Views on byproducts - VeggieBoards
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
#1 Old 04-01-2011, 08:43 PM
Newbie
 
vegancheez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 38
I think that byproducts are as bad as the meat itself. i think all vegetarians will say they are against fur, but many wear leather. Why are they so different? And then things like gelatine, i don't even understand how that could be seen as different from eating meat itself, only in the way that it has more of an ew factor. I know a vegetarian who says that it's okay, because the animals aren't killed directly for gelatine, but thats like saying pollution is okay, because we don't use fossil fuels directly for the purpose of polluting the world.
So if anyone is a veggie that accepts byproducts, please could you explain the logic behind it being acceptable?
Thankyou

Neutrality means that you don't really care
Cause the struggle goes on even when you're not there
Blind and unaware~
vegancheez is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 Old 04-01-2011, 09:59 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Phoenix Days's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,969
I don't eat animal by products, everyone else in my omni family thinks I'm being ridiculous for not eating things like gummy candies, but I just don't think it's acceptable as a vegetarian. I check the ingredients for basically everything I eat.

DON'T BRING MY MOTHER INTO THIS!
Phoenix Days is offline  
#3 Old 04-01-2011, 10:58 PM
Rat Queen/Mouse Matriarch
 
Rhys's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 836
From a welfare perspective, some people on the boards do have their own pet chickens or bees from which they collect eggs or honey from. Another member also works at an ahimsa (no harm) dairy farm where the cows are actually treated very well and every cow is allowed to live out their lives. While on a large scale, these sorts of practices may not be able to produce enough to meet demand at the prices people desire but this is what's possible in their lives.

(I'm vegan btw and tend to lean toward abolition but welfare done right is very nice to see as well and it makes me happy.)

I can't abandon the person I used to be, so I carry her.
Rhys is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#4 Old 04-02-2011, 03:23 AM
Newbie
 
longstocking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 60
Well, I'm a lacto-ovo vegetarian and generally I avoid these products. But I still might eat them and no, I don't think it's just as bas as meat.
You ask why vegetarians may wear fur ot leather? First of all, keep in my mind that while a vegan is an ethical stance, not all vegetarians do it for ethical reasons. Some do it for health, some for religious reasons, some just don't like the taste of meat etc. Unlike "veganism", that concerns all parts of your life, "vegetarian" is a dietary term.

Then also I have a question for you, are you a vegan or vegetarian? If you're vegetarian, then you still eat eggs and/or milk, right? Well, in that case explain, how eggs or milk are better than, say, gelatine? Personally, I think they're worse. Even though we sometimes think that no animal gets killed in the process, it's not that true. Every egg is like 75% of taken life, since approximetely every second chick gets killed and then the laying hen gets slaugthered primaturelly. Same thing with milk. So from an ethical point of view I don't see how gelatine is different from eggs or dairy.

Also, why when this question comes up, vegetarians only bring up gelatine and rennet? What about all other slaugther by-products and substances derived from dead animals (bonechar sugar, isinglass, pepsin, whey products (may contain rennet), animal fats, often vitamins A and D, glyserin, arachidonic acid, sometimes monoglycerides and glycerides, stearic acid, lecithin, tallow, cochineal, shellac and many, many more)? All of these substances come or may come from a dead animal. Do you avoid these, too? Or if you're a vegan, than do you think vegetarians should avoid these, too? How are they different/better than gelatine? Just because you find gelatine "ickey" and probbaly not so much some of these animal-derived chemicals doesn't make them different. I don't completely agree that gelatine is the same as meat. Yes, it is derived from collagen in animals bones and skin, but technically it's not animal flesh, it's very processed and refined and I understand why some vegetarians may not find it just as repulsing as, say, meat.
If we as vegetarians must avoid all of these by-products than I think it would be easier to give up eggs and dairy, then avoid all of these when they are "hidden" basically in everything - and not just food, mind you.

Also, the debate whether by-products are ok or not has to do with the definition of a vegetarian. It is an old word and there are several definitions. We can define a vegetaian as someone who doesn't eat animal flesh or as someone who doesn't consume anything that comes from a dead animal. Both definitions exist and I know many vegetarians who occasionally consume some of the products listed above and I don't think that just because of that they stop being vegetarians.

