Veganism

Pross

Rick Chasey wrote:

Chris Bass wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

JoeNobody wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

It must kill your social life.

Not in the slightest. Eating out generally means choosing somewhere with decent options, but that's more common these days anyway.

Oh come off it.

I had some vegan friends. They could never come out.

sounds like they just didn't like you

Fair.

For me, eating is social. Food is the cornerstone of being social. So if you're not being easy about what you're eating, you're not being social.

So ya. Not for me.

Given you regularly comment on how small you are your social life must be pretty limited if it revolves around food

joenobody

bompington wrote:

JoeNobody wrote:

Would you give a Hindu beef, or a Jew pork?

Gives the game away - essentially, Veganism is a religion.

I read this recently on that topic:

One thing I hear is people saying "veganism is like religion". As an atheist, I always find that odd. In what way are they alike? Religion tends to be based on either ancient books, tradition, or superstition. Veganism is looking at what humans are doing to animals and recognising that there is a problem. People want to act as though it's just an opinion, I guess, and therefore they're not obliged to share our view or even listen. But, our view is not dogmatic, dictated by our traditions or plucked from thin air with no basis. Animals are conscious, and at the core of any ethical view is the notion of treating others with consideration. Without that basic premise, "ethics" would become meaningless. So if you want to be ethical, then veganism follows logically. On the other hand, what is non-veganism based on? "Animals are bred to be killed, it's their purpose, they're inferior" - which is dogmatic. "It's been this way for years, I was raised this way, you're ruining Christmas" - which is tradition. And "it's just the way it is, I am entitled to my opinions, I can do whatever I want and I don't need to explain" - which is baseless and plucked from thin air. Also, it is common that non-veganism gets treated as sacred, as a religious view. Non-vegans can become extremely upset when you question their views. (Not always, and not all religious people treat their views as sacred either). But, it is a trend that their views are seen as concrete and it is offensive to them to be asked to consider an alternative. Vegans, like atheists, have considered both sides. Have non-vegans actually considered veganism? Or did they get raised that way, and now have their unchangeable view?

bompington

Hmmm. Quite apart from some pretty dodgy assertions in that, I would say that if you deny someone is religious by comparing them to atheists then you're on quite shaky ground.

rjsterry

"So if you want to be ethical, then veganism follows logically"

There's a big hole in the middle of that sentence that the rest of that quote does nothing to fill. If you have a problem with the process of livestock farming, and the necessary limits it puts on animal behaviour, that's one thing. I imagine we would agree that there are better and worse forms of farming, which allow greater or lesser expression of an animals natural behaviour. But the killing and eating of animals does not necessarily limit their natural behaviour or their welfare. In fact many prey animals are very well adapted to the risk of being eaten. Cattle have evolved as herd animals, for example. Of course we are unusual in being able to adapt our natural behaviour according to an abstract idea. We can choose not to eat animal products because we believe killing and eating an animal is wrong, but that is fundamentally an application of an almost universal human moral position - that killing someone is wrong - to an animal. I am deeply suspicious of attempts to apply human characteristics to animals, because they are not humans. The question of whether we should as far as possible ensure the welfare of animals, particularly those in our direct care, is a separate one.

rick_chasey

JoeNobody wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

I can't think of a restaurant I've been to recently where that'd work.

It does make restaurant selection a little trickier, but it's not really all that hard. I've eaten in places recently that, looking at the menu, would be tricky to accommodate me, but given advance warning I've always been amply looked after.

I love cooking for people, but christ, eat what you're given.

Would you give a Hindu beef, or a Jew pork? The people I know who love cooking relish the challenge of finding something suitable for me, and sometimes that means the whole menu is vegan. Other times it means that there's something for me alongside unsuitable choices. Come to my house though and it'll be vegan all the way, if only to show that it's just as tasty (or more so) than non-vegan. Unless you bring kids, as getting them to eat only plants can be tricky, so they might get fish and/or eggs.

TBH, if they came with food requests that weren't easily accommodated for, I probably wouldn't invite them over for dinner. Vegan is, considering what I cook and eat for myself and my usual friends, not easily accommodated for at all. Relish the challenge? Come on mate. That's a bold positive spin on it. You could see it as being difficult and challenging if you want too.

