Yeah, that's dumb as hell. Think before you post, people. It's about avoiding exploitation of animals.

*shrugs*

That's the craziest goddamn thing I've read today.

Don't be so mean to Ruddo

They crawl into the fruit which TEARS OFF THEIR WINGS AND TRAPS THEM INSIDE.

Yumm

Was just a question. Things like that and honey seem to be fringe veganism

It sure seems the dude wasp gets to have all of the fun.

This thread is getting out of hand. Instead of you guys asking me how I feel about 19th century horses or the natural instincts of wasps, let me turn it around and raise some issues to you guys. To my mind, this is much more important.
Do humans create tragic lives for intelligent mammals, like cows and pigs? Why do we do that? To what end? Can this be stopped and is it worth trying to stop?
You don't have to post anything. I'm just trying to illustrate how I'm dealing with big questions here about unnecessary cruelty and suffering, as well as human and ecological health, and you're asking me frivolous, silly questions.

Know any diabetics?

I am not trying be frivolous or silly though, and nor do I think are most of the other posters; I think we're just trying to understand the extent to which your new label is malleable. And we're not doing it to be jerks; just doing it because the ideology seems to be a very slippery slope...

This is why I think combinations of things like Bittman's VB6 diet and the current "plant-based" trend are more realistic when you begin to take in the other competing realities of the food experience, like the fact that sharing food is about celebration, hospitality, and coming together; and one's ideological beliefs don't easily fit into the entire pantheon of one's shared dining experience.

And what about, say, quinoa? As an ethically-motivated consumer looking for the full spectrum of essential amino acids within a vegan diet, quinoa is at first an incredibly attractive choice. But the ethics of your being a relatively privileged white man with easy access to quinoa are pretty messed up too.

I'll bet if you said "I'm consciously shifting to a more predominantly plant-based diet," others wouldn't bat an eye. But the vegan label is a fairly loaded term, and it encourages poking because it's a too-easy definition for what are more complex problems.

I agree with trag, although i will point out when i mentioned veganism being an upper middle-class white people 'thing', you largely poo-pooed the comment.

Re: my question about roads etc., it was fairly silly, but i asked because most of human civilization has been built out of the use of animals for both food and labor, so i wanted to know how far does this ideology extend, and the boundries appear somewhat arbitrary. I mean how does one justify really anything you've grown accustomed to as a 21st century person? So much of what we live with in our comfortable 21st century lives is the result of some use of animals one way or another, so while it was a silly question on the surface, perhaps it's worth talking about as the larger ramifications seem boundless to me.

You, ideally, should till your own soil, grow not only your own food but also cotton and whatever fibrous plants and weave clothing yourself, with a loom you built, from trees you grew in such a way as to not disturb any birds that might build their nests in said trees and and and... it just doesn't seem like logistically, there's anything you can do that won't impact animals or their habitats. Want to put gas in your car? wonder how many fish and other sea creatures died because of how oil is extracted from ocean floors...

And don't get me wrong, i think hunting is rather deplorable, and have donated whatever money i could to wildlife preservation, and don't think eating a high in vegetable diet is a bad thing, but being vegan seems like an extreme to me, and in practice... impractical.

Sorry to ask dumb questions otherwise

okay

Argo kind of addressed all this

But these are all basic defensive responses. The bottom line is that the term "vegan" comes off as an affectation, and one with an air of moral superiority, so people automatically feel judged by it and try to poke holes in the premise instead of engaging with it honestly.

But we are engaging with it honestly.

It doesn't feel that way, at least not in this page. I'm seeing unrelated arguments about the ethics of quinoa and the comforts of 21st century living.

I'm not vegan. I will never be. I like meat too much. But it sounds like Argo is saying: "I have a problem with the effect the meat and dairy industry is having on our bodies, on the animals and on the planet, so I'm cutting them out", and people are responding "oh but what about this other thing that is also messed up? And this other thing?", like I sort of did earlier when talking about sustainably manufactured cell phones. It all comes off as defensive chest-puffing.

Im being honest and i resent your presumptive analysis

Im done here, please continue serious discussion without worry of further interruption by me

I mean, we had conversations about other foods, and I'm trying to understand here. Figs popped into my head today and I was just curious. Argo drops this thread and wants us to learn with him, but I guess my question was too... dickish? I'll just hang up and listen from now on.