Many vegans are out of touch from reality

[Disection]

Reality is that only 0.5% of americans are vegans. Number is extremely low.

I cut meat from my diet for health reason (selfish yes) but I still have done it. I consume less than 70% of meat and cut red meat completely. I also have lactose intolerance so basically I don't effect cow farms.

Unfortunatelly this is not enough for vegans. They say I'm still part of problem. Okay maybe I am but then what?
People think that by shaming and showing your elitism to people then all of suddenly everyone turns 100% into vegan. Wrong. What happens is that people feel guilt and think they are not good enough and abandon whole vegan ideology after tryed it couple weeks.

Who moron suggest to go 100% into vegan anyhow? You should start progressing slow. Even if you cut half that's 100% less creatures killed.

It's like fat shaming. People think people get better but instead their self-esteem gets lower. That sure teached them..

 

[Brian W]

Reality is that only 0.5% of americans are vegans. Number is extremely low.

I cut meat from my diet for health reason (selfish yes) but I still have done it. I consume less than 70% of meat and cut red meat completely. I also have lactose intolerance so basically I don't effect cow farms.

Unfortunatelly this is not enough for vegans. They say I'm still part of problem. Okay maybe I am but then what?
People think that by shaming and showing your elitism to people then all of suddenly everyone turns 100% into vegan. Wrong. What happens is that people feel guilt and think they are not good enough and abandon whole vegan ideology after tryed it couple weeks.

Who moron suggest to go 100% into vegan anyhow? You should start progressing slow. Even if you cut half that's 100% less creatures killed.

It's like fat shaming. People think people get better but instead their self-esteem gets lower. That sure teached them..

Yeah, it's my contention that after a while of being vegan, many vegans swallow and regurgitate the trendy rhetoric of the time, forget where they came from and start judging others, including those who have health issues that make it difficult for them to follow a plant based diet. It becomes so intensely about the animals that humanity is forgotten. Of course I would like a world where there is no suffering but at the moment that is not practicable and anybody who thinks it is is incredibly naive! I say you are a vegan and I also say welcome to the forum.

 

[silva]

Reality is that only 0.5% of americans are vegans. Number is extremely low.

I cut meat from my diet for health reason (selfish yes) but I still have done it. I consume less than 70% of meat and cut red meat completely. I also have lactose intolerance so basically I don't effect cow farms.

Unfortunatelly this is not enough for vegans. They say I'm still part of problem. Okay maybe I am but then what?
People think that by shaming and showing your elitism to people then all of suddenly everyone turns 100% into vegan. Wrong. What happens is that people feel guilt and think they are not good enough and abandon whole vegan ideology after tryed it couple weeks.

Who moron suggest to go 100% into vegan anyhow? You should start progressing slow. Even if you cut half that's 100% less creatures killed.

It's like fat shaming. People think people get better but instead their self-esteem gets lower. That sure teached them..

You do you. You don't like criticism, well neither do I.

Start a thread with "Vegans out of touch with reality", make blanket statements painting vegans as unaccepting and self defeating, then wait for us to bow down and tell you how much we don't like "those kind" of vegans".
Well I'm sure you're welcome anyway

 

[silva]

Oh, and wonderful that you're finding better health by cutting out animal products from your diet!

 

[bEt]

Hello, it sounds like you've felt both unwelcome and shamed by some other vegan(s), somewhere, and I feel really bad about that. No one needs to be shamed or taunted--I think we make the best choices when we're doing so for the right reasons, that is, when we feel we are following our own conscience and not some outside dictates.

Honestly, even though I don't buy or use any animal products anymore, I didn't exactly plan to give them up entirely when I first started. I was very slow about it, and I didn't have anyone to advise me, so I made some mistakes along the way. It sounds like what you've done so far has been good for your health and also allowed you to expand your world-view, plus you've reduced the consumer demand for meats and animal products! Those are all good things! If everyone did as much as you have, the world would be a better place, in my opinion.

By the way, if you're interested in nutrition, this site has some interesting information.