You say you don't understand the logic behind word: "the animals aren't killed directly for gelatine"? Indeed, the logic here is flawed. But then again, it's basically the same as saying: "animals aren't killed directly for production of milk and eggs". Both statemenst lack logic, but no one here (on the vegetarian board I mean, 'cause vegans do that sometimes, lol) buggs vegetarians for eating eggs or milk. Yes, it doesn't come directly from a dead animal, but it doesn't mean animals don't get abused and killed there, we just don't see the evidence of death (e. g. flesh). I think that when a person says that the animal doesn't get directly slaugthered for by-products what they mean is that 1. these by-pruducts are not the reason why the kill the animal and if they didn't use it it would be just thrown out 2. it doesn't profit the slaugther house the same way as meat 2. they are vegetarian alternatives for all these pruducts that are virtually indistinguishable from these by-products, which means if more and more people would become vegetarian, and less animals would get killed, it woun't be a problem to replace these by-products with vegetarian alternatives. I dunno if you got my point here.

And finally, I think that religiously avoiding all animal by-products makes vegetarianism look even harder and crazier to many meat-eaters. Isn't our goal as AR activists and environmetolists to "convert" more people? When they become vegetarians themselves and see it from the inside, when they become "aware" of truth of animal farming they can decide for themselves what products they are comfortable with and what not. But them being vegetarians would make a huge difference for animals.

Don't get me wrong, I don't support or encourage the consumption of these by-products, I am actually not completely sure where I stand on this one, but I definitely don't think it's just as bad as meat. If someone chooses to avoid these products I admire this person. I think, that as AR and environmetal activists we try to do as little harm and suffering as possible. But no one is perfect, even the most devoted vegans. Some of them may consume animal products unknowingly, some may only do it occasionally in certain situations, some wear non-vegan clothes or take non-vegan medicines or drive cars with non-vegan tires etc. Humans use animals basically everywhere and I don't think that it's possible for anyone who lives in a modern world to not use/consume/purchase anything that comes from animals or involves animal exploitation. But we all can try to do as much as we can or as much as we feel confortable with. For some people vegetarianism is a compromise between comfortable life and veganism, for some it's step on the way to veganism and some are vegetarians for other than ethical reasons.

So there. I apologize if it came out a bit aggressive or arrogant or whatever, it's just that I've been thinking a lot about it myself lately and I am sort of struggling internally with myself about about it.
longstocking is offline  
#5 Old 04-02-2011, 05:34 AM
Newbie
 
vegancheez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by longstocking View Post

Well, I'm a lacto-ovo vegetarian and generally I avoid these products. But I still might eat them and no, I don't think it's just as bas as meat.
You ask why vegetarians may wear fur ot leather? First of all, keep in my mind that while a vegan is an ethical stance, not all vegetarians do it for ethical reasons. Some do it for health, some for religious reasons, some just don't like the taste of meat etc. Unlike "veganism", that concerns all parts of your life, "vegetarian" is a dietary term.

Then also I have a question for you, are you a vegan or vegetarian? If you're vegetarian, then you still eat eggs and/or milk, right? Well, in that case explain, how eggs or milk are better than, say, gelatine? Personally, I think they're worse. Even though we sometimes think that no animal gets killed in the process, it's not that true. Every egg is like 75% of taken life, since approximetely every second chick gets killed and then the laying hen gets slaugthered primaturelly. Same thing with milk. So from an ethical point of view I don't see how gelatine is different from eggs or dairy.