I'm fairly uncompromising on this I appreciate, and I get it's as much my issue as anything else. I do genuinely get crestfallen when we go somewhere and then a member of the party can't eat most/any of it. Doubly bad when, like most restaurants are around here nowadays, it's all sharing plates. I mean, what a bummer for everyone.

sungod

One thing I hear is people saying "veganism is like religion". As an atheist, I always find that odd. In what way are they alike? Religion tends to be based on either ancient books, tradition, or superstition. Veganism is looking at what humans are doing to animals and recognising that there is a problem. People want to act as though it's just an opinion, I guess, and therefore they're not obliged to share our view or even listen. But, our view is not dogmatic, dictated by our traditions or plucked from thin air with no basis. Animals are conscious, and at the core of any ethical view is the notion of treating others with consideration. Without that basic premise, "ethics" would become meaningless. So if you want to be ethical, then veganism follows logically. On the other hand, what is non-veganism based on? "Animals are bred to be killed, it's their purpose, they're inferior" - which is dogmatic. "It's been this way for years, I was raised this way, you're ruining Christmas" - which is tradition. And "it's just the way it is, I am entitled to my opinions, I can do whatever I want and I don't need to explain" - which is baseless and plucked from thin air. Also, it is common that non-veganism gets treated as sacred, as a religious view. Non-vegans can become extremely upset when you question their views. (Not always, and not all religious people treat their views as sacred either). But, it is a trend that their views are seen as concrete and it is offensive to them to be asked to consider an alternative. Vegans, like atheists, have considered both sides. Have non-vegans actually considered veganism? Or did they get raised that way, and now have their unchangeable view?

that quote shows nothing but the self-righteous exceptionalism of it's author, who applies several classic techniques of the propagandist, though rather clumsily

keef66

I don't think you can reasonably compare veganism with religion, even though many religions come with dietary advice.

Religions usually involve some kind of ancient text and / or prophet, and belief in the existence of a god or divine being(s) Tofu is neither ancient nor divine, it's just tofu. I don't understand either to be honest.

But veganism is just choosing not to eat some things.

People should know where their food comes from, what it involves, and the consequences for the planet, so they can make informed choices. I've worked on mixed arable and livestock farms, and now in ag R&D, so I read a lot about global cropping and food production. The biggest threats we face at the moment are global warming, loss of agricultural land, continued population growth, and the increase in demand for meat as living standards rise and more people aspire to a western diet (despite all the evidence that it's not without consequences)

We could definitely feed more people from the available land if everyone went vegetarian, but I can't imagine that happening any time soon. Insect protein and phytoplankton are likely to find their way into the food chain at some point too.

I'm pretty much an omnivore. Wherever I go I try to eat what the locals do, mainly because they know how to cook it. At home we eat a lot of vegetarian food because it's tasty, fish because it's good for us, and meat only 2 or 3 times a month because it's expensive.

The carpet bombing, guilt tripping adverts sound distasteful, but they wouldn't bother me. Nor would they likely affect my diet. People should be free to choose to eat, or not, what they like.

keef66

Back in my younger days I'd invited a load of people round for an Indian banquet I'd spent hours preparing. At which point I discovered my recently acquired girlfriend was in fact a vegetarian.

Luckily for me I'd included several dishes which she was able to eat. In particular I have Mhadur Jaffrey to thank for Gujerati green beans, aubergine cooked in the Lake Palace Hotel pickling style, and home made naan.

Pross

JoeNobody wrote:

bompington wrote:

JoeNobody wrote:

Would you give a Hindu beef, or a Jew pork?

Gives the game away - essentially, Veganism is a religion.

I read this recently on that topic:

One thing I hear is people saying "veganism is like religion". As an atheist, I always find that odd. In what way are they alike? Religion tends to be based on either ancient books, tradition, or superstition. Veganism is looking at what humans are doing to animals and recognising that there is a problem. People want to act as though it's just an opinion, I guess, and therefore they're not obliged to share our view or even listen. But, our view is not dogmatic, dictated by our traditions or plucked from thin air with no basis. Animals are conscious, and at the core of any ethical view is the notion of treating others with consideration. Without that basic premise, "ethics" would become meaningless. So if you want to be ethical, then veganism follows logically. On the other hand, what is non-veganism based on? "Animals are bred to be killed, it's their purpose, they're inferior" - which is dogmatic. "It's been this way for years, I was raised this way, you're ruining Christmas" - which is tradition. And "it's just the way it is, I am entitled to my opinions, I can do whatever I want and I don't need to explain" - which is baseless and plucked from thin air. Also, it is common that non-veganism gets treated as sacred, as a religious view. Non-vegans can become extremely upset when you question their views. (Not always, and not all religious people treat their views as sacred either). But, it is a trend that their views are seen as concrete and it is offensive to them to be asked to consider an alternative. Vegans, like atheists, have considered both sides. Have non-vegans actually considered veganism? Or did they get raised that way, and now have their unchangeable view?

Ironically, many people with a religious faith would hold the ability to choose and make 'ethical' decisions as case for there being a God. I suspect they would argue that the ability to choose to be vegan is not explained purely by evolution.

