VeggieBoards banner

21 - 34 of 34 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Discussion Starter · #21 ·
@Hydrogen I do not know anyone else who has made the holocaust comparison besides me. I just know that at least one Jew found it offensive when I made that comparison with my food allergies before I went Vegan.


I can see this as being true. Its a very plausible theory. I think that people are also so afraid of being a social outcast if they support Veganism, or so afraid that they won't be seen as a "real man" that they instead tend to dis us.
If people see physical strength as what makes a "real man", and think meat is essential for strength, maybe they should be reminded that Popeye got strong by eating spinach, not meat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
I personally think it's due to the embarrassing-as-hell vegan "activists" that video tape themselves walking into normal American restaurants and performing their whole weirdo-psycho monologs on how the cheeseburgers are suffering and blah, blah, blah.

Vegan extremists have tarnished the linguistic reputation of the word "vegan" and even somewhat to "vegetarianism" in general -- Extremists and hippies, basically. If you haven't seen this sort of madness, simply YouTube search "vegan cringe" and you will be shocked at the level of buffoonery these people are engaged in.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
Loosely related to the last comment, I think one of the problems here is the media and what they report, which both excessively highlights crazier vegans as well as encouraging vegans to get crazy, or risk no attention at all.

The following is NOT a newsworthy headline:

"Vegans protest in a public place politely making a compelling and well thought argument."

The following IS:

"Painted naked PETA girls block road and cause traffic jam."

If you go to the houses of Parliament in the UK, there are constantly people sat outside protesting politely about something. As far as the UK media is concerned, these people do not exist. But as soon as they dangerously scale a famous building, interrupt a sporting event by running across the field, or throw an egg at a politician, people apparently want to click on the story.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Discussion Starter · #24 ·
A lot of these anti-veg*n comments I find are on Twitter, most of which support radical liberal politics. I wonder if people with other political views are more tolerant of vegans, but the irony is that it seems that veg*nism is associated with liberal politics. It also seems like a lot of vegans are anti-vegan. Could it be that most people with somewhat liberal political views are tolerant of veganism, but not most people with radical political views?

I don't want to give too many details of my location, but I currently live in a region of California that is probably more liberal than 80-90% of the state. Many times at grocery stores my mom has mentioned that I am vegan (I depend on my parents because of disability/autism) and the clerk often seems to find it interesting or comments on how healthy it is. People online can come from anywhere in the world, but maybe I'm lucky to come from a more tolerant geographic region. I don't want to live in this area forever (mostly because of California's super expensive housing). Most cities I see on lists of vegetarian friendly cities seem very liberal, though a few are not, and a lot of people dispute cities on those lists.

From the responses, it seems some of the reason people complain about vegans a lot are: radical/extreme activists draw more attention to themselves, the media pays more attention to provocative activism because it tells a juicier story than reasonable activism, veganism goes against cultural values (in the United States and many other countries), people say things online they won't say offline. However, I'm still not sure how to get people to stop associating veganism with bigotry. Someone said to point out there are vegan body builders to show that vegans can be physically strong, but I don't think pointing out tolerant vegans will convince people that vegans are not usually bigots (at least not more bigoted than most people). Someone said for vegans to be a positive representative for the vegan community to show others that not all vegans are like those people complain about, but I've seen far more vegans criticize other vegans than I've seen vegans do provocative things. Since so many vegans have already shown themselves to not support provocative vegan activism, vegans being positive doesn't seem to have worked.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Well, there are vegans who take it too far, but generally, the truth hurts. I know from experience that I tried to rationalize my meat eating for years, resorting to bulls**t arguments like - "well, I only buy meat that's already been prepared, how am I the bad guy?", or "I'm an apex predator, rrrrrr". The answer is simple, truth hurts. When you have to do inconvenient things that require you to leave your comfort zone, you are going to be offended, and when most people get offended, they attack. Thing is though, radical vegans - same as with radical feminists, or any radicals, basically - hurt the cause a lot, no question about it. You can't show an example to people by offending them, and telling them how they are basically POSs. Very few people are born vegan, and I imagine most of them are not very old, so you have to give them time. I know I needed years, and between the time I started to contemplate the idea and actually do it (five days ago), I was annoyed by vegans. Because once again, the truth hurts.
 