Plant Protein: A Vegan Nutrition Primer – The Vegan RD

also, two very useful tools that you can use for free are the recipe nutrition calculator on myfooddata.com (I type in a day's food as if it were one 'recipe') and a similar online tool called Cronometer. They can help you see how your vitamins, minerals, and amino acids add up for a day.

Thank you for your thoughts, and Welcome to the forum!

 

[Jamie in Chile]

Veganism can seem very radical, but so did feminism, anti-slavery etc at one time in the past.

While there are some vegans that expect 100% veganism or nothing they are probably a minority. Perhaps a sizeable minority, but still a minority. Many are quite happy to see people eating 70% less meat.

But a key question is eating meat morally wrong. (I think yes.) If it is, you should stop it altogether in the same way you should stop other morally wrong things like stealing. If someone said they could down their stealing by 70%, should we applaud them?

 

[Jamie in Chile]

There is also the idea that if you make people angry and upset they will not cut their meat consumption and might even backlash and eat more. And you need to be more polite to be successful. I have doubts about whether this is true or not. My life experience and understanding of human psychology suggests that sometimes at least it isn't. The rude disruptor is who really gets your attention. The polite vegetarian and dinner is not noticed or forgotten the next day.

To be honest, when someone angers you it's more remembered and, while it very likely won't lead to change in the short term, might be part of a process of long term change.

Nelson Mandela has elegantly expressed this idea when he talked about how a chief in his village said that black people were likes slaves to the white people. It annoyed him, because he didn't agree, or didn't want to face it, but eventually this led to a kind of positive awakening that helped him put South Africa on a path to ending apartheid:
“This upstart chief was ruining my day, spoiling the proud feeling with wrong-headed remarks. But without exactly understanding why, his words soon began to work in me. He had planted a seed, and though I let that seed lie dormant for a long season, it eventually began to grow. Later, I realized that the ignorant man that day was not the chief but myself.” Nelson Mandela.

 

[silva]

I firmly believe we'll do better simply by normalising plant foods rather than trying to convert peoples attitudes towards eating animals.
The people I know who've gone vegan after watching the shock documentaries I believe would have done it regardless. I've known far more who've watched them that could shrug and saw they wish it wasn't so, but it's not changing their minds.

Michael Pollan has probably affected more long term change with his books like Omnivores Dilemma in how people think of foods than movies like Game Changer.

People buy and eat what the norm is--remember when turkey burgers were weird?

The research on the benefits of eating plant based, and at least dairy free, is growing at a rapid rate. Physicians are far more apt to recommend at least a mostly plant based diet

I don't believe people need to love animals to be vegan-you don't have to like anyone to not wish them harm.
It's just logical that for many places in the world now eating plants is more practical all around than raising animals

 

[ewomack]

Yes, I agree @Disection , though, as others have said, your words only apply to vegans who have actually shamed others into "converting." Not all vegans are like that. Some do exist, and, I agree, that isn't the most effective way to get people to see the other side of an argument. I don't think you'll find many vegans like that here. I haven't run into many, if any.

Speaking for myself, I've posted here numerous times suggesting that people start by convincing people to cut down on meat rather than going cold turkey. I'm still not 100% vegan, as I eat meat only a few times a year now. Cutting down at least does something and people have a larger likelihood of following through.

And congrats for cutting down on meat! That's quite an accomplishment! Thank you for sharing your experience! I hope you join us here and realize that people striving towards a more meat free life can be tolerant and respectful to others.

 

[Roy R]

Should there be a distinction made here about going Vegan and going Plant Based? What I understand is that Veganism isn't a diet.

I agree that people shouldn't be shaming people who are trying to cut out eating animals for whatever reasons. I am guessing that the issue is calling it veganism perhaps.

Having said that - going cold turkey can be hard for a lot of people - it's difficult. I know when I went down this path it was because I saw a video on youtube and I started cutting out meat - I didn't want to be part of a group so didn't call myself a vegan but when I did give it all up and realised that my principles for giving it up where the same as that of vegans, I relented and then started calling myself a vegan. i.e. against meat, dairy, eggs, honey, clothing, experimentation, exploitation etc.

