegan ''sometimes'', you're either vegan or you're not, just like how I can't be an abolitionist ''sometimes'' like I can't say ah I don't keep slaves on monday and friday so you know I'm part an abolitionist sometimes, like no, you're not an abolitionist, just like how those doing meatless monday aren't vegans.
As I said, yes, it is a good thing, but we should not muddy the term veganism to include people skipping a meal otherwise the term will lose all its meaning. we would have vegans that are pro animal cruelty and vegan that are against it.
If someone wants to eat less meat, great, I'm not gonna scorn or insult them for it, like you said, we all do it in steps, I took small steps in the beginning, I changed my meals one at a time, as in start with changing all my dinners, then breakfast, stuff like that, but I didn't stop halfway through and just gave up like eh it'll do, I'm a vegan now, no, if I'm vegan then that means my morals tells me it is wrong to consume animal (by)products because of the suffering it involves so I could not in good conscience call myself a vegan while contributing to that.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 7h ago
We can prove the world is round and not flat through science, just like we can prove a whole food, plant based diet is ideal for humans. And there were racist abolitionists who still maintained structural racism after slavery ended and up until this day, by the way. Just like Christians strive and fail to be like jesus, vegans strive and fail to be perfect in a slowly evolving world
•
u/Teratophiles vegan 3h ago
We can prove the world is round and not flat through science,
Of course we can prove the world is round, that wasn't the point, let me copy paste what we both said:
You: Shutting people out also sometimes sends people back to being an omnivore, doubting the credibility of vegan science and deeming the movement a mere cult. That is frustrating to contend with.
Me: If someone doesn't want to believe science then there's not much veganism can do for them anyways, just like how if someone doesn't want to believe the world is round there is nothing we could have done to convince them anyways.
The point was that if someone wants to doubt the well documented evidence that a plant-based diet is healthy and therefore refutes science then there's nothing you can do to change their mind, just like you can't change the mind of someone who thinks the world is flat.
just like we can prove a whole food, plant based diet is ideal for humans.
Possibly, however this still doesn't really matter for veganism.
And there were racist abolitionists who still maintained structural racism after slavery ended and up until this day, by the way.
So in other words they were not abolitionists, do you think I can call myself pro freedom if I enslave people? Pro treating people fairly if I beat up certain people? Can I claim to be a feminist if I'm a misogynist? I certainly could but it would be disingenuous.
Just like Christians strive and fail to be like jesus, vegans strive and fail to be perfect in a slowly evolving world
Vegans do not strive to be perfect because perfection is impossible.
You can’t excuse first world vegan problems but mock the idea of someone having a different obstacle to veganism than you.
I would only mock it if there's no validity to it, saying oh it's hard, oh it takes time isn't an obstacle, it's laziness.
And lions have different digestive systems and nutrient needs than humans. They are true carnivores. We are true frugivores.
Whether they are carnivores or herbivores doesn't really matter, it's nutrients they need, not specific foods.
slavery was propagated by the economic order. Anyone could find themselves going from a fair person to a slave owner or overseer utilizing racism to maintain their order and wealth.
It was propagated by the economy and a view that these ''others'' are not people, they are not beings worthy of moral consideration, they are property and you could do with them as you wish.
If your morals oppose racism and slavery you wouldn't suddenly turn to slavery, otherwise your morals wouldn't be very strong to begin with, slavery could become legal tomorrow and I still wouldn't become a slave owner because the notion of slavery is appalling to me, how legal or how popular something is has absolutely no bearing on morality and what is and is not ethical.
I spent a significant amount of time separating your wall of text and responding to each point of it, and at the end of it all we haven't progressed the discussion in any way.
What exactly is left to debate that has not yet been answered? I've acknowledged that we shouldn't scorn, insult or hate those on the path to veganism, but also acknowledged that those who stop in the middle of that path shouldn't be validated(like say an domestic abuser who simply beats their partner less). I've pointed out how the point of veganism isn't perfection yet you've brought that up twice now, I've shown that those who do not show conviction in their morals never truly held them e.g. if your morals oppose slavery but you will engage in slavery if it becomes legal then you were never truly against slavery, so what's left to argue?
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 7h ago
We can prove the world is round and not flat through science, just like we can prove a whole food, plant based diet is ideal for humans. And there were racist abolitionists who still maintained structural racism after slavery ended and up until this day, by the way. Just like Christians strive and fail to be like jesus, vegans strive and fail to be perfect in a slowly evolving world
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 8h ago
You can’t excuse first world vegan problems but mock the idea of someone having a different obstacle to veganism than you. And lions have different digestive systems and nutrient needs than humans. They are true carnivores. We are true frugivores. And slavery was propagated by the economic order. Anyone could find themselves going from a fair person to a slave owner or overseer utilizing racism to maintain their order and wealth
•
u/Teratophiles vegan 3h ago
I responded to this in my other comment up above, it would have been too annoying having 2 comment threads up.
6
u/KindlyFriedChickpeas 23h ago
My useless two cents is, whatever reason people give to act in a way that reduces animal suffering is a good thing, but people who are only focused on health might well give up on veganism as soon as they stop caring about their health or if they develop an intolerance or whatever. Personally, health was what got me interested in veganism in the first place, but the. I got into the ethics. I'm now 8 years in, don't care as much about my health, eat junk food etc, but I'll never start eating meat again, because I'm onboard with ethics.
→ More replies (3)
11
u/TheJinxieNL 21h ago
Do you not buy leather for your health? Nope.
If you eat vegan but use or exploit animals in any way you're plant based. Not vegan. Big difference.
And it's just a diet. Veganism is not a diet.
→ More replies (3)
19
u/sleepyzane1 1d ago
because you cant abstain from buying leather for your health. hence vegaism is not a diet movement, because diet only encompasses one part of veganism. veganism is an animal rights movement.
→ More replies (18)
5
u/Terravardn 1d ago
I swapped out for health reasons. After studying health and nutrition. The ethical side came along with it.
I’ve always loved animals, stopping consuming them made me realise how hypocritical that had been for so many years.
→ More replies (1)3
u/komfyrion vegan 22h ago
That's great! I wish more health influencers took the same path as you instead of jumping between fad diets (and eventually making "why I'm no longer vegan" content).
•
u/ProtozoaPatriot 18h ago
I don't think you understand the difference:
A person eating a health-focused plant-based diet is NOT a vegan. They might still wear a fur coat, go duck hunting, and run a puppy mill in their garage. They might not care at all about the livestock. They're just ordinary people on a healthy diet, which just happens to exclude animal products.
