Seen a lot of posts on Lemmy with vegan-adjacent sentiments but the comments are typically very critical of vegan ideas, even when they don’t come from vegans themselves. Why is this topic in particular so polarising on the internet? Especially since unlike politics for example, it seems like people don’t really get upset by it IRL

  • ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    172
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’ve been a vegetarian for 15 years. People IRL often do get offended if you tell them you don’t eat meat. I try my best to avoid saying it because it often leads to being lectured about proteins. Everyone suddenly becomes a nutritionist when you explain why you don’t eat meat.

    • ZagamTheVile@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      95
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yeah. I try not to mention it to people if I can avoid it. I work construction and am surrounded by manly men tring to out man each other. I had one guy offer me bear jerkey and got bent out of shape when I declined. He wouldn’t stop. He just kept on me about why I didn’t eat meat. After about an hour of him asking again and again why I don’t eat meat I said “meat’s another word for dick and eating dick is gay”. As problematic as it was, it worked.

      It never cases to amaze me that a 250pound dude with a 40oz soda in one hand and a mouthfull of gas station pizza thinks he has the responsibility to lecture me about nutrition.

      • illi@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        8 months ago

        “meat’s another word for dick and eating dick is gay”. As problematic as it was, it worked.

        It’s both sad and hillarious that this worked. I wonder if you created a new vegetarian as well

        • ZagamTheVile@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          8 months ago

          Probably not but I like to think it’s created a feedback loop going on in his head endlessly. “Meat is manly. Meat is dick.'”

        • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          38
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          And we’ve been (forgive the pun) fed propaganda by the industrial farming and food industry for generations, not to mention the religious right.

        • Thorry84@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          8 months ago

          You are not wrong. I am vegetarian for about 15 years and I’ve literally have had a father of a friend yell at me. He was telling vegetarians aren’t real and if anybody would actually not eat meat for a couple of months they would die because they would be missing vital nutrients only found in meat. He was yelling at me to stop telling lies and be truthful.

      • sik0fewl@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Some essential amino acids are difficult to find in adequate quantities on a vegan diet. If you don’t vary your protein sources or make sure you are getting the right amino acids, then you may develop a deficiency, which can lead to poor health or even be fatal.

          • sik0fewl@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            8 months ago

            Ya, it’s probably more correct to say any concerns are overstated. And I probably didn’t help by saying “difficult”. It’s not difficult, just not as simple as eating any meat. And like I mentioned, as long as you’re varying your protein sources, you will be fine.

        • zeekaran
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          I know plenty of vegans and they’re all healthier than average. I don’t know any who have had issues with nutrition.

      • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        I have a hard time hitting my protein goal and maintaining correct macros even with meat. I have looked at vegetarian options and I don’t see how anyone could do it without just slamming multiple protein shakes a day. Which would destroy my digestive system. I’d probably be ok when I’m not bulking but I’d have to do a ton of research and basically forget about fast food options. If someone could lay out a vegetarian diet for me that would work I’d be more than happy to give it a shot but I don’t have time to make that effort myself.

    • Stupidmanager@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      I’m what I call “mostly vegetarian“ which means that I choose to not have meat, but will eat small portions on occasion. And boy does that just piss off people like no other. Worse is I get it from both sides, to either commit in full or just give in to my natural instincts and consume more red meat.

      Sometimes I just want a salad. Sometimes I want some bacon crumbles on that salad. Sometimes I want 3oz of fish with a plate of veggies. But what I can tell you is 3/4 of my plate will have healthy veggies or fruit.

    • Björn Tantau@swg-empire.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      I did get offended when, after a very successful date, I went to a shawarma place with her and we both had a super awesome shawarma with lots of meat. For the next date I made some pizza rolls with salami and she confessed that she actually doesn’t eat meat.

      I still tease her about that when I meet her nowadays.

  • BrikoX@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    133
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    8 months ago

    From what I have seen, it more stems from the activism vegans are engaged in more than the actual veganism.