Ben6899

keef66 wrote:

I don't think you can reasonably compare veganism with religion...

...

People should be free to choose to eat, or not, what they like.

Good post, keef!

Although I must point out that tofu - marinated in teriyaki sauce and then baked - is divine.

shortfall

Ben6899 wrote:

keef66 wrote:

I don't think you can reasonably compare veganism with religion...

...

People should be free to choose to eat, or not, what they like.

Good post, keef!

Although I must point out that tofu - marinated in teriyaki sauce and then baked - is divine.

Really? If you like it the fair enough but to me it tastes like a lump of something spongy and bland that has been marinated in teriaki sauce. Do the same thing to a bit of belly pork though and now you're talking!

I don't know much about veganism. Can someone give me a brief summary or point me in the direction of some links with decent information?

haydenm

I have a lot of friends who are vegan, only realised this since they started coming to stay and I had to cook for them. While I eat meat I can't say it really bothers me all that much cooking something different, it's not as if there aren't great vegan recipes about.

I tend to have venison in the house quite a bit through work/people I know locally, always a decent conversation about whether they would eat it or not. Culling 'wild' deer so allow trees to grow is exceptionally environmentally friendly as 4x as much carbon is sequestered in the soil than in the trees themselves. Plus they are free range, delicious and often in such high numbers that they starve to death over winter. Some of my vegan friends sometimes have more positive opinions of it than some of the meat-eating friends who come to stay...

trek_dan

Meat eaters arguments against veganism always sound a bit like obese car owning Brexit melts commenting on cycling articles on the local paper website

keef66

Pross wrote:

Ironically, many people with a religious faith would hold the ability to choose and make 'ethical' decisions as case for there being a God. I suspect they would argue that the ability to choose to be vegan is not explained purely by evolution.

So it's a binary choice; God or evolution? No other explanation for ethics possible?

It's all part of mankind's many constructed systems of beliefs and customs, rules, laws, rights, responsibilities and freedoms that allow societies to function, cooperate, co-exist, or not in some cases. And it's easy to see how evolution could have favoured such development.

Just because we can think these abstract thoughts, consider other ways of living, choose what to eat, or to care about other creatures' welfare, it in no way suggests to me the existence of a divine being (tofu excepted)

I think the ability to choose to be vegan is partly down to intellect and partly a result of a secure, abundant food supply.

I'm off to make a cup of tea. The production of which involves an obscene amount of water, pesticides banned in Europe, poorly paid locals working long hours and often with inadequate protective clothing, shipping stuff halfway round the world, and most of the profits going to multinational companies and the retailers.
Unfortunately I take it with milk, which necessitates the breeding of cattle with unnaturally large udders, frequent impregnation, removal of the resulting calves, the males of which are generally slaughtered but don't make it into the food chain.

I do like tea though...

keef66

We're overrun by muntjac; plenty of them don't make it through the winter. Spotted a dead one on the morning dog walk just before Christmas. Next day it'd been disemboweled, day after that the limbs went missing and 3 days later it had vanished completely.

There's something round here that's not a vegan.

rick_chasey

trek_dan wrote:

Meat eaters arguments against veganism always sound a bit like obese car owning Brexit melts commenting on cycling articles on the local paper website

Fair.

haydenm

trek_dan wrote:

Meat eaters arguments against veganism always sound a bit like obese car owning Brexit melts commenting on cycling articles on the local paper website

I know what you mean but I think that is a bit unfair, as with all things it's only the most extreme on either side who make fools of themselves.

I love my vegan friends and enjoy cooking for them but one thing I really can't stand is the sort of person who gets upset if the same spatula has touched meat in another pan or something. I lived with two girls like that at uni and they were dreadful (for other reasons as well). Thankfully all my friends are fairly rational about it, none of them have ever tried to 'convert' me as it were either.

veronese68

HaydenM wrote:

Culling 'wild' deer so allow trees to grow is exceptionally environmentally friendly...

The deer in Richmond Park are culled every year so I guess that is alright as well. I believe it is sold as royal venison. Every now and then a group will kick off and say that the culling is cruel and shouldn't be done. I suppose they could introduce wolves or some other natural predators to keep numbers down, would certainly make me cycle through there faster.

bompington

cooldad wrote:

Lookyhere wrote:

I m sure the Nazis had similar feelings

Oh dear we've been Godwinned.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

It's absolutely not fair to compare meat-eaters to Hitler. After all, he was a vegetarian, therefore morally superior to carnivores.

Although that still leaves him below Vegans I guess.

dinyull

keef66 wrote:

and meat only 2 or 3 times a month because it's expensive.