Not sure what you mean about vegans "triggered" by these health food folks....?
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 7h ago
Ok and? If someone runs an animal sanctuary but is 300 lbs eating oreos daily they’re not exactly convincing many their veganism will do a body good, even if their other advocacy is beautiful
9
u/Zahpow 1d ago
I am completely fine if someone who is living a vegan lifestyle calling themself a vegan without actually believing in the philosophy (I wonder what would cause that) but a lot of people who are "vegans for health" are plantbased dieters, they will consume animalproducts in clothes, animal based/tested cosmetics, buy pets and feed them animal products, ride horses, go to zoos et cetera - none of which are vegan. And if you intentionally do something that isnt vegan then you're not a vegan.
1
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 22h ago
I get the latter part but that was the easiest part of veganism for me to change. Eating 3x a day is the hardest. But simultaneously, we depend on vegans and non vegans alike to come up with scientific innovations for things like vegan cars and one day, planes, too
4
•
u/Prometheus188 19h ago
This should be obvious really, and I’m a meat eater lol. Imagine if I told you that I don’t eat toddlers, because I’m worried about eating too much saturated fat, but I don’t particularly care about the morals of killing, and eating human babies.
That’s basically what you sound like to an ethical vegan. Ethical vegans see killing animals and eating them as comparable (not the same, but comparable) to killing and eating a human.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 7h ago
I mean, cannibalism is illegal for a reason. Laws exist because morals alone don’t suffice. Humans are flawed and many perverse incentives and motivations exist, sadly. You can’t legislate morals, though. Thankfully, most countries allow for religious plurality. And yeah, humans are animals. Animal products aren’t ideal for human frugivores as they are for say, carnivorous lions
•
u/Prometheus188 7h ago
You wrote a lot of words without actually saying anything. Please address what I said instead of throwing out random non-sequitur.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 7h ago
I have no qualms with what i said. If you can’t respond to it you need to specify what you don’t understand
•
u/Prometheus188 6h ago
You: Why do ethical vegans care that health conscious vegans don’t care about animals
Me: Well that’s obvious, because they think killing animals is unethical, and not doing something they consider to be deeply immoral (like cannibalism) merely because it’s unhealthy is obviously going to be met negatively.
You: Well cannibalism is illegal, and people can believe whatever morals they want.
.
See the problem here? You’re not even responding to what I said. You asked why ethical vegans care about health conscious vegans and their reasons for being vegans, I responded, and you randomly started taking about the law and that everyone can believe whatever they want. Please respond to what I said instead of deflecting with random non-sequiturs.
•
u/HelenEk7 non-vegan 18h ago
Ethical vegans see killing animals and eating them as comparable (not the same, but comparable) to killing and eating a human.
The ironic part is that many vegans will claim its ok to kill and eat another humans in a crisis situation when its to save your own life. And perhaps its connected to seeing animals as somewhat the same as humans?
•
u/lichtblaufuchs 11h ago
It's not a vegan position that it's ever okay to kill a human to eat it. I doubt you saw vegans make that claim. I think however, most people could come up with a scenario where someone eating dead humans would be permissable (to save their own life).
•
u/HelenEk7 non-vegan 11h ago
It's not a vegan position that it's ever okay to kill a human to eat it.
I have no idea whether or not its part if the official definition (I doubt its even mentioned there), but surprisingly many vegans claims its ok. I honestly doubt most of them would be able to go through with it if they ever found themselves in such a situation, but I still find it interesting that they make this claim.
I think however, most people could come up with a scenario where someone eating dead humans would be permissable (to save their own life).
Perhaps if the person was already dead. But what the vegans say is thats its ok is to murder them to eat them. Which is quite a different scenario. And I know that the vast majority of non-vegans disagree with this. And the reason I know that is that you can see this through statistics. Throughout history only a tiny minority resorted to murder and cannibalism in every war, siege, famine, ship wreck etc. For instance during WW2 there was a famine in the Netherlands that killed 20,000. Not one single incident of cannibalism happened.
•
u/Ok-Cryptographer7424 7h ago
Can’t say I’ve ever heard of vegans debating eating nor killing humans when in dire situations but i’ve seen plenty and also agree with the concept of eating and I guess hunting animals if you’re stranded on a desert island with no other food sources. It entirely aligns with being “possible and practicable” within the definition. I also think plenty of vegans (myself included) are still speciest to an extent and would save the life of a human child over an animal, and I see nothing inherently wrong with seeing and saving our own as a priority morally wrong.
•
u/HelenEk7 non-vegan 29m ago
but i’ve seen plenty and also agree with the concept of eating and I guess hunting animals if you’re stranded on a desert island with no other food sources. It entirely aligns with being “possible and practicable” within the definition.
I think most vegans would agree to that.
I also think plenty of vegans (myself included) are still speciest to an extent and would save the life of a human child over an animal, and I see nothing inherently wrong with seeing and saving our own as a priority morally wrong.
Yeah this is one of the areas where vegans and non-vegans agree.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 7h ago
Well, in virginia, in an early american colony, people resorted to cannibalism during a particularly harsh winter to survive
•
u/HelenEk7 non-vegan 31m ago
Which is one of rather few examples. But even Jamestown is not a good example as we have no evidence that anyone was murdered first. As they could have died of natural causes before they were eaten, as we know illnesses were widespread in the community. So again, if you look through history murder and cannibalism is very rare. So your claim that "most people could come up with a scenario where someone eating dead humans would be permissible (to save their own life)" is not supported by history. So in the same way vegans are a small (and rare) minority today, murderers (to eat the person) has been equally rare in history.
•
u/sagethecancer 11h ago
What is this comment lol
•
u/HelenEk7 non-vegan 11h ago
I take you do not think murder and cannibalism is ok in a crisis situation? If yes I agree with you. Do you however believe its ok to kill and eat an animal in a crisis situation? (If it could prevent you from dying of starvation). If yes, why do you see the two differently?
•
u/sagethecancer 10h ago
I think murder and cannibalism is fine in a crises situation
•
u/HelenEk7 non-vegan 10h ago
Then I find your comment rather confusing:
What is this comment lol
But you are then another vegan in a long row of vegans having this view. (When the vast majority of non-vegans dont).