    • CalciumDeficiency@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      8 months ago

      I think there’s nothing wrong with explaining your ideas and why you believe them to those willing to listen, but I can see why pushy activism for any cause can get annoying quickly. There are often Jehovah’s witnesses outside my local supermarket, for example, but they only give you a pamphlet if you specifically approach them

      • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        97
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        It’s not just pushy, it’s judgemental and vitriolic

        Oh, you eat meat, murderer? Your shoes are made from the skins of defenseless creatures. The sugar you’re so callously adding to your coffee was processed with ground-up bones, you unredeemable monster.

        Even the arguments for veganism that aren’t built on animal cruelty still take on an air of moral superiority. Don’t you care about the planet and future generations? How dare you trade carbon emissions for the temporary comfort of a bacon cheeseburger!

        The vegan movement has always been associated with anger and contempt, even if it is justified.

        • FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          There’s also the ‘guilt by association’. Look at organisations like PETA: they even complained about things like the treatment of entirely fictional animals in video games, like Palworld. Basically, you can’t even argue that ‘they look like real animals so it encourages real-world mistreatment’ like they usually do.

          That does not make you look particularly sane. I’m sure they do good work as well, but that sort of thing isn’t helping their cause.

          • IronKrill@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            8 months ago

            Saying PETA is representative of vegans is rather like using Antifa as an example of liberals, or Info Wars for conservatives.

            • FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Which is exactly what everyone does. At least in the US. And every side is equally wrong about it.

              The loudest voices always draw the most attention. And I don’t know any other vegan voice that’s as loud as PETA’s. That’s kind of the problem.

          • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            PETA might do something good by accident. They kill 60-70% of the pets they receive for donation, so I guess the lucky 1/3 that don’t get the ax are a good thing.

        • NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          PETA was giving away free coloring books one time so I decided to order some for my kids thinking it would be good for them to hear from all sides.

          One of the pictures was three people standing over a turkey dinner with the most horrific caricatures you can think of absolutely salivating over how juicy the turkey was going to be.

          I shit you not.

          I had to trash the sons of bitches.

          Really killed that group for me, I always that people were exaggerating about them and how bad they are.

          They killed that little piece of me.

        • spankinspinach@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          In my experience, your first sentence sums it up nicely.

          They assume a moral high ground because they’ve adopted a diet that is generally deemed healthier and better for the environment (I don’t always agree with this).

          But unless they’re also doing all the things we could all do better (e.g. not buying new, not upgrading the the latest and greatest, not taking 40 minute showers, not eating out every second day), they’re only somewhat less guilty of environmental damage than the average person, but they’re taking a generally undeserved “holier than thou” position and then shoving it down your throat. This isn’t everyone, and I don’t really care what you eat, but these are the vegans that get under my skin.

          • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Eh, I can see it both ways. Like, nobody is, or can be, perfect. That doesn’t mean they don’t have a valid moral argument for the good choices they make. They’re trying to be a better person, and I think it’s fair to help other people recognize the poor decisions they are making. Climate change especially affects all of us.

            On the other hand, you’re 100% correct. Nobody can lay exclusive claim to the high ground, so anybody acting superior is probably an asshole.

        • Feyd@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          23
          arrow-down
          19
          ·
          8 months ago

          In my experience it’s usually more like: Them: here have some of this meat thing Me: No thanks Them: why not it’s really good try some Me: i don’t eat meat Them: but why? Me: to reduce animal cruelty and environmental harm Them: wow how dare you be so judgy

          I’m not really sure how I’m supposed to not offend this type of person in this situation and frankly I don’t think it’s my fault or my problem they’re offended. My theory is that that agree with my reasons but rather than change or live with the cognitive dissonance they just lash out at anyone that reminds them they could be living more ethically even if they basically MAKE them say it.

          Blaming vegans for that is bullshit, frankly

          • Pronell@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            8 months ago

            That isn’t the type of behavior that I think most find annoying but I’m sorry that you get that reaction at all.