Say WHHHAAAAATTTTT????

keef66

I love vegans, but I don't think I could eat a whole one.

haydenm

Veronese68 wrote:

HaydenM wrote:

Culling 'wild' deer so allow trees to grow is exceptionally environmentally friendly...

The deer in Richmond Park are culled every year so I guess that is alright as well. I believe it is sold as royal venison. Every now and then a group will kick off and say that the culling is cruel and shouldn't be done. I suppose they could introduce wolves or some other natural predators to keep numbers down, would certainly make me cycle through there faster.

They are also essentially farmed, like most deer populations in the UK. I've probably moaned about this before but part of the value of an estate in Scotland is made up of the stag cull figures, a lot of these places feed them in the winter and don't shoot hinds to bring up stag numbers. Great for stalking returns, very bad fro growing trees. There are orders of magnitude more deer in Scotland than there is supposed to be. They even tried full scale 100% culling on a peninsular a few years ago and the population bounced back in about two years. We tend to accept that we can really impact the deer population in an area so we target culling on restock sites to try to keep losses to a minimum.

Oh and they are delicious

rick_chasey

It’s quite extreme being vegan.

chris_bass

bompington wrote:

It's absolutely not fair to compare meat-eaters to Hitler. After all, he was a vegetarian, therefore morally superior to carnivores.

No he wasn't

chris_bass

Rick Chasey wrote:

trek_dan wrote:

Meat eaters arguments against veganism always sound a bit like obese car owning Brexit melts commenting on cycling articles on the local paper website

Fair.

I'm pretty sure I pointed this out on page 1 in a round about sort of a way.

Pross

keef66 wrote:

Pross wrote:

Ironically, many people with a religious faith would hold the ability to choose and make 'ethical' decisions as case for there being a God. I suspect they would argue that the ability to choose to be vegan is not explained purely by evolution.

So it's a binary choice; God or evolution? No other explanation for ethics possible?

I think you missed my point. I was turning the comment previously quoted around. That quote (which I suspect is the sort of smugness the OP was originally objecting to rather than veganism itself) was from an aethist suggesting if you held religious beliefs you shouldn't kill animals. The point I was making was that believers would argue the ability to make choices in the way a vegan does supports their argument of a 'higher being' rather than only someone religious is capable of ethics.

I'm not bothered what food / lifestyle choices anyone else makes if it doesn't adversely affect others but preachy people who try to make out that their lifestyle choices are superior is annoying.

rjsterry

HaydenM wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

HaydenM wrote:

Culling 'wild' deer so allow trees to grow is exceptionally environmentally friendly...

The deer in Richmond Park are culled every year so I guess that is alright as well. I believe it is sold as royal venison. Every now and then a group will kick off and say that the culling is cruel and shouldn't be done. I suppose they could introduce wolves or some other natural predators to keep numbers down, would certainly make me cycle through there faster.

They are also essentially farmed, like most deer populations in the UK. I've probably moaned about this before but part of the value of an estate in Scotland is made up of the stag cull figures, a lot of these places feed them in the winter and don't shoot hinds to bring up stag numbers. Great for stalking returns, very bad fro growing trees. There are orders of magnitude more deer in Scotland than there is supposed to be. They even tried full scale 100% culling on a peninsular a few years ago and the population bounced back in about two years. We tend to accept that we can really impact the deer population in an area so we target culling on restock sites to try to keep losses to a minimum.

Oh and they are delicious

Like I said, they are well adapted to the risk of being eaten. See also rabbits. As you also point out, problems arise with insufficient predation. Culling is far more humane than letting them starve due to over grazing, if less natural.

Stevo_666

Chris Bass wrote:

bompington wrote:

It's absolutely not fair to compare meat-eaters to Hitler. After all, he was a vegetarian, therefore morally superior to carnivores.

No he wasn't

Oh yes he was...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler_and_vegetarianism

chris_bass

Stevo 666 wrote:

Chris Bass wrote:

bompington wrote:

It's absolutely not fair to compare meat-eaters to Hitler. After all, he was a vegetarian, therefore morally superior to carnivores.

No he wasn't

Oh yes he was...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler_and_vegetarianism

oh no he wasn't
https://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/myth_check_was_hitler_a_vegetarian

I know it is unlike the Nazis to use false propaganda to fit their agenda but it seems like they may have don that in this case!

joenobody

Rick Chasey wrote:

Relish the challenge? Come on mate. That's a bold positive spin on it. You could see it as being difficult and challenging if you want too.

You're not wrong with the last sentence, however I can only talk to my experience, and that is that those people I know (who love to cook) are excited to see what they can do. YMMV.