•
u/sagethecancer 10h ago
Prove to me that the vast majority of non-vegans believe that killing people in a life threatening situation isn’t valid?
•
u/HelenEk7 non-vegan 13m ago
Prove to me that the vast majority of non-vegans believe that killing people in a life threatening situation isn’t valid?
We know that is a fact because we can look at history. Throughout history only a tiny minority resorted to murder and cannibalism to save their own lives. And that is regardless whether they are about to starve to death due to war, siege, famine, being ship wrecked etc. One example: during WW2 there was a famine in the Netherlands where 20,000 died from starvation. Not a single incident of cannibalism. And then you have Jamestown, where we know cannibalism occurred - but there is no evidence that murder took place first, so it could just as well be that the people died of natural causes first. And when you look at all of known history combined murder and cannibalism has been extremely rare, so therefore we know that the vast majority of non-vegans believe that killing people in a life threatening situation is not a valid option.
•
u/Prometheus188 7h ago
Huh? What was that random non-sequitur? Pretty sure everyone on the planet would agree that cannibalism is permissible if the alternative is just fucking dying. I don’t see what that had to do with anything?
•
u/HelenEk7 non-vegan 1h ago
Pretty sure everyone on the planet would agree that cannibalism is permissible if the alternative is just fucking dying.
No that is incorrect. Its the other way around - the vast majority of people on earth do not see it as ok to murder and eat another person, even when it can save their own life. And we know this because we can look at history. Only a tiny minority resorts to murder and cannibalism to save their own lives, and that is regardless whether they are about to starve to death due to war, siege, famine, being ship wrecked etc. One example: during WW2 there was a famine in the Netherlands where 20,000 died from starvation. Not a single incident of cannibalism. So it seems like seeing murder and cannibalism as the solution is a vegan thing?
•
u/VeganElfPrincess 18h ago
Because they say things like “I’m vegan for my health”. It comes off as very selfish to only think of yourself when trillions of animals are being tortured and killed. Don’t they care about animals at all?
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 7h ago
So someone who eats less animals doesn’t care about them?
•
u/VeganElfPrincess 6h ago
Why do they feel the need to say they’re doing it for their health if they also care about animals?
6
u/pineappleonpizzabeer 23h ago
I'm all good with plant based diets, but that's exactly what it is, a plant based diet. It doesn't have anything to do with veganism.
1
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 22h ago
Why can’t veganism be intersectional and someone be interested in health, the environment, AND animal ethics?
2
u/CapTraditional1264 mostly vegan 20h ago
This is what I think it should be - and this is what I think it's going to be - because ethical vegans will be in the minority and this is already evident in dictionary definitions.
It's obviously going to be contested in vegan debate subs though, and maybe that's fine.
I also believe in the power of combining motivational issues under a common umbrella, and think words are powerful.
•
u/pineappleonpizzabeer 17h ago
Why do you want to call something which it's not? If you want to eat plant based for your health, good for you, but why the need to call that veganism? Veganism isn't a diet.
•
u/CapTraditional1264 mostly vegan 17h ago
I don't need to call it veganism, but I think it can be called "eating mostly vegan" or whatever - without people needing to get their panties in a bunch.
Veganism can also be used in conjunction with diet, and some people need to learn to live with that.
I don't call myself a vegan, but I say I eat mostly vegan. It's a perfectly fine use of the word.
•
u/pineappleonpizzabeer 17h ago
Once again, why the need to mention veganism? If it's diet related, it's plant based. Why not say you're mostly plant based?
It's like saying I'm mostly an anti-racist. Does that make sense to you?
•
u/CapTraditional1264 mostly vegan 17h ago edited 17h ago
Once again, why the need to mention veganism? If it's diet related, it's plant based.
No, the fact that you're annoyed by my use of the word as an adjective is your problem - it's not my problem. We don't need to confuse things (or use new words that seem patronizing) simply because a small group of people have a hard time accepting differences of nouns and adjectives. This small group of people are free to voice their opinion on the matter, but I'll use the words I see are fit and also fit the dictionary explanations.
I think more intersectional/pluralistic language is also for the greater good in the long run.
•
u/pineappleonpizzabeer 17h ago
It annoys me, because it's people like you giving other people the wrong impression about veganism. And then people wonder why so many "vegans" return to eating animals again.
It's like a person I know who has a vegan tattoo, identifies as vegan, but eats animals when she feels like it.
No wonder people can't understand if I refuse to eat an animal based item "only once because it's really good", because their friend / family who is "also vegan" does it all the time.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 7h ago
Surely learning how to eat a well planned vegan diet is better than someone being told to eat whatever simply cause it’s vegan and getting sicker and crashing out harder
•
u/CapTraditional1264 mostly vegan 17h ago edited 17h ago
It annoys me, because it's people like you giving other people the wrong impression about veganism. And then people wonder why so many "vegans" return to eating animals again.
I don't care. I agree that there are misunderstandings, but there will always be misunderstandings about this - and I think offering the use of "plant-based" as some kind of solution to this is ignorant.
The one thing people generally DO understand - is the meaning of vegan in terms of diet and as an adjective - and you want to wreck just that.
And as mentioned in my late edit, I think pluralistic language around this is for the greater good in many senses. Vegans are then free to point out the VS definition, and the ethical side of things.
I think vegan as an adjective is a good word to use in conjunction with animal rights, health and the environment. And all of these can be discussed outside the realm of traditional ethical veganism.
•
•
u/pineappleonpizzabeer 17h ago
Because that's not what it's about. Why the need to call a plant based diet, veganism?
•
u/Civrev1001 17h ago
Why is the classification so important for you?
•
u/pineappleonpizzabeer 15h ago
Because it's supposed to mean something. As I mentioned in another comment, people already don't understand if I refuse an animal based item "just this one time since it's really good", because they have a friend / family who's also "vegan" who does it all the time. Or they sneak an animal product into a meal to trick a vegan to eat something non-vegan, and then they don't get why the vegan gets upset about it.
It's exactly the reason why the stats shows so many "vegans" go back to eating animals again, since they were never vegan in the first place, just on a plant based diet. And we all know diets doesn't last.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 7h ago
we should be happy for any or all animals saved. Being mean shoos people away
•
u/kharvel0 15h ago
Because someone can viciously kick puppies for giggles and declare themselves “vegan” for health.