            I think many people are so annoyed with feeling they are attacked for eating meat (and I do eat meat) that when that button gets pressed the anger just rises up.

            For me I get a little true guilt. I know I’m not helping in the best possible ways that I can, all the time. I’m not perfect and won’t ever pretend that I am, and I also haven’t given up on getting better. When I go a day without eating meat, I congratulate myself. With a burger. (No, not really.)

          • fishos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            8 months ago

            Some people see “to reduce animal cruelty” as judgy because that’s just how nature is. The moral superiority comes from you acting like you’re somehow above everyone and everything else. It’s entirely in your wording and the implications that if you eat meat, you enjoy animal suffering vs seeing it as a natural outcome of nature.

            • Feyd@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              8 months ago
              1. This is completely besides the point, but I personally view factory farming as different than what happens in nature.

              2. This is also beside the point, but you are making some wild logical leaps here. The fact that I personally don’t want to support factory farming because I think it is cruel in no way means that I think other people “enjoy animal suffering” and assuming that is arbitrarily assigning thoughts I have never had to me.

              3. None of the above is really relevant because I should be allowed to go about my day without justifying my dietary choices just as people that eat meat should.

              • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                Look, you don’t deserve the treatment you’ve described. Everyone here agrees with you on that.

                The person you were replying to was trying to explain why what you said might be interpreted as judgemental, even if that’s not how you meant it (and we all believe you, even if the people you’re talking about don’t).

                I think the last line sums it up. You don’t eat meat, and that’s the only explanation you owe anyone.

                However, I know that when I’m providing a meal and I learn someone doesn’t eat meat, I always ask follow up questions because maybe I cooked the 1rice with chicken stock, or maybe the vegetables were sauteed in butter. If it is a moral choice, I would appreciate a heads up so I can prepare a meal everyone can enjoy. I’m not irritated by the request, because that’s the whole reason why you cook food for friends. If it’s a healthy choice, you might still eat some of the brown rice, or maybe I sub oil for butter. Those are changes I can make on the fly.

                I know I’ve probably unintentionally offended some vegans by probing for more answers. And I’ve met some vegans who are every bit as judgemental as you’ve been assumed to be. We could all do a little bit better at understanding each other.

                • illi@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  I’d not see it as judgemental, just trying to inform. These days meatcis just a commodity, completely disasociated from the animals it comes from and without second thougt on how those animals are treated. If I go into detail like this, it’s really just to get the info out there in a casual way. The person in question might ignore it, or may think about it. I also needed nudges like this to realize the moral issue and I’m happy for every one of them. I don’t really go into detail much, and rarely inform someone about my preferences. But will answer truthfuly when asked

                  If someone chooses to ignore ot just not see the suffering behind eating meat in this day and age, it is frustrating though to say the least. Especially if simply reducing the meat intake and being more selective about the source of the meat comes a long way. But I get why it is so tough, as I’m not a saint myself and while I reduce meat most of the time, I still have some occasionally even if I feel bad about it.

        • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          And it’s history stems from religious ideology.

          Edit: oh you downvoters. Go look it up. A woman had a vision from God that said “don’t eat things with faces”. Dead serious - that’s where it started.

          All the sciencey justifications today are post-hoc rationalization.

      • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        The UK has a high rate of veganism, and part of that is attributed to the fact that the major vegetarian and vegan organisations in the UK generally recommend persuading people by offering them delicious food that is also vegetarian/vegan and saying it’s more ethical. On the other hand, the equivalent organisations in the US tend to lean more towards recommending telling people that eating animal products is unethical, and it’s difficult to accuse someone of unethical behaviour without being insulting. It also doesn’t help that multibillion-dollar organisations have run successful smear campaigns against groups like PETA - everyone’s heard of the time they took someone’s pet dog and killed it, but most aren’t aware that it happened once and gets reported on as if it’s news every few months, or that it was an accident as the dog’s collar had come off and it was with a group of strays, and got muddled with another dog, so was put down weeks earlier than it was supposed to be, bypassing the waiting period they had specifically to avoid this kind of mistake.

          • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            It doesn’t strengthen your point to link Fox News and the literal website for the smear campaign I mentioned: https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=PETA_Kills_Animals

            As for PETA putting down lots of animals, that’s no secret. It’s really easy to get people to donate to a no-kill animal shelter, so there are lots of them. However, when you’re a no-kill animal shelter, and you’re full of animals you can’t kill, or are asked to take an animal that can’t be ethically be treated with anything other than euthanasia, you have to turn the animal down, and it ends up wherever will take it. Usually, that ends up being a PETA-run shelter. When a PETA-run shelter is being given all the rejects from everywhere else, it’s obviously going to end up putting lots of animals down. It’d be better for PR if they didn’t, but less ethical, and they prioritise the ethics above the PR.

            If you look at one of your more reliable sources, the Snopes article, it backs up what I’m saying, and not what you’re saying. It corroborates the story from my original post, lists another incident where PETA staff were accused but not convicted, and then discusses that they put down a lot of animals in their shelters, and how it includes healthy animals. The only controversy there is the definition of adoptable - a healthy stray kitten is theoretically adoptable, but if you get ten times as many kittens in a week as you do people wanting to adopt a kitten, 90% of them won’t get adopted, and your shelter will get quickly overcrowded if you insist on ignoring that fact.

            • Confused_Emus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              I’m no fan of Fox News in general myself, but just because we don’t like them doesn’t make everything they publish false. And yeah, the PETA kills site clearly has an agenda, but their agenda is to try and save animals from PETA’s “love.” There’s sensationalism on that site, but there are also numbers, many of which come from PETA themselves.

              I linked the Snopes article knowing that it supported points from both sides. The point in linking that article is that it’s despicable that any of those reports of PETA’s disgusting behavior are true at all.

              You know what no-kill shelters try to do when they don’t have space? Coordinate with local foster programs, coordinate with other shelters to see if they have space. There are other alternatives besides taking in a perfectly healthy animal and dropping it in the euthanasia queue.

              I’m quite sure there are quite a few things PETA has been accused but not convicted of. When you’re a group of assholes as big as that, you get pretty good at skirting the fine lines of what’s legal and what’s not. They’re hardly the first example of groups like that.

              • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                And yeah, the PETA kills site clearly has an agenda, but their agenda is to try and save animals from PETA’s “love.”

                Their agenda’s to make PETA look bad so people don’t become vegan or demand higher welfare standards from meat producers, and they can continue selling meat to Americans of such low standards that it would be illegal in the rest of the civilised world.

                You know what no-kill shelters try to do when they don’t have space? Coordinate with local foster programs, coordinate with other shelters to see if they have space. There are other alternatives besides taking in a perfectly healthy animal and dropping it in the euthanasia queue.

                As I said, they can’t do that once the foster programs and other shelters are full, too, and then overflow into PETA-run shelters because they’re the ones that still have a capability to receive more animals after they’re full. There aren’t enough shelters to keep every animal in good conditions until it’s either adopted or dies of natural causes, and no amount of coordination can magically create extra capacity.

                • Confused_Emus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  I’m sure PETA shelters would have more capacity if they didn’t prefer to see an animal dead than a pet. They have significantly higher kill rates than any other shelters, and have made their stance pretty clear that they’re against animals being pets. No wonder they just keep killing them.

      • Treczoks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        think there’s nothing wrong with explaining your ideas and why you believe them

        That’s actually not the problem. The problem are those who repeat themselves ever louder, even to people who have expressed disinterest.

    • qevlarr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Fascinating! Thank you for this article. It exactly describes what’s happening: “oh, you think you’re better than us? I’ll have another steak!”