Also, why when this question comes up, vegetarians only bring up gelatine and rennet? What about all other slaugther by-products and substances derived from dead animals (bonechar sugar, isinglass, pepsin, whey products (may contain rennet), animal fats, often vitamins A and D, glyserin, arachidonic acid, sometimes monoglycerides and glycerides, stearic acid, lecithin, tallow, cochineal, shellac and many, many more)? All of these substances come or may come from a dead animal. Do you avoid these, too? Or if you're a vegan, than do you think vegetarians should avoid these, too? How are they different/better than gelatine? Just because you find gelatine "ickey" and probbaly not so much some of these animal-derived chemicals doesn't make them different. I don't completely agree that gelatine is the same as meat. Yes, it is derived from collagen in animals bones and skin, but technically it's not animal flesh, it's very processed and refined and I understand why some vegetarians may not find it just as repulsing as, say, meat.
If we as vegetarians must avoid all of these by-products than I think it would be easier to give up eggs and dairy, then avoid all of these when they are "hidden" basically in everything - and not just food, mind you.

Also, the debate whether by-products are ok or not has to do with the definition of a vegetarian. It is an old word and there are several definitions. We can define a vegetaian as someone who doesn't eat animal flesh or as someone who doesn't consume anything that comes from a dead animal. Both definitions exist and I know many vegetarians who occasionally consume some of the products listed above and I don't think that just because of that they stop being vegetarians.

You say you don't understand the logic behind word: "the animals aren't killed directly for gelatine"? Indeed, the logic here is flawed. But then again, it's basically the same as saying: "animals aren't killed directly for production of milk and eggs". Both statemenst lack logic, but no one here (on the vegetarian board I mean, 'cause vegans do that sometimes, lol) buggs vegetarians for eating eggs or milk. Yes, it doesn't come directly from a dead animal, but it doesn't mean animals don't get abused and killed there, we just don't see the evidence of death (e. g. flesh). I think that when a person says that the animal doesn't get directly slaugthered for by-products what they mean is that 1. these by-pruducts are not the reason why the kill the animal and if they didn't use it it would be just thrown out 2. it doesn't profit the slaugther house the same way as meat 2. they are vegetarian alternatives for all these pruducts that are virtually indistinguishable from these by-products, which means if more and more people would become vegetarian, and less animals would get killed, it woun't be a problem to replace these by-products with vegetarian alternatives. I dunno if you got my point here.

And finally, I think that religiously avoiding all animal by-products makes vegetarianism look even harder and crazier to many meat-eaters. Isn't our goal as AR activists and environmetolists to "convert" more people? When they become vegetarians themselves and see it from the inside, when they become "aware" of truth of animal farming they can decide for themselves what products they are comfortable with and what not. But them being vegetarians would make a huge difference for animals.

Don't get me wrong, I don't support or encourage the consumption of these by-products, I am actually not completely sure where I stand on this one, but I definitely don't think it's just as bad as meat. If someone chooses to avoid these products I admire this person. I think, that as AR and environmetal activists we try to do as little harm and suffering as possible. But no one is perfect, even the most devoted vegans. Some of them may consume animal products unknowingly, some may only do it occasionally in certain situations, some wear non-vegan clothes or take non-vegan medicines or drive cars with non-vegan tires etc. Humans use animals basically everywhere and I don't think that it's possible for anyone who lives in a modern world to not use/consume/purchase anything that comes from animals or involves animal exploitation. But we all can try to do as much as we can or as much as we feel confortable with. For some people vegetarianism is a compromise between comfortable life and veganism, for some it's step on the way to veganism and some are vegetarians for other than ethical reasons.

So there. I apologize if it came out a bit aggressive or arrogant or whatever, it's just that I've been thinking a lot about it myself lately and I am sort of struggling internally with myself about about it.

ah, i get what you're saying. i mean, i don't think the same but it's awesome to find somebody that can actually put together decent reasoning.
and i am vegan. i pretty much think all animal products are as bad as each other, because in using any, you are benefitting from their death, and i find that unacceptable.
its depressing how everything seems to involve deaths of animals. even in grain farming, they have to kill rats and mice that are trying to get at the grain, so its impossible to eve be entirely ethical unless you grow all your own food. even walking down the street we can kill insects and stuff, but i agree in that we should try as hard as we can to be as ethical as we can be.
hehe, and i think we all come across as a little arrogant/aggressive when we argue.
when i was a vegetarian i didn't do gelatine and all that kind of stuff at first but i wore leather, mainly because the only two veggies i knew both did by products. then one of them pointed out that its hypocritical t do one by product and not the rest, so i had a two day phase of thinking by products were fine. and then i just randomly started feeling really guilty about it, so i gave up all by products, and decided on going vegan as soon as i could convince my parent (which took quite a while :/).
i think if you're struggling internally about it then thats probably something in your head saying its not okay, and thats the bit you should follow. maybe brainstorm two lists: moral side of byproducts, immoral side of byproducts. i do stuff like that to try and make my ethics involved decisions.