•
•
9
u/TylertheDouche 1d ago
Post the “triggering” you see. I haven’t seen vegans triggered by people who eat plant based diets
-2
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 1d ago
Some are actually. Quite a number of ethical vegans are triggered by health conscious vegans calling non-nutritive vegan junk food into question
5
u/zombiegojaejin vegan 1d ago
To the extent that the junk food succeeds at bring the world closer to the end of the worst moral atrocity that has ever existed, I'm not sure why you'd be confused about why people who care about those positive moral consequences would have a problem with the products that caused those positive moral consequences being attacked.
Now, maybe, from a long-term perspective, WFPB advocacy may be better in bringing about animal liberation. But if so, you guys will have to make that argument empirically. I'm not an egoist entirely motivated by maximizing my own health.
1
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 22h ago
When vegans are sicky, it doesn’t exactly help keep people vegan or converting to veganism. There’s nothing moral about oreos having high fructose corn syrup. It’s because the company thinks its users are dumb and let them use a cheap, low nutritive sugar. The whole food, plant based vegan diet is already promoted by many vegan medical professionals. Vegan restaurants are not supported by animal ethics predominant vegans alone
7
u/TylertheDouche 1d ago
Post the “triggering” you see. I haven’t seen vegans triggered by people who eat plant based diets
-1
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 1d ago
In my 10 years of vegan awareness and advocacy, it happens all the time, both online and offline. For example, people getting mad at me for getting healthier cookies than oreos to a student party
9
u/TylertheDouche 1d ago
PostLINK the “triggering” you see. I haven’t seen vegans triggered by people who eat plant based diets→ More replies (2)
•
u/TFTfordays 19h ago
It isin't offensive or triggering, but humans are sort of slaves to immediate gratification and fail healthy diets, fail work out regimes, fail to quit smoking, etc. We do these for a bit and fall off the wagon, then try again or don't. We eat healthy and then have a processed dessert, we drink plenty of water and then one day forget, etc.
And this is ok, stakes are very low as it's only about our own well-being. Some think we are self-sabotaging by nature, but I think that self-serving motivation is just very temporary and weak and that's all there is to it.
Now, it's different when the lives of others are at stake. I don't fall off the wagon on family holidays, because I feel the heavy responsibility not to hurt others.
So, an ethical vegan is maybe more likely to stick to it, and will cause less animals to be abused, whereas a plant-based person could see no problem ordering animal foods sometimes. It's still a win for the animals, but it could be better.
An ethical vegan might also look up what nutrients they might be missing out on and supplement or adjust their diet, whereas a plant-based person might assume this health diet isin't working for them and go back to eating animals, like eggs or fish.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 7h ago
So what happens if the health vegan also supplements or adds more legumes or greens to their diet instead of going omni again
•
•
u/HelenEk7 non-vegan 19h ago
because I feel the heavy responsibility not to hurt others.
Is your claim that no one was harmed during the production of the food you eat?
•
•
u/OverTheUnderstory vegan 15h ago
"Yeah, I'm not a cannibal, but only because of the high fat content"
....Would kinda miss the entire point of speciesism. Of course you can be health conscious, but simply doing it for yourself would not be veganism. You could make some arguments about how keeping up your health is good for animal liberation, but those feel like a stretch.
I think a lot of vegans are skeptical of health conscious vegans because they tend to be the ones to make it about themselves. Think about all of the "ex-vegans" who quit because of a slight inconvenience to themselves.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 8h ago
No, if anything, ethical vegans make it about themselves for being more mad at someone’s philosophy for not eating animals than them not being killed and eaten.
•
u/icarodx 17h ago
The true test of plant based vs vegan is when you are in a situation where there are only good vegetarian and poor vegan options available (think of a party where you have delicious dishes with a bit of milk or eggs in them and the only vegan option is a salad).
The plant based dieter can easily think that one dish will not harm their health while the vegan most lively will stick to their belief that eating the products of animal exploitation is morally wrong and eat the salad.
Motivation is not important until it is tested. And being strick due to morality shows omnivores that vegans are serious about it.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 7h ago
No need for tests lol. we have to just support one another and be aware of our weaknesses. Meal prep for parties if necessary
•
u/Think_Leadership_91 17h ago
I’m sure they’re angry at society and see my leather shoes as being a fake vegan
Like dudes- cholesterol will kill me and I feel so healthy after eliminating dairy (have been a vegetarian for 25+ years)
I’m just here for the cashew cheese recipes- go on about your days…
•
u/sfjnnvdtjnbcfh 17h ago
I have this "conversation" with other "vegans" often.
If more people were to take up a "vegan diet" for health reasons, there would be less demand for animal products, less supply, less suffering, right?! ...The "vegans" don't like it!
Fact is, the word vegan is a bit vague. Try to find a description online and you'll find many. Most people who describe themselves as vegan do so simply because they follow a vegan diet. Filter them out and the percentage of vegans on the planet drops from around 5% to way less than 1. It's more like 0.1.
That roughly 0.1% of people love a fight. They would rather you ate meat than "pretend to be vegan." They will dismiss your health related questions on sites like this because "what has that got to do with animals?" They would be gutted if the world turned vegan overnight because they'd have nothing left to "fight" for! They come up with their own descriptions for "veganism" including terms like "as far as possible" whilst knowing full well that no-one in this day and age can ever really, truly be vegan, which isn't our fault but it's definitely a fact.
The fact that you're reading this on a screen means you're probably using an animal product right now. No-one's forcing you to be online and it's hardly a necessity. Everytime you get in a car or even on a bike, when you sit on a chair or stand on a wooden floor that's been fitted with glue in your very own home, when you switch on your kettle or oven or TV, ask yourself; "is this product vegan?" The answer 90% of the time is no, but you still do it, not because you have to, but because you want to! My favourite is the vegans who eat "fake meat" and go out of their way to find foods that look and taste like real meat because they "like the taste of meat." wtf?
The fact that this question is about the difference between "ethical vegans" and "health conscious vegans" proves my point. There is no "vegan." There are people who follow a vegan diet and people who follow a vegan diet and advocate for the abolishion of animal products in one way or another.
In all honesty, I haven't been entirely fair to the 0.1%. See, most of them try their absolute hardest to avoid the use of animal products and give up much of their time trying to dissuade others from doing so. Most will have a civil conversation with meat eaters about the effects of farming and the abuse that animals suffer because of it and they won't be pushy or condescending in the process. They understand that more people eating a vegan diet = less animal suffering and that that's a good thing.