·
Bandit
Joined
·
544 Posts
Most veg*ns I've encountered are relatively educated white people. The way they live their veg*nism will show the privileges they have as relatively educated white people. As the compassion movement spreads into other demographics, I expect we will see people bringing their privileges or lack thereof to their way of living with less or no non-human animal products. It is particularly important for existing veg*ns to educate themselves about their unearned privileges as white people, as people with access to schooling, as possibly straight people, as people with access to a variety of foods, etc. If we're ignoring or excluding people from veg*n information and resources, we need to work on that.
There are quite a few African American vegans out there. I'm just saying this association of vegan with whiteness is weird. I know a soul food family restaurant in LA that is vegan, in Inglewood, and a Cuban vegan restaurant near LAX. On YouTube Brown Vegan, Urban Black Vegan and Cheap Lazy vegan are all non white, and while they're not as well known as Freelee, very few YouTube vegans are as well known as Freelee.


I can see the association of veganism with education and by proxy, social class, but to call it a white thing is kind of ridiculous.

I think the bigotry the author was referring to wasn't even race related, with the exception of the halocaust references, which I personally avoid because those aren't good arguments ...Godwins law says as soon as you compare Hitler to anything else the conversation is over. Incidentally, Israeli ethnic Jews ironically have the largest percentage of vegans in their nation, so much so that there are now vegan options in the Israeli army.
 

·
Bandit
Joined
·
544 Posts
The online world is full of echo chambers of ignorance and hate. For every person advocating social justice or progress of any sort, there seems to be a group of three, with linked arms, hating vegans or denying anthropologenically caused rapid climate disruption, or calling feminists evil ugly women, or saying they're more discriminated against as a white man than anyone else in the entire universe.

Some of these people are deceptively clever or have large vocabularies, so you may be tempted to argue some sense into them. Before I returned to college I spent way too much time doing that. While I learned a great deal from my stay in Intertardz land, cultural and social information I'm sure I'll always carry with me in some small way, I'm generally giving up on those folks, even the ones who are deceptively clever.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. It's a stupid cliche but it's true. Post your blog, make Pinterist boards, make YouTube videos, but don't waste too much time arguing with these sorts of people. ..especially if you're only making animal rights arguments and not including environmental or health reasons, or facilitating veganism to make it easier for them to transition, with tips.

It struck me quite a few years back that mainstream liberal youth thought had made it trendy to bash Christianity, less on the basis of logic, or comparative religion, and more so because of some abortion clinic bombers they saw on TV.

I mean if it can become that trendy to knee jerk bash one of the largest religions in the world without having to form intelligent arguments, what makes you think the unwashed masses are going to treat veganism any differently?

Some people don't like people with strong ethics. Period. So that's a group you'll never get through to, because they're probably post modern existential nihilists.

Then you just have followers, and followers will laugh at vegans if their friends do.

Then you have the genuinely ignorant who might change their opinion through sound education, but the best way to reach them is unlikely to be arguing on the Internet, unless they showed genuine curiosity about veganism, or at least vegetarianism in the first place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Discussion Starter · #28 ·
Thing is though, radical vegans - same as with radical feminists, or any radicals, basically - hurt the cause a lot, no question about it. You can't show an example to people by offending them, and telling them how they are basically POSs.
My issue is not how to convince meat eaters to stop eating meat. It's to convince people that vegans are not bigots or evil, and not to constantly complain about vegans. I agree that radical/extreme activists hurt their cause (including extreme vegan and animal rights activists) but I don't encounter very many radical/extreme vegans so I don't have many opportunities to convince vegans not to be extreme.

There are quite a few African American vegans out there. I'm just saying this association of vegan with whiteness is weird. I know a soul food family restaurant in LA that is vegan, in Inglewood, and a Cuban vegan restaurant near LAX. On YouTube Brown Vegan, Urban Black Vegan and Cheap Lazy vegan are all non white, and while they're not as well known as Freelee, very few YouTube vegans are as well known as Freelee.

I can see the association of veganism with education and by proxy, social class, but to call it a white thing is kind of ridiculous.
I don't understand why veganism is associated with being white either. In the United States, Europe, and some other places, most vegans are white but that is because in those places most of the total population is white. European culture (and places colonized by white people) also seems to be a lot more meat-centric than the rest of the world. Although a very large majority of people in every country except India eat meat, in a lot of places people eat a lot less meat than in Europe or white majority colonies (like the United States). In some countries meat usually is not a main course but something like a stir fry will have a small amount of meat in it.