 

[Lou]

Should there be a distinction made here about going Vegan and going Plant Based? What I understand is that Veganism isn't a diet.

Veganism is a lifestyle. but not a religion. the diet distinctions and the lifestyle distinction are not completely understood - even by vegans.

But IMHO maybe a more important distinctions is between vegans and what I affectionally call Nutty Vegans.

 

[majorbloodnok]

The world contains two types of people; "them" and "us". The population also contains two basic types of thinking; "exclusive" (oh, you're one of them) and "inclusive" (hey, we've this in common so you must be one of us).

The vegan population has both inclusive and exclusive thinkers just like the non-vegan population. Irrespective of dietary choices, arguments of exclusivity are unlikely to win many converts in either direction whereas inclusive discussions (you've increased the proportion of plant-based food in your diet by 50%? Well done) are much more likely to promote collaboration.

That said, anyone taking an ethical stance to anything is likely to feel frustrated when either people don't agree with that ethical position or when shifts towards that ethical position are happening more slowly than might be liked. Anyone getting frustrated is likely to criticise and that's leaning towards exclusive thinking. Understandable, but not productive.

The language @Disection uses is pretty excluding, to the point of coming across as perhaps being an internet troll. However, that could be simply down to English being a second language. The points @Disection makes, however, are relevant to this forum precisely because they should be getting everyone to shift the way they think; less about making one's own viewpoint heard and more about listening to others' viewpoints. After all, as the saying goes "God gave us two ears and one mouth so we could listen twice as much as we speak".

 

[silva]

How about people accept the idea that some people are simply @$$hats and will be regardless of their ideology?
and also....
Why is being vegan seen by so many as some kind of club they're p'ssed about not being invited into?
What's the problem with saying you're vegetarian, or mostly plant based?
If someone says they're Kosher do you not expect them to be...Kosher? Would you not be shocked to have someone who identifies as Muslim eat pork?
I had to leave a forum that had more activity of vegans defending a post about vegans can eat egg or honey....because someone called it out as not vegan. Vegans tripping over themselves to come to aid of the egg and honey vegan someone has the audacity to correct
It isn't that I care if someone calls themselves vegan and backslides, it's that I care about the word becoming meaningless.
Vegan means no animal exploitation and avoidance of the products that are derived from animals. No, we can't avoid everything, and it shouldn't be about personal purity in avoiding animal products, but instead working towards eliminating them for all.
Even if someone intentionally slips up I will still defend them as vegan, but never will I defend the action as vegan . Like no, eating eggs is not vegan.

 

[peacefulveglady]

I find it disbursing you come on a vegan message board and start stating vegans are out of touch in reality. There are all kinds of vegans on spectrum.
Cutting out one animal products does not automatically make you vegan. You have to commit to all animal products and then call yourself vegan.

 

[Graeme M]

I have found some vegan groups to be pretty judgemental, and vegan comments on a lot of farming posts leave a bit to be desired because they tend to reinforce negative stereotypes of vegan.

Recent research in the US by an animal rights advocacy group Pax Fauna found that:
"Vegetarians and vegans, however, remain deeply unpopular. Omnivores view veg*ns more negatively than several groups which are commonly targets of prejudice, including Black people, immigrants, and atheists: “People also often freely associate negative words with vegetarians, calling them ‘sadistic,’ ‘judgmental,’ and ‘militant.’” Negative feelings are stronger towards vegans than vegetarians, and towards veg*ns motivated by animal suffering or environmental concerns as opposed to those motivated by health. Such feelings are also stronger towards veg*n men as opposed to women, reflecting the fact that veg*nism is seen as effeminate. Finally, veg*n stereotypes are associated with whiteness, wealth, and elitism (contrary to data showing that veg*nism is significantly more common among people of color and does not correlate with class)."

I think veganism now has such a negative connotation and is so weighed down by the baggage of negative public opinion that I really doubt it can ever gain more than fringe interest. Currently, true ethical vegans make up perhaps 1-2% of the population and there is no sign that much is changing. Pax Fauna found in that same research that much of what people call the growing popularity of veganism is really the spread of a form of reducetarianism.