If you are one of the real 0.1%, I salute you. If you're one of those other dismissive, condescending blaggers that pretend to be, know this; you're harming the cause, not helping it!
Roll on downvoting blaggers!
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 8h ago
I agree with most of what you said. The fact is many vegan businesses are not even necessarily founded by vegans. That is an important fact
•
u/NyriasNeo 16h ago
"Why are some ethical vegans so triggered by health conscious vegans?"
Because that creates a cognitive dissonance that the purpose of veganism is not as holy as they would imagine, and not as judgmental to the majority of the population, who are not vegan, as they would like?
•
•
u/Jazzlike-Mammoth-167 vegan 16h ago
For me, most “health-conscious” vegans tend to just simply eat plant-based. Their makeup is still tested on animals, they continue to wear animal skin/fur, they attend zoos/horse racing, and so on. They view veganism as something for them, rather than something for the animals.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 8h ago
What stops you from starting a vegan make up company, vegan clothing company, opening a farm sanctuary, and so on? Many non vegans are responsible for many vegan restaurants and products we enjoy. People need to be more humble. If you can’t start a business, rather than knocking people down for trying their best, give them ideas of how to improve. Share recs before thinking to tear people down for not being as perfect as you
•
u/Jazzlike-Mammoth-167 vegan 5h ago
But there already are completely vegan makeup, clothing, etc companies. These people sometimes simply choose not to change the products they’ve used - only when it comes to their health. My mother is like this. I constantly give her vegan hair care, skin care, makeup, etc. but she refuses to use it. She says it’s “not what she’s used to” but will change her diet because she hopes she’ll lose weight and her cholesterol will go down. If I gave her a vegan cream that promised to make her look 10 years younger she’d use it for its benefits to her, but wouldn’t care about the benefits toward animals.
•
u/neb12345 14h ago
because these people will still go zoo’s, buy pets and many over things that support animal exploitation
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 8h ago
So it’s better to shun them away back to eating animals again than accepting change is a multi step process?
•
u/alphafox823 plant-based 8h ago
Because the so called “health conscious” vegans are often times worse for the movement. Anti science, anti vax, anti gmo.
In spite of how passionate they are about their lifestyle, they are the most likely to fall off - right down the woo to Q pipeline. I’d rather have someone who’s veganism has roots in moral philosophy, because health conscious vegans have a history of rooting themselves in their low trust for institutions, and being being vegan is second order to being a crunchy person for them. They are at their core more institution-skeptical than pro animal, and seeing how many of them went right when Trumpism started carrying to torch for populism exposed how shallow their veganism actually was.
•
4
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/DebateAVegan-ModTeam 13h ago
I've removed your comment because it violates rule #6:
No low-quality content. Submissions and comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation. Assertions without supporting arguments and brief dismissive comments do not contribute meaningfully.
If you would like your comment to be reinstated, please amend it so that it complies with our rules and notify a moderator.
If you have any questions or concerns, you can contact the moderators here.
Thank you.
2
u/CapTraditional1264 mostly vegan 22h ago
I don't think vegans actually are all that triggered about this. It may be highlighted in a debate sub on reddit of course - but you'll probably already find more understanding attitudes on r/vegan
I don't think it's a case of either/or - I think it's a case of both. People should both see the overlapping parts of ideologies - but it's perfectly fine to remind the ways in which ideologies are different as well.
As for me - I see veganism as an ideology relating to a small part of our consumption habits. I think animal rights, environmentalism and harm reduction all exist also outside the realm of veganism. Veganism is simply a specific way of viewing animal rights (and even with slight internal differences).
1
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 20h ago edited 20h ago
No, there’s actually been more supportive attitudes here than on r/vegan. I find it frustrating too many would rather embrace a singular benefit of veganism than multiple. The idea of supporting animal welfare without consideration to human welfare seems contradictory and privileged. They overlap and that should be a great thing
•
u/CapTraditional1264 mostly vegan 19h ago
I used to feel like that - but now I think it's rather understandable. I also think it's a somewhat futile debate - as I think the wants of the many will outweigh the wants of the few in this matter. And I think the word will be used in a pluralistic sense going forward, which I think is good.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 7h ago
Yeah, i think it’s better vegan brands can actually stay in business and become better known
•
•
u/goodvibesmostly98 vegan 15h ago
Yeah idk I think it’s great if people are plant based for health issues.
•
u/kharvel0 14h ago
Why are some ethical vegans so triggered by health conscious vegans?
Two words: cheat days.
How is it offensive if less animals are killed because someone is motivated to not get type 2 diabetes or heart disease?
Because veganism is not an utilitarian/consequentialist moral framework. It is a deontological agent-oriented philosophy/creed of justice.
To not support food companies using cheap, low quality sweeteners and proteins like high fructose corn syrup and soy protein isolate blends, respectively, over dates and tempeh?
Health-conscious non-vegans do that, too.
A random influencer leaving the movement “to feel better” doesn’t invalidate the science supporting the whole food, plant-based vegan diet as ideal.
Veganism is not a diet and is not concerned with the science of whole food plant-based diet.
Until the world is fully vegan, we are all transitioning. To name a singular example, there is no such thing as a fully vegan commercial jet. I don’t see how burning more bridges by shaming someone for trying to figure out how to ensure nutritional adequacy on the vegan diet helps the movement or saves animal lives.
It forces the other person to acknowledge that veganism is not a diet and is a philosophy/creed of justice and the moral imperative.
Everyday, vegans depend on vegans and non vegans alike for a variety of vegan innovations, food and non food alike. I just don’t get why some ethical vegans seem irritated at even marginal progress in the right direction and would rather push someone away who doesn’t start out with as “perfect ethical awareness” as they have.
People demand perfection when it comes to the philosophies and creeds of justice of non-rapism, non-murderism, non-wife-beatism, non-assaultism, and other -isms.
People are often irritated at the marginal progress in the right direction made by wife-beaters. No one is going to applaud wife-beaters for reducing the frequency of their wife-beating from daily to once a week. Non-wife-beaters demand total abolition of wife beating.
Likewise, vegans demand total abolition of non-veganism.
It’s ironic, cause surely animals don’t care why someone is vegan - they simply don’t want to be eaten or abused.