Neutrality means that you don't really care
Cause the struggle goes on even when you're not there
Blind and unaware~
vegancheez is offline  
#6 Old 04-02-2011, 06:44 AM
Beginner
 
midwestbeth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 129
As a relatively new vegetarian, I'm still learning about all the animal byproducts that seem to be in too many things we consume. I do my best to avoid those products, but it can be overwhelming. If I do unintentionally consume a byproduct, I'm not going to beat myself up over it. Putting such strict restrictions on myself would be a set up for failure as a vegetarian and would not be an encouraging example to others.
midwestbeth is offline  
#7 Old 04-02-2011, 07:27 PM
Newbie
 
vegancheez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 38
it surprises me by how obsessed the food industry is with by products...i just don't see a reason for it, and i can't understand how use of animal products has escalated to a point where there seem to be about three vegan friendly products. i mean, every time i branch out to try something new i find out, having fallen in love with it, that in fact it contains an obscure bit of exploited animal

Neutrality means that you don't really care
Cause the struggle goes on even when you're not there
Blind and unaware~
vegancheez is offline  
#8 Old 04-02-2011, 07:44 PM
Herbivorous Urchin
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,721
Many people are on here for health reasons, and couldn't give a lick about byproducts.

Vegetarians won't eat chickens, but still eat eggs.
Vegetarians won't eat cows, but still drink milk.
Technically those are byproducts of animals.

It is up to the motivations, and availability of the person who is choosing what to eat. *I* am okay with certain animal byproducts, because I don't view humanely treated chickens' eggs as bad, or where i get my wool from as cruel, or the honey I buy. It's all a very individual choice.

Quote:
"You will always be fond of me. I represent to you all the sins you never had the courage to commit.”
Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray
River is offline  
#9 Old 04-02-2011, 08:02 PM
Beginner
 
ecl23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 125
I believe what you're implying about vegetarians is such a general statement. If you're saying vegetarians are "hypocrites" than it's safe to say that the same can be said for vegans. I'm not going to stear in that direction because I'm sure that's not your intend and it surely isn't mine. However, what I am going to say is that every individual is different with their approach. Just like PP stated, there's people who are vegetarian for health reasons, athletic performance, some are transitioning, etc. You can't dump the things you listed on your post as ALL vegetarians. I'm sure there's vegetarians who only drink milk but have never own any leather, fur, eaten gelatine or eggs. There are others who are vegetarians who don't drink milk or eat eggs but still have the occasional leather in their closets. The possibilities are endless.

Just to touch up on transitioning, many vegans started out as vegetarian and slowly started cutting back on byproducts. I can't speak for other people but what I can say is that: I'm vegetarian but I'm slowly becoming vegan. Even when I was a lacto-ovo vegetarian-- I avoided leather products, fur, etc. Personally, I wasn't going to go straight to veganism and it's that transition that's helping me keep up the great work. I'm sure there's plenty who are in the same situation.

The point being is that we're all slowly making a difference in eliminating the suffering of animals and bringing awareness to those who aren't veg*n. It's better than having an "all or nothing" attitude, that's for sure.
ecl23 is offline  
#10 Old 04-03-2011, 02:28 AM
Riot Nrrrd
 
Dave in MPLS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: St Cloud MN
Posts: 3,180
How are eggs a byproduct? What is the primary product that eggs are salvaged from? Not that I'm expressing an opinion as to if they should or should not be consumed, but whether or not they should be, they are themselves the primary product of interest in the whole enterprise of egg production, not a by product produced during the production of something else.