      • anakin78z@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        This is really easy to test in fairly small social groups. The next time you’re in a group ordering pizza, say you want cheese, because you don’t eat meat. Now watch everyone else order, or change their order to, double meat supreme with bacon. It’s almost like they can’t help themselves. It’s hilarious how easy you can change other people’s behavior.

    • pearable@lemmy.ml
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      8 months ago

      There’s another factor here. People who are vegan, sober, poly, don’t drive, and any number of choices are breaking societal norms. Most people don’t even think about these things as choices. They do the default. Realizing that there’s a choice, and that this person decided not to do the default, puts people off. It makes them uncomfortable. They begin to question things they’ve never had to evaluate.

  • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    83
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    8 months ago

    If you accept that there are moral/ethical problems with eating meat (contribution to climate change, health concerns, animals being killed and eaten, whatever), and choose to eat meat anyway, and encounter a vegan, what has to happen?

    You can accept that they are making a better choice, but then you have to accept that you’re making a worse choice. Most people are cowards and protect the ego at any cost. Rather than shrugging and saying “yeah, i should eat less meat. Good for you taking the high road”, which requires accepting that you’re not being the best, you can instead grab onto any reasons why no it’s really them that sucks. That’s easier, more comfortable, and doesn’t require any painful introspection or changes.

    It’s the same mechanism when people get mad at cyclists, pedestrians, people who go to the gym, people who don’t shop at Walmart, whatever. They’re doing something that makes you feel bad in comparison. Most people are terrible at that and will lash out instead of doing anything productive.

    Alternatively, or maybe additionally, people are really tribal, and once they adopt the idea that vegans (or cyclists, or people driving small cars, or people wearing sandals, whatever) are in the outgroup, then they enjoy being hostile to them.

    People are ego driven emotional morons. All of us. Me, too. It’s terrible.

  • Leviathan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’ve never once in the last decade seen a single vegan post other than recipes. What I do see is constant posts about how “vegans are always throwing it my face/holier than thou”, “I’m gonna eat extra meat because vegans make me feel bad”. I really don’t think vegans are the problem, I think these fools fall for every single piece of beef industry propaganda that comes across their screens.

  • lustyargonian@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Holier than thou attitude from new vegans whose world view changed overnight and cognitive dissonance on the part of non vegan with the need to deflect than to make substantial changes.

  • Nougat@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    81
    arrow-down
    40
    ·
    8 months ago

    It’s a first world hill to die on, and many of the people who espouse veganism are only able to do so because of their own privilege.

    It’s a combination of smugness and “I’m better than you” and the lack of awareness that everyone had and continues to benefit from a world that has always used animal products. The Industrial Revolution basically ran on steam engines and leather belts, for example.

    I have absolutely no problem with the idea that using fewer animal products and eating less meat is a good idea. I also recognize that feeding the world’s growing population is probably going to involve insects being more widely used as a food source.

    • SporeAdic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Vegans literally are suggesting solutions to the growing population because in almost every situation, it is much more efficient by land and water use for people to eat plant-based rather than meat. It’s only a “first world hill to die on” if you think poor people can’t eat plants. Sorry but I don’t think this is a very accurate take…

      • Nougat@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        8 months ago

        “Meat from herd mammals” is not at all the sum total of use of animal products. Should we all be eating less beef? Sure, I can get behind that. None? I’m okay with that, too. What about eggs, cheese, butter - and that’s only referring to things we eat, not things we use for other purposes.

    • Floey@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      People also continue to benefit from the work of slaves in the past and even present. What’s your point? Do you think slavery is ethical? Is someone choosing to avoid products created from slave labour not a more ethical choice?

    • jeffw@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      29
      ·
      8 months ago

      What privilege? Meat is the most expensive food out there. Eating rice and beans isn’t really showing privilege

      • Mostly_Gristle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        8 months ago

        The privilege is being able to choose to eat that way out of a sense of morality or fashion rather for the reason that it’s literally all there is to eat. The privilege is being able to turn your nose up at perfectly edible food for no other reason than that it’s got a bit of egg, honey, or butter in it without having to worry about starving to death. The privilege is also having access to such an abundance and variety of food that you can maintain a vegan diet year round and not have to fear that you won’t meet all the calorie, protein, and vitamin requirements you need to stay alive and healthy while much of the world is in a constant struggle to scrape together enough calories of any kind to stay alive.