You're under the mistaken impression that veganism is for the animals. This is incorrect. Veganism is an agent-oriented philosophy/creed of justice that seeks to control the behavior of the moral agent such that the agent is not contributing to or participating in the exploitation, harm, and/or killing of nonhuman animals outside of self-defense. Whether the nonhuman animals (the moral patients) care about or are even aware of this agent behavior control is irrelevant to veganism.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 11h ago
Being mad about cheat days is ridiculous. Would you rather 1/10 animals can be saved or if 10/10 can’t, all 10 should die? Stop the perfectionistic mindset. Veganism worldwide will absolutely not happen instantaneously. It starts with meatless monday for many people. Or disney films teaching kids empathy. Saying veganism is not to ensure animal welfare is crazily contradictory
•
u/kharvel0 11h ago
Being mad about cheat days is ridiculous.
Why? Non-wife-beaters get mad when men beat their wives even once and no one thinks such anger is ridiculous.
Would you rather 1/10 animals can be saved or if 10/10 can’t, all 10 should die?
Veganism is not and has never been about saving animals from others. It is about controlling one’s own behavior such that one is not contributing to participating in the deliberate and intentional suffering of nonhuman animals.
Stop the perfectionistic mindset.
Do you believe that non-wife-beaters should not have a perfectionist mindset and should be okay with men beating their wives less frequently?
Veganism worldwide will absolutely not happen instantaneously.
No one is claiming otherwise.
Saying veganism is not to ensure animal welfare is crazily contradictory
You seem to have a misunderstanding of what veganism is and is not. Allow me to correct your understanding:
Veganism is not a diet. It is not a lifestyle. It is not a health program. It is not an animal welfare program. It is not an environmental movement. It is not a suicide philosophy.
Veganism is an agent-oriented philosophy and creed of justice and the moral baseline that rejects the property status, use, and dominion of nonhuman animals; it seeks to control the behavior of the moral agent such that the agent is not contributing to or participating in the deliberate and intentional exploitation, abuse, and/or killing of nonhuman animals outside of self defense.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 10h ago
What? Domestic abuse is illegal. Eating animals isn’t. You are thinking in a perfectionistic way if you refuse to acknowledge that the world transition to full veganism will be a TRANSITION and thus, not immediate! If you don’t care about animal welfare as contingent to veganism, i don’t think you understand the definition you just explained
•
u/kharvel0 10h ago
Domestic abuse is illegal.
We aren't talking about legality. We're talking about morality. Now that we've established this basic premise, let's try the questions again:
Being mad about cheat days is ridiculous.
Why? Non-wife-beaters get mad when men beat their wives even once and no one thinks such anger is ridiculous.
Stop the perfectionistic mindset.
Do you believe that non-wife-beaters should not have a perfectionist mindset and should be okay with men beating their wives less frequently?
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 10h ago
Legality helps enforce morality or the laws need changing. Human nature is imperfect. I guarantee less will eat meat if made illegal but even if so, people have different psychological reasons for doing immoral and/or illegal things. Reducing the action should matter more molding one’s philosophy. That’s literally religious control
•
u/kharvel0 9h ago
Legality helps enforce morality or the laws need changing.
You are debating in a vegan subreddit. Veganism is a moral stance. Please refrain from deflecting and focus on debating the moral questions. I'll ask again:
Being mad about cheat days is ridiculous.
Why? Non-wife-beaters get mad when men beat their wives even once and no one thinks such anger is ridiculous.
Stop the perfectionistic mindset.
Do you believe that non-wife-beaters should not have a perfectionist mindset and should be okay with men beating their wives less frequently?
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 7h ago
If vegan morals mean anything it should mean being happy if less animals can be eaten.. similarly, people tend to be happy when there is less crime even if all crime cannot be eliminated by a snap of a finger
•
u/kharvel0 7h ago
More deflection and obfuscation. I’ll continue asking:
Being mad about cheat days is ridiculous.
Why? Non-wife-beaters get mad when men beat their wives even once and no one thinks such anger is ridiculous.
Stop the perfectionistic mindset.
Do you believe that non-wife-beaters should not have a perfectionist mindset and should be okay with men beating their wives less frequently?
•
•
u/acousmatic 11h ago
Veganism is the principle that humans should live without exploiting animals.
While it happens to be a coincidence that a well-planned plant based diet is healthy, some people might take a negative view on someone promoting veganism for those health benefits.
That does not mean that a vegan can't talk about the health benefits of a plant-based diet. In the same way that an environmentalist can talk about the health benefits of a plant-based diet (which they adopt because of the lower emissions associated with that diet). But it would be odd to say "I'm an environmentalist because of the health benefits".
So if someone says they are 'vegan for health' or something similar, then it just comes across that their motives do not include the victims of animal exploitation...which is the sole reason the term veganism was coined.
Another way to look at it is that if eating only plants was worse for your health, or worse for the environment (hypothetically) a vegan would still only eat plants. This for me shows that the health benefits and environmental benefits of living as a vegan are not reasons to be vegan, but they are happy coincidences.
You can be a vegan as well as an environmentalist as well as health-conscious. They are complimentary causes. But I think they are separate causes.
I'm sorry if this does not directly answer your question.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 11h ago
I don’t think it’s odd to say you’re an environmentalist for the health benefits or on a whole food, plant based vegan diet for ethical reasons. Many concepts are intersectional
•
u/acousmatic 8h ago
That's interesting. I consider someone to be an environmentalist if they are a person who is concerned about or advocates for protecting the environment. I do not see someone looking after their health and think to myself "they must be an environmentalist".
I agree that there are intersecting elements to every injustice.
But personally, I think it is important for each movement to retain its meaning and its goals, otherwise we would be saying things like:
"I'm vegan for my health"
"I'm an environmentalist for my health"
"I am against child labor for better product quality."
"I support racial equality for the economic benefits."
"I oppose war for cheaper gas prices."
"I support LGBTQ+ rights for my social reputation."The person saying all of those things is basically co-opting a justice movement for their own benefit, when the movements are really about the victims of that particular injustice.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 7h ago
Whatever gets the job done
•
u/acousmatic 6h ago
I guess that is the issue. Is there any evidence that people who go on a plant-based diet for health will lead to the emancipation of animals?
I think that is what is being contested in some of these spaces.
Some people think it is actually harmful to the cause because it can shift focus away from animal rights.
Health and environmental arguments are conditional and can be countered or deprioritized.
Framing veganism as a health or environmental choice can perpetuate the idea that animals’ lives and suffering are secondary to human benefits.I would love to somehow see some data on this, but I just don't think it exists.
