This is such a conundrum for me because I absolutely support people eating less animals and animal produced products but veganism is not a diet it is a philisophy. You are not vegan if you do this and you should not call yourself vegan. Dilution of the term IS harmful. At its core veganism is the belief that animals should not be exploited for anything under any circumstances. They have every right to this earth as we do and it is our responsibility to insure their lives are not harmed by us.
But the point of this is literally don’t let perfect be the enemy of good. There’s a rather large subset of the population that hears “oh no animals products at all? Forget that.” And they commit to no animal product reduction at all. So then the question is harm no animals, or harm less animals?
There’s a rather large subset of the population that hears “oh no animals products at all? Forget that.”
Then they aren’t getting the message. The answer to that is not to give up the message. It’s to find a way to communicate that message so that it’s understood.
Do you genuinely believe this? If I hear “X is bad”, I don’t need someone to tell me “oh, but less X is still good step”. I can understand that with even my two braincells.
Where’s the proof that people don’t understand that? Do we need to start preaching harm reduction and “perfect is the enemy of good” in other areas of activism? Feminism, anti-racism?
I actually believe this. I believe people are both more ignorant and petty than even you or I can imagine. I also think that people can be persuaded. Make people think that these ideas were something they came up.
trying to wean myself of genocide one bit at a time
the issue here is that it frames veganism as someone trying to become better by denying themselves treats, when in reality it’s someone becoming less of a monster by not denying others the right to life.
vegans are not good people because they’re vegans, veganism is only about not committing evil. It’s literally the absolute minimum. Carnists are evil, but it is so normalized people don’t see it that way.
vegans are not denying themselves cheese, we simply are not denying a baby the right to live.
The focus in veganism, like with every liberation movement, should be on the oppressed and not the treatlerites trying to be a bit less brutal. And that’s my issue with this tweet. Babystepping is for libs and people don’t get a pat on the back for no longer being part of the cow genocide. Either you have solidarity with the oppressed, in which case you’d be horrified at the thought of eating bacon, or you’re still looking at yourself and what you’re ““sacrificing””. Centering once again the humans when its about non-human animal liberation.
Either you have solidarity with the oppressed, in which case you’d be horrified at the thought of eating bacon, or you’re still looking at yourself and what you’re ““sacrificing””. Centering once again the humans when its about non-human animal liberation.
Oof. I want to print this out and frame it.
After being vegan for several years, it just hit me one day. I was thinking about how when I was a carnist, I felt like I had a right to eat a cow or a pig if I wanted to. That sense of entitlement to someone else’s body is insane!
But you’re still “the crazy one” for pointing it out. And don’t you dare break the norms of civility pointing out the mass murder and enslavement that is animal ag.
Veganism is a philosophy to you, but maybe not to others.
What genuine difference does it make to you if someone goes 100% vegan as a dietary choice? Your personal goal is still fulfilled by them no longer eating meat, regardless of whether they agree with you or not philosophically.
It’s about all animal products. Leather shoes are not vegan, medicine with gelatin is not vegan, cleaning products might not be vegan. Veganism is about animal liberation and not about the vegans. That’s where the focus should be. “What genuine difference does it make to you” is the wrong question, it doesn’t matter what difference it does to the vegan, it’s about what difference it does to the animal getting a bolt rammed through its skull.
This is such a conundrum for me because I absolutely support people eating less animals and animal produced products but veganism is not a diet it is a philisophy. You are not vegan if you do this and you should not call yourself vegan. Dilution of the term IS harmful. At its core veganism is the belief that animals should not be exploited for anything under any circumstances. They have every right to this earth as we do and it is our responsibility to insure their lives are not harmed by us.
But the point of this is literally don’t let perfect be the enemy of good. There’s a rather large subset of the population that hears “oh no animals products at all? Forget that.” And they commit to no animal product reduction at all. So then the question is harm no animals, or harm less animals?
Just don’t call it veganism because that is not what it is
Then they aren’t getting the message. The answer to that is not to give up the message. It’s to find a way to communicate that message so that it’s understood.
Give them the gateway to veganism.
Do you genuinely believe this? If I hear “X is bad”, I don’t need someone to tell me “oh, but less X is still good step”. I can understand that with even my two braincells.
Where’s the proof that people don’t understand that? Do we need to start preaching harm reduction and “perfect is the enemy of good” in other areas of activism? Feminism, anti-racism?
I actually believe this. I believe people are both more ignorant and petty than even you or I can imagine. I also think that people can be persuaded. Make people think that these ideas were something they came up.
the issue here is that it frames veganism as someone trying to become better by denying themselves treats, when in reality it’s someone becoming less of a monster by not denying others the right to life.
vegans are not good people because they’re vegans, veganism is only about not committing evil. It’s literally the absolute minimum. Carnists are evil, but it is so normalized people don’t see it that way.
vegans are not denying themselves cheese, we simply are not denying a baby the right to live.
The focus in veganism, like with every liberation movement, should be on the oppressed and not the treatlerites trying to be a bit less brutal. And that’s my issue with this tweet. Babystepping is for libs and people don’t get a pat on the back for no longer being part of the cow genocide. Either you have solidarity with the oppressed, in which case you’d be horrified at the thought of eating bacon, or you’re still looking at yourself and what you’re ““sacrificing””. Centering once again the humans when its about non-human animal liberation.
Oof. I want to print this out and frame it.
After being vegan for several years, it just hit me one day. I was thinking about how when I was a carnist, I felt like I had a right to eat a cow or a pig if I wanted to. That sense of entitlement to someone else’s body is insane!
But you’re still “the crazy one” for pointing it out. And don’t you dare break the norms of civility pointing out the mass murder and enslavement that is animal ag.
Fewer.
Veganism is a philosophy to you, but maybe not to others.
What genuine difference does it make to you if someone goes 100% vegan as a dietary choice? Your personal goal is still fulfilled by them no longer eating meat, regardless of whether they agree with you or not philosophically.
It’s about all animal products. Leather shoes are not vegan, medicine with gelatin is not vegan, cleaning products might not be vegan. Veganism is about animal liberation and not about the vegans. That’s where the focus should be. “What genuine difference does it make to you” is the wrong question, it doesn’t matter what difference it does to the vegan, it’s about what difference it does to the animal getting a bolt rammed through its skull.