I think the bigotry the author was referring to wasn't even race related, with the exception of the halocaust references, which I personally avoid because those aren't good arguments ...Godwins law says as soon as you compare Hitler to anything else the conversation is over.
Something else race related is someone said the ethical argument for vegetarianism uses the same basis as for light skinned privilege by considering animal lives as more important than plant lives.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. It's a stupid cliche but it's true. Post your blog, make Pinterist boards, make YouTube videos, but don't waste too much time arguing with these sorts of people.
The problem is it was a huge number of people who never stopped complaining about vegans. It was mostly on Twitter, and I've stopped using Twitter anyway because most of the tweets I've seen were about highly controversial topics and the 140 character limit makes it hard to discuss controversy. I don't know if these attitudes about vegans are mostly popular among Twitter uses for some reason but it would be good to know what to do about this in case I find another online community and people still complain frequently about vegans.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,959 Posts
My issue is not how to convince meat eaters to stop eating meat. It's to convince people that vegans are not bigots or evil, and not to constantly complain about vegans. I agree that radical/extreme activists hurt their cause (including extreme vegan and animal rights activists) but I don't encounter very many radical/extreme vegans so I don't have many opportunities to convince vegans not to be extreme.

I've known people who for 10 years and more have used the same story to illustrate their small minded prejudices. You, nor any one else, is likely to change those people


I don't understand why veganism is associated with being white either. In the United States, Europe, and some other places, most vegans are white but that is because in those places most of the total population is white. European culture (and places colonized by white people) also seems to be a lot more meat-centric than the rest of the world. Although a very large majority of people in every country except India eat meat, in a lot of places people eat a lot less meat than in Europe or white majority colonies (like the United States). In some countries meat usually is not a main course but something like a stir fry will have a small amount of meat in it.

Depends a lot on where you live. In bigger cities I don't think thats true. There are many black vegans.

Something else race related is someone said the ethical argument for vegetarianism uses the same basis as for light skinned privilege by considering animal lives as more important than plant lives.

That's pretty stupid. Humans are certainly equal to each other, and they're also animals----plants aren't sentient

The problem is it was a huge number of people who never stopped complaining about vegans. It was mostly on Twitter, and I've stopped using Twitter anyway because most of the tweets I've seen were about highly controversial topics and the 140 character limit makes it hard to discuss controversy. I don't know if these attitudes about vegans are mostly popular among Twitter uses for some reason but it would be good to know what to do about this in case I find another online community and people still complain frequently about vegans.
You can't change this, leave it alone. Work on promoting AR and veg diets.
 

·
Bandit
Joined
·
544 Posts
My issue is not how to convince meat eaters to stop eating meat. It's to convince people that vegans are not bigots or evil, and not to constantly complain about vegans. I agree that radical/extreme activists hurt their cause (including extreme vegan and animal rights activists) but I don't encounter very many radical/extreme vegans so I don't have many opportunities to convince vegans not to be extreme.



I don't understand why veganism is associated with being white either. In the United States, Europe, and some other places, most vegans are white but that is because in those places most of the total population is white. European culture (and places colonized by white people) also seems to be a lot more meat-centric than the rest of the world. Although a very large majority of people in every country except India eat meat, in a lot of places people eat a lot less meat than in Europe or white majority colonies (like the United States). In some countries meat usually is not a main course but something like a stir fry will have a small amount of meat in it.



Something else race related is someone said the ethical argument for vegetarianism uses the same basis as for light skinned privilege by considering animal lives as more important than plant lives.



The problem is it was a huge number of people who never stopped complaining about vegans. It was mostly on Twitter, and I've stopped using Twitter anyway because most of the tweets I've seen were about highly controversial topics and the 140 character limit makes it hard to discuss controversy. I don't know if these attitudes about vegans are mostly popular among Twitter uses for some reason but it would be good to know what to do about this in case I find another online community and people still complain frequently about vegans.
Yeah Twitter. It's impossible to have a meaningful argument there. I mostly just tweet and follow interesting or like minded individuals. I honestly consider Twitter, Instagram and Pinterist to be more relaxing because of the relative lack of arguments.