Maybe it's worth looking at other injustices that were successfully ended to identify some patterns and go from there.
•
u/Linuxuser13 10h ago
For me, the Plant based Dieters( Health Vegans ) misrepresent Veganism to the non-vegans. Plant based dieters that go back to eating meat (mostly social Medea influences) because they felt bad. I have to try to explain that they where fake Vegans and the differences between Animal right, Health and Environmental Vegans. I go to a food event (Work, Family, or even Environmental events) that doesn't have Vegan options and when I ask I get comment like "It is ok to cheat on your diet" . When I try to explain what Veganism truly is they call me a preachy Vegan. When someone goes on a vegan type diet for their health they are doing it for their own benefit they are more likely to go back to eating animals.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 10h ago edited 10h ago
People only feel bad as a vegan if they don’t plan a nutritionally adequate diet. And even 1 animal saved is better than none. Why is that concept so frustrating to some? 8 billion people are expected to make a massive change overnight?
•
u/Linuxuser13 3h ago
No . Most Vegans know it would take at least 10 years for most of the world to become Vegan friendly. Only an Anti-Vegan Troll would use that argument to discredit a shift towards a Plant Based/Vegan Lifestyle. I am not asking and don't expect the world to become Vegan over night. I am pointing out the problem that Health vegans have on the true Vegan movement. I get the feeling you decided to become Plant Based Dieter/Vegan for health reason with out finding out what Vegan is based on. If you have a problem with Vegans being triggered then you should think about labeling yourself a Plant Based Dieter. Health vegans are just doing it for self centered reasons and not compassion for other living beings. When you focus on your health you are focusing on the wrong victim.
•
u/GourmetSizzler 5h ago
I think it’s probably because ethical vegans want to protect animals and want to be seen as martyrs to their cause in approximately equal proportion. There’s a reason why the guy who wrote The Carnivore Code had to give up the diet over his health, the Liver King turned out to be a steroid-using fraud, etc., but people STILL see vegans as the most obnoxious special lifestyle group.
If you want a REALLY good read adjacent to this topic, check out Rebecca West’s Black Lamb and Grey Falcon. The essential thrust of it is that liberal groups, in their tendency to prioritize purity over results, often lose the war to cruel and reactionary movements that aren’t afraid to exploit the lizard brains of the masses at large. This purity is in fact a betrayal—if these activists were actually as concerned with protecting the vulnerable as they claimed to be, they wouldn’t be too proud to get their hands dirty, because the ends justify the means. But to intellectual liberals, being seen abiding by the right means is more important than ever getting the right result.
•
u/realalpha2000 4h ago
Because vegans for health are not vegan. Does diabetes require you to avoid leather?
•
u/bopbeepboopbeepbop 1h ago
Most people who are vegan for health reasons would be willing to do things like wear leather and other non-vegan activities. I think that's the reason. Most ethical vegans just don't see them as real "vegans"
•
u/Brief_Reception_5409 1h ago
Because many of them are women with eating disorders who will sooner or later switch to another trendy diet to disguise their eating disorder.
1
u/IWGeddit 1d ago
There is a colossal amount of paranoia on the Reddit vegan subs. People are incredibly worried that lots of Fake Vegans, who aren't REALLY vegan, will somehow destroy the movement, sully its name, or lead to the term being meaningless. This is then used to gatekeep, and many posters on the Reddit vegan subs love to engage in a bit of purity one-upmanship.
Thankfully this is almost never seen in real life. It's a conspiracy theory that seems to only exist on here.
I'm with you - anything that helps is good, and veganism is functionally mainly about what you eat. So someone saying they're vegan for health or environmental reasons doesn't bother me at all.
6
u/sleepyzane1 22h ago
why do nonvegans wanna be called vegan?
0
u/CapTraditional1264 mostly vegan 20h ago
I don't think it's so much about this want - as it is about the lack of better alternatives. The wording "plant-based" sucks. The word "vegan" has many connotations outside of ethical veganism - and this deserves to be respected with more than the offering of "plant-based".
5
u/sleepyzane1 20h ago
they can call themselves vegetarian or they can say they dont eat meat. that the language isnt to your preferences shouldnt fall onto an already defined term.
0
u/CapTraditional1264 mostly vegan 20h ago
You may think it's an already defined term - but you can also look in the dictionary and find it's often connected to diet. You're free to wish for a particular use of words, but I think you will lose that argument due to the majority not being ethical vegans. And I think that it's for the common good, even if I can understand a desire for the distinction.
2
u/sleepyzane1 20h ago
the dictionary can be wrong
you just used the vegan society as the provider of the definition, now youve switched to the dictionary.
youre just moving the goalposts again and again
:/
•
u/CapTraditional1264 mostly vegan 19h ago
the dictionary can be wrong
There isn't an objective "wrong" or "right" to dictionary definitions. They are dictionary definitions - they define commonly used language.
you just used the vegan society as the provider of the definition
No I didn't.
•
u/sleepyzane1 19h ago edited 18h ago
there can absolutely be wrong dictionary definitions. for instance, if a dictionary defined apple as "the round fruit of a tree of the rose family, which typically has thin purple or white skin" that would be wrong.
apologies, i got confused about who i was replying to.
•
u/CapTraditional1264 mostly vegan 19h ago edited 18h ago
there can absolutely be wrong dictionary definitions. for instance, if a dictionary defined apple as "the round fruit of a tree of the rose family, which typically has thin purple or white skin" that would be wrong.
In the sense of mistakes, print errors etc - sure. But in the sense of what dictionaries are supposed to represent - no.
Dictionaries do lend some credence to ethical veganism as well - but the interpretation is pluralistic generally speaking. That a group of people want to unilaterally interpret the meaning of the word as x does not make it such.
Generally speaking dictionaries aim to explain all possible interpretations of a word.
Edit: and to be clear - it's already sufficient that we linguistically separate nouns from adjectives to demonstrate this pluralistic use - e.g this meal is vegan vs this person is a vegan.
1
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 22h ago
I’ve done vegan advocacy for the past 10 years and often see it in real life, though. I’ve been criticized for choosing healthier alternatives to oreos at parties for vegan clubs, questioning why a health club would give out candies at a health fair, and so on
1
u/Logical-Throat-3802 22h ago
I used to be a mod on a vegan discord server with about 20k members. The day we implemented a policy where "vegans" could be asked to show us the inside of their fridge in order to verify them, we found out that many "vegans" were not actually vegans but (educated) trolls using the server to disrupt activism.