The time could be ripe for a vegan reformation. I'd rather see vegan advocacy more in the form of education, encouragement and acceptance. In fact I think advocates would do better to actually partner with, or at least co-exist with such movements as reducetarianism, ethical omnivorism and regenerative farming; such could provide much more fertile ground for an eventual progression of local cultural attitudes to animal farming and justice for the animals concerned. The current paradigm of actively attacking and judging people for doing wrong when they engage in practices deeply rooted in our cultural history and psyche seem far less likely to truly flower into anything useful. I suppose I'd wrap all of that up into the idea that taking the long view might be more productive than the change everything right now tack.

 

[shyvas]

Many are quite happy to see people eating 70% less meat.

This is definitely progress. We all know that the entire world's population isn't going to become vegan.

I have influenced one friend to become flexitarian and that to my mind, is positive.

 

[Sax]

I think veganism now has such a negative connotation and is so weighed down by the baggage of negative public opinion that I really doubt it can ever gain more than fringe interest.

That's possible. But the goal shouldn't be to spread veganism so people's perception of vegans is tangential IMO.

The goal should be to end the systematic exploitation of and violence against animals. You don't get systemic change through individual conversion - at least I can't think of an example of that.

Imagine slavery abolitionists taking time and effort away from their work to focus on making abolitionists look better. Or civil rights activists parsing who fits the definition of non-racist. None of that advances the push for systemic change.

I've shared this before and I'll share it again. Animal rights activist Lauren Gazzola on why worrying about how vegans look is a mistake:

 

[KLS52]

Reality is that only 0.5% of americans are vegans. Number is extremely low.

I cut meat from my diet for health reason (selfish yes) but I still have done it. I consume less than 70% of meat and cut red meat completely. I also have lactose intolerance so basically I don't effect cow farms.

I might be reading this incorrectly so feel free to correct if I am, but consuming less than 70% of meat is still a lot of meat..more than half. Why do feel the need to say you are vegan? It sounds like that might be the issue. Why not just say you are attempting to go vegan instead? It's fine and often wise to take it slowly.

I agree there should be no shaming and I commend your efforts in eliminating animal products from your diet. So you're not there yet...you're still doing good for yourself and the animals. But as someone who rarely uses the vegan label to describe myself due to occasionally having a veggie burger that may not be vegan or bread that may have milk or honey in it, I don't understand why it's so important for you to have that label and then be insulted if someone calls you out on it.

Anyway, I am happy to have you here and wish you luck on your most worthy journey.

 

[Roy R]

It isn't that I care if someone calls themselves vegan and backslides, it's that I care about the word becoming meaningless.

Indeed - didn't the etymology of the word vegetarian when it was first coined mean the same as what the word vegan means now - until it got b@astardised.

 

[Lou]

Indeed - didn't the etymology of the word vegetarian when it was first coined mean the same as what the word vegan means now - until it got b@astardised.

I don't think so.
I think vegetarian diet always included milk and eggs.

If I remember the history correctly, it wasn't till the 40s when Vegetarian Societies had disagrements about milk and eggs and then the "vegans" split off and formed their own groups.

Not sure when the terms ova-vegetarians and lacto-vegetarians got coined. But I would not call that bastardization, more like being specific.
I would have to re-read some articles but I think some of the earliest vegetarians ate seafood. (I'm thinking Aristotle). So I wouldn't consider the word pesto-vegetarian a ******* either. So IMHO the vegetarian terminology is more about being specific than making exceptions.

My journey started without a lot of knowledge and education. So it took me getting into an argument before I learned that vegetarians did eat milk and eggs. Now I use the term strict vegetarian diet for the vegetarians who eat a vegan diet (but don't adopt the lifestyle).

Although it's nice that we have the word flexatarian as an umbrella term for everything in-between. It's such a broad term it's almost meaningless. But at the very least a person calling himself a flexatarian is showing some awareness. And that is something.