Comment on Top of the world, ma
HumanOnEarth@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
Not vegan, but hate the idea that they’re made fun of for trying to spread awareness. I’m not including the militant vegans here. They do more damage than they fix.
I’m sure some people do it from a high horse but vegans are far from the only type of people that do that. And the message is absolutely important, besides the cruelty part, eating animals is a huge part of the climate change problem.
it’s not because they are trying to spread awareness. now obviously not all blah blah blah., but they have a tendency to be highly sanctimonious and abrasive, they accept no partial measures and treat it like like a cult would in the eve of the coolaid tasting party.
kind hard to see their point of view in the other end of a carnist label spat at you.
Have you tried not doing exactly what you’re accusing them of doing?
Everybody needs to move away from the extremes, both sides, all of us.
Not all vegans are militant. Not all meat eaters are blood lusting demons.
sure? but i am not arguing for the benefits of the KFC double down with bacon. i already acknowledged that not all vegans are like that, but you are being dishonest if you are claiming my critique of the vegan spaces are not dominated by the loudest and most brash of the extremes, and in lemmy it’s usually directed at ransoms who wander in from /all. and it’s an all or nothing situation, where vegetarians are branded with the same iron as people who advocate for animal harm.
i prefaced with understanding that a community is not just its loudest and obnoxious people, but nonetheless they set the tone
deltamental@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
Being “militant” means that you don’t curb your ethical viewpoint to accommodate the feelings of those who behave unethically, according to your viewpoint.
An easy-going person who is anti-trafficking, maybe they will stay chummy with Epstein, let things slide, keep pleasant relations, be pragmatic, avoid abrasive confrontations, and all-around keeping social situations smooth, even when things don’t adhere to their sense of morality. Maybe they will speak up when trafficking hits to close to home or in extreme cases, but will defer to the general vibe in situations where the audience is less receptive.
Meanwhile, a militant anti-trafficker like Norman Finkelstein is going to behave differently: he will shamelessly bash Dershowitz, Epstein for their trafficking, social etiquette be damned. Harsh words hurl from his mouth and his abrasive sentiments disrupt what could have been a polite, pleasant interaction. He might even reject substantial material benefits ($$$) to castigate his hopeful associates.
If you grew up, lived, and were were cultivated into one of the many historical societies where trafficking perpetrated by powerful elite was normalized, even celebrated (Genghis Kahn’s empire, aristocratic society in Ancient Greece, …) you might be the anti-trafficker minority in a pro-trafficking society. And you would, most likely, shut the fuck up and just let things slide: why make your own life hellish and unpleasant to make but a small dent in a sea of immorality? Are you going to tell off your local warlord over his harem of war-captured slaves?
At the end of the day, you have to decide: are you trying to “spread awareness” of trafficking, or are you trying to end it? Temper it, or wholly eliminate it from the face of the Earth?
There is no evidence open sores on the skin of a chicken, pig, cow, dog, or cat feel less painful to them because they aren’t human. No evidence being confined in metal warehouses for months feels more rewarding to those who lack opposable thumbs. At this moment, 34,000,000,000 land animals are experiencing such a life, brought into existence through human-controlled breeding, designed to produce unnaturally ripe bodies for the slaughterhouse, flesh for the human palate. The sheer scale of this massive project to exploit animal bodies has meant only 4% of mammalian biomass today is wild animals, while a staggering 62% of that biomass is in the bodies of the creatures we breed to exploit.
“Climate change” could never hope to do a even a fraction of the damage we are already doing on an annual basis, to cause the amount of unmitigated suffering we are causing as par for the course. That’s the truth, and any serious vegan who sugar coats it is doing so strategically, not because they “respect different perspectives on the issue”.