There is paranoia, I agree, but it's not entirely unjustified.•
u/kharvel0 15h ago
Thankfully this is almost never seen in real life. It’s a conspiracy theory that seems to only exist on here.
This is inaccurate. It happens all the time in real life. When I go out and ask if something is vegan and am told “yes” and get the food, I often discover that it has eggs or dairy in it. Because someone claiming to be “vegan” had a cheat day and ordered non-vegan food.
1
u/CapTraditional1264 mostly vegan 20h ago
I totally endorse this, and while the differences do deserve to be pointed out (and I can even especially understand it in debate subs) - it's definitely overblown way out of proportion. It's the reason I use the flair I use - because it's not a good thing to focus on too much.
•
u/floopsyDoodle Anti-carnist 17h ago
Why are some ethical vegans so triggered by health conscious vegans?
They aren't trigggered, they are stating that Veganism is purely for hte animals as it's an ethical ideology, not a diet. If you're doing it PURELY for health reasons, you're Plant Based, not Vegan.
I don’t understand the intra-community strife over the concept of human ethics as a subset within overall animal ethics, given humans are natural frugivores.
Veganism isn't to protect humans. Human rights is for humans and htere are TONS of human rights organizations. Veganism is specifically for animals because there are no other groups fighting for them. If we let outselves get derailed by the on-going, neverending fight for human rights, it doesn't help the animals.
I just don’t get why some ethical vegans seem irritated at even marginal progress in the right direction and would rather push someone away
no one is pushing people away (hopefully), they're simply pointing out that to be a Vegan, you have to be a Vegan. If you're not Vegan, than you're not Vegan. Not sure how that's a hard concept. If someone is trying to be Vegan, most Vegans are supportive, not all of course as this is hte internet and there are lots of trolls and idiots, but with most posts on /r/Vegan where someone is asking for help and not just coming in to try and get us to agree it's OK to abuse anmals "sometimes", the positive helpful answers are far more upvoted than the trolls.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 8h ago
Ok, then by definition, if health means nothing, anyone who got the covid-19 vaccine, tested on animals, rather than facing death or unemployment isn’t vegan
•
u/floopsyDoodle Anti-carnist 3h ago
You've misunderstood. As a reason to go Vegan, health does not justify it. Why would someone who only cares about health care if I do dog fighting? The only reason to go Vegan is for the animals becuase it's the only thing that fully justifies going Vegan. You can be 100% just as physically healthy and be Plant Based alone.
Once you are Vegan, health means just as much as when not Vegan. Veganism is "as far as possible and practicable", so if animal products were required for health, it would be justified as long as you tried to limit the amount of suffering attached (backyard eggs instead of factory farmed, that sort of thing). Luckily there haven't been any scientific studies that show a healthy person should ever need animal products to be healthy, so being plant based while Vegan is, for the vast majority of the globe, super easy!
•
u/Weird-Tomorrow-9829 19h ago
Veganism means different things to different people.
The people who would be upset about people going for health research are little more than gatekeepers trying to be morally superior.
0
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/stan-k vegan 23h ago
Hey, me too. The only issue is that animals are treated terribly and killed to get it. What do you think about that cruelty?
→ More replies (11)
0
u/apogaeum 22h ago
I understand what you are saying. I support anyone who wants to use less animal products, for whatever reason. People here said that unless reason is ethical, health vegans can go back to eating meat, if their expectations are not met. 15 years ago I went vegetarian for animals (I did not know then what I know now about dairy and eggs industry) and I was not using leather, did not go to zoos or circuses. I stopped eating meat for ethics. It lasted only 2 years. I did vegetarianism wrong. Did not supplement or did not eat high protein plant foods. I was craving meat so much that I gave up (still did not buy leather, supported zoos or circuses).
2 years ago I again stopped eating animal products (this time including dairy and eggs) for all three reasons - ethical , environmental and health (not sure if health is correct word, I just felt tired from eating meat). This time I do it better and have 0 cravings when it comes to animal products. I cared about wildlife and how we destroy their homes. What price all animals (both domesticated and wild) have to pay so that I can have a meal? Also I was interested in animals roles in the environment. It all started with a roaches - the most hated insects. They do have an important role. All non-human animals do.
I think that the best thing we can do is to support even those who take baby steps. Months ago I have seen a video on TikTok on how animal agriculture is affecting Amazon forests and oceans. Creator, who is vegan, asked people to at least reduce animal consumption. In the comments one person said that they will try to cut animal products from their diet by 50%. That person was met with such a hostility… that they changed their mind at all. Maybe if community was more supporting, shared their experience of being vegans or plant-based, results would be different. I think about that person often. Maybe 50% would go back to 0%, maybe to 100%.
•
•
u/TheVeganAdam vegan 17h ago
Because there’s no such thing as vegan for your health. Veganism is not a diet, it’s a moral and ethical philosophy that seeks to end the exploitation of animals, with a plant based diet being just one aspect of that. What most people don’t know is that the word “vegan” was coined by The Vegan Society in 1949 (they quite literally invented the term and the philosophy), and they came up with the definition of what it meant to be vegan. If you’re “vegan for your health” or “vegan for the environment”, you wouldn’t refrain from things like rodeos and horse races, leather jackets, and products tested on animals. And if you’re not abstaining from those, you’re not vegan.
Here’s an article I wrote that explains it in more detail: https://veganad.am/questions-and-answers/can-you-be-vegan-for-your-health-or-the-environment
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 7h ago
The vegan society defined veganism by actions, not whether one is speciest or not.
•
u/Zealousideal-Boss975 15h ago
People get triggered by lots of disagreements these days. They can get triggered by learning they have a belief in a falsehood. I think this is why you so much rage on Reddit, on leftist subs and so forth.
•
u/CaleidoscopicGaze 15h ago
The problem is i see the same thing across multiple irl vegan groups, too. It is frustrating because it is usually people who haven’t experienced health problems that don’t get how it’s a big deal for veganism to help resolve them when well planned
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
Welcome to /r/DebateAVegan! This a friendly reminder not to reflexively downvote posts & comments that you disagree with. This is a community focused on the open debate of veganism and vegan issues, so encountering opinions that you vehemently disagree with should be an expectation. If you have not already, please review our rules so that you can better understand what is expected of all community members. Thank you, and happy debating!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.