        • businessfish@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          that’s great, but most vegans you speak to will tell you that we aren’t telling the people who lack the privilege we have to go vegan. we’re asking our neighbors, our bosses, our friends - people in similar if not the very same life circumstances as us - to walk a couple aisles over from where they buy the meat in the grocery store and buy some beans instead.

          people love to bring up the privilege thing, but i would argue that it is entirely irrelevant. the entire point of veganism is to do what is reasonably possible and practicable. not to tell people who don’t have the privilege to be so discerning about their diet that they are going to hell or something.

      • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Well, that’s getting into the difference between veganism and vegetarianism.

        That aside, although meat is expensive from a cost and input perspective, it is a very efficient and dense source of calories and protein.
        Outside of a first world or industrial agricultural setting, they also have the advantage of being able to convert food sources humans cannot eat into one we can, while to a great degree being able to tend to themselves.
        Goats, sheep and chickens can have large numbers managed by a few children with sticks, and also produce non-vegan animal byproducts which can be sold for cash.
        This is also before hunting is considered.

        While vegetarianism and veganism can be practiced outside of a first world context, and indeed have been for thousands of years, they do come with sacrifices that are significantly easier to make with more money or in a post agricultural region.
        Eschewing cheese, eggs and honey is not a difficult thing to do for me if I wanted, but there are places where that’s just leaving good food uneaten, or money unearned.

        That’s I believe what’s being referred to when it’s called a privilege.

        • jeffw@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Except meat is the least efficient protein source. You need land to grow animal feed, which largely could be used to grow crops to feed humans. You put in like 100 calories to get 1 calorie out.

          • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            Not all land is suitable for crop cultivation, which was the point I was making. In subsistence or low tech farming areas, animals forage on land unsuitable for crop production and eat food unsuitable for human consumption. They’re not eating feed, they’re eating wild weeds and grass we can’t. They’re eating insects, miscellaneous seeds, small plants and whatever they find.

            Do you think that if you’re farming to have enough food to feed your family and maybe some leftovers to sell, that you’re going to choose to produce something markedly inefficient in comparison to other options?
            Subsistence farmers today aren’t stupid. They’re not wasting 90% of their food because they want a hamburger. They raise goats and chickens because they feed themselves and you let your kid who’s too young to do heavy work follow them with a stick to keep them from wandering off. They raise cattle and donkeys because they can forage, and what they can’t forage is more than made up for by using them to work the land or as beasts of burden.

            There’s a reason we domesticated animals. We didn’t just immediately start giving them feed corn and locking them in cages.

            It’s a privilege to be able to ignore a readily available source of food.
            It’s a privilege to live in a society where we set aside land to grow huge amounts of food to feed our food.
            It’s a privilege to not have to know specifically where your food is coming from.

            It’s kind of ignorant to think that people who don’t have those privileges must be foolish enough to choose what you think is an inefficient option, and to not consider why they would make that choice.

      • Nougat@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Vegan: no animal products. No butter, no eggs, having to be well-informed (as others have stated) and know about the content of every bit of everything you buy, and making choices on that basis instead of on cost.

        Even then, how many of the products you buy and use every day have depended on animal products for their manufacture? I’m willing to bet that a fair amount of human labor consumes and uses animal products to sustain themselves, even if there are no animal products in the thing you’re buying. I don’t think it’s fair to compartmentalize that away from purchasing decisions. The people who put your flat pack MDF furniture in a box, did they have a chicken sandwich on their lunch break? The people who are paving the roads and maintain the rails on which the products you ultimately buy, are they wearing leather boots?