I tried to argue once with a morbidly obese man who said he was concerned about THE HEALTH RISKS OF VEGANISM, I was so appalled I posted rebuttals and links, but it's the only time, because trying to have an argument on Twitter is about the most absurd thing I can think of because of the format. I realized it was just foolish.
 

·
99% Vegan
Joined
·
162 Posts
Yes, Godwin was right. However, I think that its time that we as a society start educating the public on how their attitude towards other people groups - race, diet, sexual orientation, and so on - is exactly how Hitler started out. He only started out disliking the Jews and it grew to hate, discrimination and then finally, murder.

Is society likely to round up Vegans and murder them? No, except those who are allergic to any animal product, is more likely to be murdered if bullied or kissed (leaving out the "or worse" case) or some person blatantly disregarded the "allergy" as being a "non-issue". I still call this murder in my books. And there has been a legal case, where the allergic person won the court case. The person who passed away, was served a fish dish instead of his order. It was a mistake, and the family almost didn't persue it. The family wanted to use the winnings to help educate others. What came out was better staff training at many restaurants in dealing with food allergies - which was what they wanted. Allergic Living Magazine did an article on this. I got the link in my email and can't post it here because its the wrong kind of link. (Special link tied to me.)

Society is most likely only to go so far as to ban us from their restaurants and social gatherings out of fear that they will become "like us". Still, getting along and having peace amongst all, should be the ultimate goal, with them allowing us to exist without them being offended because we exist.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,330 Posts
Godwins law says as soon as you compare Hitler to anything else the conversation is over.

No, Godwin's Law said more or less the following:

"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazism or Hitler approaches 1—​​that is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Hitler or Nazism."

There was nothing about the conversation being over, although some discussion groups have such a convention. This is a bit daft because the introduction of Hitler and Nazism as a comparison aid in a debate may be not be inappropriate.
 

·
Bandit
Joined
·
544 Posts
No, Godwin's Law said more or less the following:

"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazism or Hitler approaches 1—​​that is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Hitler or Nazism."

There was nothing about the conversation being over, although some discussion groups have such a convention. This is a bit daft because the introduction of Hitler and Nazism as a comparison aid in a debate may be not be inappropriate.

I appreciate your clarification but I respectfully disagree. Genocide is an ongoing problem in the world, as is racial discrimination, so people always going back to Hitler can limit people intellectually in their grasp of evil in the world. People never say "wow you're such a pilgrim, slaughtering all of those native Americans" or talks about Rwanda, Pol Pot, or the murder of indigenous environmental activists in South America right now.

Also, though occasionally Hitler really is an apt comparison, usually it's used on discussion boards to insult someone of opposing beliefs "vegan Nazis" "no its animal halocaust, meat eater!"..."socialist Nazi" "no Republicans are actually more like Nazis" and so on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,330 Posts
I appreciate your clarification but I respectfully disagree. Genocide is an ongoing problem in the world, as is racial discrimination, so people always going back to Hitler can limit people intellectually in their grasp of evil in the world. People never say "wow you're such a pilgrim, slaughtering all of those native Americans" or talks about Rwanda, Pol Pot, or the murder of indigenous environmental activists in South America right now.

Also, though occasionally Hitler really is an apt comparison, usually it's used on discussion boards to insult someone of opposing beliefs "vegan Nazis" "no its animal halocaust, meat eater!"..."socialist Nazi" "no Republicans are actually more like Nazis" and so on.
Hi Thalassa. I've read and reread your post and am not quite sure what I've said that you disagree with?

I don't think that Godwin when he came out with his "law" was saying that mention of Hitler in a debate was necessarily a bad thing (or a good thing either). He was just saying that if a debate goes on long enough, it's an inevitability. There's a million things we can have a discussion about and if one of them is "German militarisation in the 1930s", then to not mention Hitler and the Nazis would be a bit strange. This is why I finished my previous post by saying that such a mention "may not be inappropriate". Of course I fully accept your point that it can very often be very unhelpful and limiting to bring up Hitler/Nazis in discussions but this is taking things outside the scope of Godwin's Law.

Regards, Leedsveg:up:
 
21 - 34 of 34 Posts
Top