Cochineal and shellac are primary products as well. Again, not saying anything pro or con about them. Cochineal requires killing, not sure about shellac (probably, but I don't know much about shellac).

Remember that there are many reasons people may choose a vegetarian diet. Although it is interesting to me how often 'vegetarian' is assumed to mean 'ethical vegetarian' in everyday discourse. OK by me since that is my niche, but its gotta be annoying if someone is just on a slimming diet or something.

There are also ethical vegetarians for whom the 'ethics' bit has nothing to do with animals themselves. Again it does for me, but not everyone (especially historically).

But I digress. Just wanted to make a quick case for calling byproducts substances that actually are byproducts.

Dave in MPLS / DISCLAIMER: I am not an actual rooster.
"It is better to light a candle than to curse the darkness"
National Suicide Prevention Lifeline 18002738255
Dave in MPLS is offline  
#11 Old 04-03-2011, 07:18 AM
Veggie Regular
 
ashlend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,126
Some great points have been made in this thread.

I recently went vegan (long overdue for me personally) but when I was a vegetarian, I did avoid some animal byproducts and not others. I agree that it may be more logically/morally consistent to just avoid them all, but I do also think any animal product someone avoids makes a difference. It doesn't have to be all or nothing, and by making people feel like it does, we might interfere with their motivation to do whatever they do feel they can do at this particular point in their life (which is a lot better than doing nothing.)
ashlend is offline  
#12 Old 04-03-2011, 09:47 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Bluejeans84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 526
I haven't eaten animal by products since I've stopped eating meat. Yes, my family still thinks I'm crazy. xD

Chillin' in my blue jeans!
Bluejeans84 is offline  
#13 Old 04-03-2011, 10:10 AM
Herbivorous Urchin
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave in MPLS View Post

How are eggs a byproduct? What is the primary product that eggs are salvaged from? Not that I'm expressing an opinion as to if they should or should not be consumed, but whether or not they should be, they are themselves the primary product of interest in the whole enterprise of egg production, not a by product produced during the production of something else.

An egg is as much of a byproduct as leather.


Different cows are used for leather, than for meat. They don't send meat cow skin to become leather, it's a completely different industry.

Fur isn't really a byproduct at all, as we don't eat the animals where fur comes from. So really, if you look at the nitty gritty, the OP might mean "satellite animal products".

Quote:
"You will always be fond of me. I represent to you all the sins you never had the courage to commit.”
Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray
River is offline  
#14 Old 04-03-2011, 02:20 PM
Riot Nrrrd
 
Dave in MPLS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: St Cloud MN
Posts: 3,180
Quote:
Different cows are used for leather, than for meat.

Which would make it a primary product. This means it would be incorrect to call leather produced from cows slaughtered for leather production a byproduct for the same reason it is incorrect to call eggs from layers a byproduct.

I'm not sure 'byproduct' or 'not byproduct' is all that relevant to decision making anyway.

For what it's worth, there is a history of vegetarians speaking out against and avoiding leather. Here is a link to a piece about artificial leather from 1885: http://books.google.com/books?id=qgQ...eather&f=false Also look into vegetarian pioneer Anna Kingsford's views on leather. (I don't have a link, sorry. Google it Familiarity with Kingsford will make you a better person anyway.)

There were also vegetarian apologists for leather. Very few modern ethical vegetarians see leather as acceptable though, based on what I've experienced.

Dave in MPLS / DISCLAIMER: I am not an actual rooster.
"It is better to light a candle than to curse the darkness"
National Suicide Prevention Lifeline 18002738255
Dave in MPLS is offline  
#15 Old 04-03-2011, 03:40 PM
Veggie Regular
 
runnerveggie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,862
Quote:
Originally Posted by vegancheez View Post

I think that byproducts are as bad as the meat itself. i think all vegetarians will say they are against fur, but many wear leather. Why are they so different? And then things like gelatine, i don't even understand how that could be seen as different from eating meat itself, only in the way that it has more of an ew factor. I know a vegetarian who says that it's okay, because the animals aren't killed directly for gelatine, but thats like saying pollution is okay, because we don't use fossil fuels directly for the purpose of polluting the world.
So if anyone is a veggie that accepts byproducts, please could you explain the logic behind it being acceptable?
Thankyou

I think the idea is that some vegetarians think if we eliminate demand for the major products of slaughter (meat), those by-products won't be affordable so companies will look for alternatives in foods that use them.