        Everyone depends, to some degree or another, on the use of animal products, either as food or for some other purpose. Even vegans.

        Edit: Like I said above, reducing dependence on animal products is probably a good idea, but people who believe they have eliminated their dependence on animal products are patting themselves on the back for something they simply cannot accomplish.

        • Tywèle [she|her]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          8 months ago

          Veganism is not about completely eliminating every use of animal products no matter what. It’s about reducing animal suffering and their exploitation as long as it’s possible and practicable.

          “Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.”

          From https://www.vegansociety.com/go-vegan/definition-veganism

    • CalciumDeficiency@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      8 months ago

      Found it interesting to discover that the money here in the UK is made from animal parts - I think certain notes contain tallow? Definitely seems like it is impossible to fully exclude animal products from your daily life unless you go off the grid and try to be an entirely self sufficient vegan homesteader, which, while extremely difficult and likely dangerous is still an option open to those preaching a vegan lifestyle. Vegans often do not actually practise their philosophy as far as is practical and possible, they all draw the line somewhere so far as how willing they are to sacrifice their comfort and convenience. Like there are no fully vegan cars - the glue is animal based, even if you opt out of a leather interior. Public transport or taking a job you can walk to are alternatives in the UK if you actually cared about benefitting from animals as little as possible, but few vegans will make sacrifices which are actually inconvenient once you get down to the nitty gritty

      Imo being a vegan so far as diet and basic lifestyle changes goes is fairly easy for some people (they don’t really like meat to begin with, know how to cook and enjoy it, no real health issues, disposable income) but the real test of how much they actually believe in these ideas is in if they consistently give up more niche forms of animal exploitation wherever they can

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Because of the trope that vegans are pretentious twats that publicly chastise anyone not vegan.

    Like most things it’s one of those situations that’s blown out of proportion and the vast majority of us will never interact with a preachy vegan. I’ve encountered many vegans in the wild and they’ve most all been decent people, and I love picking their brains for decent vegan or vegetarian foods. I don’t mind vegan/vegetarianism, it’s just not easy to do well, so it helps to talk to people who do it for real. That said, I have encountered a few that are on the preachy side, but whatever. They’re no different than the tool who has the “eat tasty animals” bumper sticker and the like.

  • sparkle@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    The same reason people hate leftists, feminists, trans athletes, “gamer girls”, people on welfare, blacks, etc. An image the right cultivated of the group, out of convenient easily-hateable annoying people in it that they could use to create a generalization/stereotype out of. It’s something that’s able to happen to any group, I could portray any hobbyist or activist in this way the same exact way as these “annoying” groups are portrayed, but the right is particularly willing to just flat out lie, slander, and cheat their way into making countercultural/anti-status-quo groups look as absurd as possible, to the point that the majority of the population falls for it (even those that don’t consider themselves to be conservative).

    I’ll make a comparison. Conservative/“anti-sjw” thumbnails often have a picture of some angry-looking rainbow haired woman, usually the same few, in order to be like “look how irrational and crazy these feminazis are, she must hate men so much” and like 4 out of 5 of those times it’s a picture of a woman that was protesting a literal neo-nazi gathering or something, not some sort of radical crazy man-hating feminist. But the internet has conditioned the average person to look at someone like that and immediately think they’re an irrational “feminazi”, and conservatives showing these pictures everywhere and making 100 videos on the same person makes people subconsciously believe they’re rampant and have a massive (and bad) grip on society.

    Same kind of thing happens with vegans, you have the same 10 or so internet vegans people use to portray veganism that conditions people to think poorly of the concept “vegan”, and when these influencers are confronted about it they say “I don’t hate veganism, I just hate the annoying vegans” then they go onto Twitter to complain about the vegans and how they’re irrational for not eating meat and their brains must be de-evolving or something. They know what they’re doing, but they can hide behind plausible deniability, and the majority of viewers fall for it.

