You must log in or register to comment.
What’s not mentioned is going to a group lunch or dinner with someone who has a very restrictive diet and can basically only eat at one place.
Not excluded, not belittled, but you hear a collective sigh/moan when that person joins.
In CA, we have so many vegan/gluten free/kosher/halal/etc options that I’m spoiled. Most restaurants have items accommodating those folks. I can see this being more challenging in some areas. Generally, I go by myself to more adventurous/eclectic restaurants and have a standby list of places with broad menus that I go with friends.
One explanation for vegaphobia is founded on the meat paradox: many people who eat meat do not like harming animals. Vegans remind them of this cognitive dissonance, and one way to resolve this inner conflict and reduce dissonance is to maintain prejudice against vegans.
I find it quite interesting how often meat eaters in the west will be prejudiced against people who eat dogs - as if there’s any other difference than the cognitive dissonance of seeing one as a pet deserving of a dignified life and the other as a tasty steak to chow down on.
My intuition is that this is mostly projected insecurity. For somebody who’s doing something ethically questionable, it’s pretty handy to have some group on hand to blame for being self-righteous and insufferable and so on. Very convenient indeed.
PS: ethically questionable does not necessarily mean “bad” or “wrong”, but it is undeniable that vegans and vegetarians cause less animal suffering and environmental damage than the rest of us. Anyone who can take a deep breath and look at things rationally should be able to admit that.
it is undeniable that vegans and vegetarians cause less animal suffering and environmental damage than the rest of us
this just isn’t true. I don’t cause any animal suffering. most people don’t. (except pests, or by accident)
If you buy basically anything from the meat, or dairy, or egg, aisle of your supermarket then you are creating demand for something whose production involves quite a lot of suffering.
So, yes, it is true. You may not want it to be true, but it is.
If you buy basically anything from the meat, or dairy, or egg, aisle of your supermarket then you are creating demand for a product whose creation involves quite a lot of suffering.
demand does not causally lead to production.
Of course it does.
I bought a PlayStation. Sony isn’t going to put it back into production, despite proven demand.
producers are free agents, so the only phenomenon that can be said to cause their actions is their own will.
Producers would not produce meat if nobody bought it. There’s a direct causal link between the two. Just because this specific cow didn’t die for you to specifically eat it doesn’t remove the link between your choice and the death.
At least that’s my non-vegan perspective.
Producers would not produce meat if nobody bought it
iphones were produced before anyone bought one. producers can’t know whether a product will sell in the future.
This is a silly sophistry and you know it is. Demand is what incentivizes supply.
the theory of supply and demand is a price discovery theory. it’s not an immutable law about when factories turn on production.
your accusation of bad faith is, itself, bad faith.