Also, some people might not find it too challenging to eliminate meat, but they find it too difficult to eliminate all by-products.

I would rather appreciate that these people are doing what they can rather than judging them for not being strict enough. Everyone has their own challenges in life, and sometimes what we eat isn't the top priority.
runnerveggie is offline  
#16 Old 04-03-2011, 05:02 PM
Newbie
 
longstocking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by River View Post

An egg is as much of a byproduct as leather.
Different cows are used for leather, than for meat. They don't send meat cow skin to become leather, it's a completely different industry.

Hmmm. It's the first time I hear something like this. Where did you get this information? I'd like to know more about it.
I'm definitely not an expert in leather but from what I've heard/read/watched they usually try to profit from each animal as much as possible and use it to their fullest. No part is wasted. I've watched a documentary once and it said that something like 96 or 98% (don't remember the exact number) of the animal is used: flesh for meat, hide for leather, bones for gelatine and bonechar.. blood, internal organs, hooves, horns, fat, tails, legs - everything is used, from what I've heard. And if you think about it, it kinda makes sense. Raising animals is expensive, so they need to profit from each one as much as possible. Why would they want waste anything? If diffrent cows are used for leather, then for meat, then where does the meat from leather cows go to? Do they just throw it away? and vice versa... It just doesn't sound logical...

I didn't have a lot of time to make a proper research, but here's what I've found:

Quote:
Most leather comes from cattle who are slaughtered for meat, worn-out dairy cows who no longer produce enough milk to be profitable, and veal calves whose soft skin is particularly valuable.

source:http://www.idausa.org/facts/leatherfacts.html

And another one (it's sort of anti-vegan, but it gives the idea of how much of cattle they actually use):
http://streakr.com/no-such-thing-as-a-vegan/

That being said, it seems to be true, that leather is not exactly by-pruduct of meat industry, since each animal gives so much hide that the farmer profits almost just as much from the the hide as from the meat. So we can say that leather is a co-product of meat industry and they slaughter the animal just as much for its skin as for its flesh:

Quote:
Most consumers mistakenly assume that leather is merely a by-product of the meat industry, and that buying leather clothing does not increase the number of animals slaughtered. However, this belief ignores the economic interdependence of factory farming and the leather trade.
In reality, leather is a co-product of the meat industry, generating significant profits for both factory farms and the leather trade itself.

source:http://www.idausa.org/facts/leatherfacts.html
longstocking is offline  
#17 Old 04-03-2011, 05:03 PM
Newbie
 
longstocking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by RunnerVeggie View Post

I think the idea is that some vegetarians think if we eliminate demand for the major products of slaughter (meat), those by-products won't be affordable so companies will look for alternatives in foods that use them.

Also, some people might not find it too challenging to eliminate meat, but they find it too difficult to eliminate all by-products.

I would rather appreciate that these people are doing what they can rather than judging them for not being strict enough. Everyone has their own challenges in life, and sometimes what we eat isn't the top priority.

My thoughts exactly.
longstocking is offline  
#18 Old 04-03-2011, 05:33 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Herbivorous B.I.G.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 992
Quote:
Originally Posted by River View Post

Different cows are used for leather, than for meat. They don't send meat cow skin to become leather, it's a completely different industry.

Not sure where you got that info, but it's wrong. Most leather comes from slaughtered beef cows and used up dairy cows.
Herbivorous B.I.G. is offline  
#19 Old 04-03-2011, 06:16 PM
Herbivorous Urchin
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave in MPLS View Post

Which would make it a primary product. This means it would be incorrect to call leather produced from cows slaughtered for leather production a byproduct for the same reason it is incorrect to call eggs from layers a byproduct.