  • jacktherippah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    70
    arrow-down
    33
    ·
    8 months ago

    I don’t hate veganism. It’s a dietary choice and that’s fine. What I hate is vegans. They’re always pushy and judgmental and hateful and sometimes even destructive in their activism. They’re an annoying group of people and I just don’t want to have to deal with them.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      Unfortunately this is a topic like abortion.

      Vegans and pro life folks see what “others” are doing as murder/evil. So naturally, since they view the behavior as absolutely inappropriate, their discussion of the topic is always very energetic.

      I am not advocating for any dietary path, or abortion position in this comment. I’m only describing people’s behavior. Do not misrepresent me.

      • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        Then what would we call someone who makes the dietary choice but none of the other lifestyle choices? How would they identify in a restaurant setting? The answer is “vegan”. In the same way that I’m vegetarian but don’t care if I wear leather shoes.

        I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m saying that English lacks the words that would let you be precise. We need a word for people who are vegan in diet, and don’t care to bother the rest of the world about it. That’s why OPs question keeps coming up.

      • ReiRose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        I think plant-based is the diet choice and veganism is the lifestyle. I got corrected by someone who was plant based. They didn’t want to associate with vegans

    • Tiefling IRL@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      It’s an issue of the loud ones standing out the most. I can easily say the same thing about many carnivores I know, who moan and complain if there’s as much as a piece of corn in their meal.

      (Though disclaimer, I’m not vegan)

    • r0ertel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      I came here to say the thing that you said in better words. I’m on a diet for health reasons that closely resembles the vegan diet, so to keep it simple, I’ll say to people that I’m vegan. Most wait staff don’t care if I ask if a menu item can be made vegan, but family or people I’m dining with will either send hate vibes or go into a long thing about some distant vegan relative who died from malnutrition.

    • Floey@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yes, some people being pushy and judgemental is the real travesty. Not animals having their autonomy and lives taken. I didn’t realize we were supposed to coddle people who we see partaking in grave abuses.

    • Today@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      My son used to tell this joke - little less relevant now that the giant hand sized vapes are less common.

      If you vape, you’re vegan, and you’re a musician; which one do you talk about first?

        • Today@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          That wasn’t one of the three, but I’d imagine there may be some crowds where you bring that up early and some where you hold off.

  • retrospectology@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    The meat and dairy industries have been pumping out propaganda for years, mostly aimed at right-wing dudes. It’s just kind of part of right-wing culture at this point to kneejerk react to veganism with tired old tropes and stereotypes.

    It was worse back in the 90s and early 2000s.

  • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    8 months ago

    This is so frustrating. People saying “Oh I just don’t like those self-righteous vegans”. Thing is, it doesn’t really matter what vegans say or how reasonable/logically sound it is, the knee-jerk reaction is always the same.

  • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    8 months ago

    Because I sat at a table for an hour with a work colleague lecturing me on veganism. I couldn’t care less if you don’t lecture me.

  • ArxCyberwolf@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I said this on another thread posted by a very antagonistic vegan: Acting holier-than-thou, smug, and hostile is not a good way to convince people of your arguments. It pushes people away and biases them against you and the argument you’re making.

    Far too often I see vegans outright shaming and harassing people for choosing to eat meat, or acting smug and superior because they are making “the right moral decision” and everyone else is lessor for thinking otherwise. I often see them call people “stupid” and “lazy” for not making the same choice they did.

    Now, if I came here acting the same way, but I was championing eating only meat and shaming others for eating vegetables, I’m sure vegans would be upset for the same reason.

    It’s gotten bad enough that a lot of people (admittedly myself included) are put off by vegans and their arguments. Not because the arguments don’t have merit (they certainly do) but because enough vegans have acted antagonistic or smug that they get shunned for it when the discussion gets brought up, because it’s what has become expected.

    If you really want people to listen to you, you need to frame it from a friendlier and more down-to-earth position and not come across as hostile. The human mind tends to close itself off immediately when faced with hostility. This doesn’t just apply to discussions about veganism, but any discussion in general really.