I'm not sure 'byproduct' or 'not byproduct' is all that relevant to decision making anyway.

For what it's worth, there is a history of vegetarians speaking out against and avoiding leather. Here is a link to a piece about artificial leather from 1885: http://books.google.com/books?id=qgQ...eather&f=false Also look into vegetarian pioneer Anna Kingsford's views on leather. (I don't have a link, sorry. Google it Familiarity with Kingsford will make you a better person anyway.)

There were also vegetarian apologists for leather. Very few modern ethical vegetarians see leather as acceptable though, based on what I've experienced.

That's the point I was making, if you had even read my post.

You may try reading it again.

Quote:
"You will always be fond of me. I represent to you all the sins you never had the courage to commit.”
Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray
River is offline  
#20 Old 04-03-2011, 06:18 PM
Herbivorous Urchin
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,721
I realize this is PETA, but I have read many many many more things on the indian Leather industry.


https://secure.peta.org/site/Advocac...Action&id=1424

Quote:
"You will always be fond of me. I represent to you all the sins you never had the courage to commit.”
Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray
River is offline  
#21 Old 04-03-2011, 06:23 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Herbivorous B.I.G.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 992
Sure, it does happen, but it's not the case with most leather.

Not that it makes it any better. Just sayin'.
Herbivorous B.I.G. is offline  
#22 Old 04-03-2011, 06:24 PM
Herbivorous Urchin
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbivorous B.I.G. View Post

Sure, it does happen, but it's not the case with most leather.

Not that it makes it any better. Just sayin'.

I can tell you, 90% of the leather belts sold at Target come from India.

Quote:
"You will always be fond of me. I represent to you all the sins you never had the courage to commit.”
Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray
River is offline  
#23 Old 04-03-2011, 10:46 PM
Riot Nrrrd
 
Dave in MPLS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: St Cloud MN
Posts: 3,180
Quote:
That's the point I was making, if you had even read my post.

What you said was:

Quote:
An egg is as much of a byproduct as leather.

Which appeared to be a response to my comment that eggs were not byproducts. If you were agreeing with me just say so. 'As much of a byproduct as leather' implies that I think that leather is a byproduct. I don't recall even hinting at having that belief. Sometimes leather is, sometimes not. However I don't feel real or presumed 'byproduct' status is particularly relevant, as I stated in the very message quoted. Whether leather is a byproduct or not doesn't enter into my decision not to use it. Same with eggs (which I also no longer use/consume FWIW).

Dave in MPLS / DISCLAIMER: I am not an actual rooster.
"It is better to light a candle than to curse the darkness"
National Suicide Prevention Lifeline 18002738255
Dave in MPLS is offline  
#24 Old 04-04-2011, 01:06 AM
Newbie
 
longstocking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by River View Post

I realize this is PETA, but I have read many many many more things on the indian Leather industry.
https://secure.peta.org/site/Advocac...Action&id=1424

I didn't find anything about special "leather cows" in that link. Just because the majority of leather on the market is from India (don't know how reliable this source is) doesn't mean the cows used aren't beef or dairy cows. The slaughter of cows is prohibited in most Indian states, so I guess, they send all worn-out dairy cows and their calves to the North of the country for slaughter, where it is allowed and where people also eat beef, so there are also beef cattle.
longstocking is offline  
#25 Old 04-06-2011, 10:56 AM
Newbie
 
vegancheez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecl23 View Post

I believe what you're implying about vegetarians is such a general statement. If you're saying vegetarians are "hypocrites" than it's safe to say that the same can be said for vegans. I'm not going to stear in that direction because I'm sure that's not your intend and it surely isn't mine. However, what I am going to say is that every individual is different with their approach. Just like PP stated, there's people who are vegetarian for health reasons, athletic performance, some are transitioning, etc. You can't dump the things you listed on your post as ALL vegetarians. I'm sure there's vegetarians who only drink milk but have never own any leather, fur, eaten gelatine or eggs. There are others who are vegetarians who don't drink milk or eat eggs but still have the occasional leather in their closets. The possibilities are endless.

Just to touch up on transitioning, many vegans started out as vegetarian and slowly started cutting back on byproducts. I can't speak for other people but what I can say is that: I'm vegetarian but I'm slowly becoming vegan. Even when I was a lacto-ovo vegetarian-- I avoided leather products, fur, etc. Personally, I wasn't going to go straight to veganism and it's that transition that's helping me keep up the great work. I'm sure there's plenty who are in the same situation.

The point being is that we're all slowly making a difference in eliminating the suffering of animals and bringing awareness to those who aren't veg*n. It's better than having an "all or nothing" attitude, that's for sure.

yeah, im not saying all vegetarians go for byproducts and stuff, if thats how it came across. i did the whole transition thing myself. and i dont think that the vegetarians that do it for health reasons and stuff are hypocrites, its the ones that are vegetarian for moral reasons yet have no interest in taking it further or even researching the dairy industry, preferring to remain ignorant...hmm...to make this clear and avoid being offensive (hopefully, i dont want to come across as a bad person, just stating my opinion) im going to use the example of my vegetarian friend.
if you ask her why shes veggie, she shrugs. if you ask her if she thinks by products are ok she shrugs. theres just a lot of stuff like that and stuff she says that you would never expect anyone who valued the lives of animals to say.
i sent her and a few other friends a link to a video about what happens to male chicks, and later on i asked her if shed watched it. she said she couldnt be bothered. i explained to her what was in the video and she said "i don't really give a ----". there are a couple of other vegetarians i know that are like that and thats why i think its hypocritical. to care about the deaths of cows and chickens etc, but to respond like that when there are millions of chicks dieing simply because the general vegetarian opinion is that eggs are okay (again, i know its different for many). it just causes me to rage inside, and to be honest i think her viewpoint is a worse one to have than that of a meat eater.
sorry for the rambling and if i sound aggressive and stuff, but its hard to explain without sounding like that...

Neutrality means that you don't really care
Cause the struggle goes on even when you're not there
Blind and unaware~
vegancheez is offline  
#26 Old 04-06-2011, 11:08 AM
Ankle Biter
 
Poppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Central Virginia, USA
Posts: 9,333
MOD POST- Just a reminder that this thread was started in the Vegetarian Forum - a support forum. In this forum, vegetarians should not be made to feel that what they are doing is not enough (and comparisons to meat-eaters are not okay). The subject of byproducts can be quite informative, but please keep the discussion supportive.

It is our choices that show what we truly are far more than our abilities. ~A. Dumbledore
Poppy is offline  
#27 Old 04-06-2011, 11:55 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Joan Kennedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lovettsville, VA and Portland, OR
Posts: 1,983
http://meat.tamu.edu/byproducts.html The link goes into a lot of detail about several kinds of livestock. One thing it breaks out is the value of meat vs byproducts in cattle -- it's about 9 to 1. Producing and selling the meat is the overwhelmingly major part of the cattle-raising enterprise. Cattle would be raised and slaughtered even if everything but the meat were discarded. They would not be raised and slaughtered if everything but the meat were used. Consumer demand for meat, not for leather, is what drives the number of cattle raised and killed. Same with gelatin and all the other cattle byproducts. That is why the use of leather seems fundamentally different to me from the use of mink, chinchilla, sable, or any animals that are grown primarily for their fur.

I remember when I first saw video footage of male chicks being killed in a grinder. It is an upsetting image -- like most people who see it, I was sick. Before seeing that, I had assumed male chicks were raised to maturity and then slaughtered as broilers. But on reflection, I can't say the second path is in any way more pleasant for a chick than the first.
Joan Kennedy is offline  
#28 Old 04-06-2011, 12:55 PM
Veggie Regular
 
ashlend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,126
I guess, to me, it really doesn't matter if leather is a byproduct or not. I've kind of realized that it doesn't really make sense to me personally to refrain from eating animals on moral grounds, while at the same time wearing their skin. That's why I stopped wearing leather. I could understand how someone who wasn't veg*n for ethical reasons might wear leather, though.
ashlend is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the VeggieBoards forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off