tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post1503787677809248577..comments2024-02-03T06:58:02.859-04:00Comments on My Face Is On Fire: Why I Will Not Advocate VegetarianismUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger34125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-35581088970139399552010-03-07T15:47:40.966-04:002010-03-07T15:47:40.966-04:00Venusgirl7, I'm not sure how my writing (for i...Venusgirl7, I'm not sure how my writing (for instance) about the need to be consistent and unequivocal about promoting veganism when advocating for animals can be portrayed as "going after others in the movement", if that's what you were suggesting. For there to be a "movement" at all, activists and advocates need to establish and then agree upon goals, and then assess and evaluate the merits (or lack thereof) of the methods used to attain those goals. Advocating for something like vegetarianism (i.e. the occasional exploitation of animals) doesn't even correspond with the goals of abolitionists, who strive to educate their fellow humans to stop using nonhuman animals altogether--to stop treating them as things or property that exist solely for the use of humans. To promote or condone the occasional deliberate use of animals just doesn't jive at all with promoting that they not be used at all.<br /><br />You wrote:<br /><br /><i>I've seen many proclaimed "abolitionists" spend so much time chastising the already "converted"</i><br /><br />I think that it becomes problematic to make assumptions about people's intentions and that's why clarity is essential when educating others (and by "others" I mean everyone and anyone, whether omnivores or vegetarians, or other animal advocates). From your anecdote: You felt "chastised" for having an abolitionist comment on your sharing statistics that could be construed (i.e. either the sharing or the stats) as promoting vegetarianism. Perhaps you were not clear when sharing them, perhaps the abolitionist was not clear in explaining why he or she was taking issue with your sharing them. A couple of questions asked in good faith and some clarification all 'round could have ensured that no confusing messages were exchanged and that no feelings were hurt.<br /><br /><i>that they end up leaving all the "heavy-lifting" of the "unconverted" to the less fundamental of us.</i><br /><br />By "heavy-lifting", do you mean educating those who use animals about not using animals? If so, I think that you must be unaware of the advocacy work that my abolitionist colleagues actually <i>do</i> (i.e. I'm guessing this since I'd like to think that you wouldn't choose to deliberately misrepresent them). They educate anybody and everybody about animal rights and veganism in any number of ways (including, but not limited to handing out pamphlets, talking to friends/strangers one-on-one or speaking in front of groups, starting AR/veganism book clubs or study groups, organizing or hosting vegan potlucks, making YouTube videos, recording and broadcasting podcasts and radio shows, blogging, writing letters to newspapers or writing books). They also adopt/foster homeless animals from the streets and from shelters, and encourage others who are able to do so to adopt/foster, as well.<br /><br />You wrote:<br /><br /><i>I do believe in the AR movement, we do need to keep ourselves honest by continually reassessing our motives and approach -- from vegetarians to abolitionists.</i><br /><br />I do agree with you that as animal advocates we need to be honest with ourselves (and each other) and constantly reexamine our motives and approaches. That being said, I think that it's important not to conflate different motives and objectives and lump them together under the term "AR movement". To describe anyone who chooses to continue to use animals (i.e. whether they eat them, eat their secretions, wear their skins, pay to watch them sit in cages, et al.) as part of an animal rights movement makes about as much sense as describing someone who reduces the daily working hours at his or her child sweatshop as being part of a children's rights movement. <br /><br />This is why it's important to get the abolitionist message out to everyone (i.e. consumers and animal advocates, both) and it's also why it's imperative that this message present veganism as a moral baseline.Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15800153451645970774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-64711603611649158172010-03-07T12:34:12.726-04:002010-03-07T12:34:12.726-04:00Jacqueline Bodnar wrote:
"merely pointed ou...Jacqueline Bodnar wrote: <br /><br /><i>"merely pointed out your hypocrisy"<br /><br />"your attitude harms more than hurts"</i><br /><br />Yep, lambasting. Your completely ignoring the facts and rational arguments offered to you to instead repeatedly hiss accusations of my purportedly being a hypocrite and liar for not having been a vegan from birth, then using this to try to dismiss my condemnation of the exploitation of all (and not just some) nonhuman animals pretty much fits that description. <br /><br />As I wrote to you previously, I would have been happy to discuss vegan advocacy with you. You were unwilling to actually read and process anything I wrote, however, and more intent on name-calling and public shaming.<br /><br />You're absolutely right that our exchange wasn't that interesting. It was just a run-of-the mill example of the defensive hostility shown to vegans by vegetarians or omnivores who tout their consumption choices as being somehow more meaningful than others' as they choose to continue (and condone others') using nonhuman animals. You're right that you were actually pretty generic in that sense. I hope that you can eventually come around to taking the rights of animals more seriously. Cheers.Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15800153451645970774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-70916429738987775842010-03-07T12:01:09.813-04:002010-03-07T12:01:09.813-04:00Just wanted to weigh in and say you completely exa...Just wanted to weigh in and say you completely exaggerated everything. Lambasted? Give me a break. I merely pointed out your hypocrisy and how your attitude harms, more than hurts. It pushes people away from even wanting to learn more about animal rights. I realize the exaggeration in your post was necessary in order to make the situation seem more interesting than the exchange really was, but your readers should know that it was an exaggeration all the same. But hey, thanks for sending so much traffic my way! :)VegBlogger.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17798495392394187130noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-73112259390942974492010-03-06T02:11:24.779-04:002010-03-06T02:11:24.779-04:00I completely get the abolitionist theory and I see...I completely get the abolitionist theory and I see egg-laying chickens and dairy cows/veal calves as the worst treated animals in the world, so it's hard for me to watch people stop at vegetarianism. I want nothing less than the complete liberation of animals, so I guess that ideologically makes me an abolitionist. Strategy-wise however, I acknowledge that any major social issues movement in history has succeeded because of a whole range of approaches working in tandem. I simply don't think spending all one's time and energy going after others in the movement (like many hard-core abolitionists do)is an effective use of activism time... There're too few of us against a very big world of people who have never given thought to ANY animal issues.<br /><br />I've seen many proclaimed "abolitionists" spend so much time chastising the already "converted" that they end up leaving all the "heavy-lifting" of the "unconverted" to the less fundamental of us. I just had a Francione devotee lecturing me on Twitter this past week about a statistic I posted about the world food supply that would be available if everybody was vegetarian. If there was a statistic for the vegan scenario, I would have used it, but I felt (knowing who my particular audience of social media forum "followers" are...mostly non-veg people)that it was an effective statement to counter the stupid false belief that the world food supply will be diminished by ending the production of meat. Anyway...understand that I am a hugely active animal rights advocate and am constantly promoting veganism through various media and campaigns ...I am NOT the person anybody should be spending their activism time on. I see this kind of "need to be vindicated" complex as ultimately creating a major disconnection from those we are trying to reach, thus hurting the animals in the big picture. <br /><br />I do believe in the AR movement, we do need to keep ourselves honest by continually reassessing our motives and approach -- from vegetarians to abolitionists.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16409431718969725682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-39139490629458149782010-03-05T12:49:08.792-04:002010-03-05T12:49:08.792-04:00Actually M, "this Paola person" did read...Actually M, "this Paola person" did read your comment.<br /><br />Paola: "So, according to what this "M" person wrote, since we cannot fix everything in the world by going vegan, it's not worth it?"<br /><br />M: "Ha ha, isn't the attitude criticized in the quote above the very attitude espoused by the blogger of this post and which I criticized in my comment. One, I'm not talking about "everything in the world", I'm talking about animal welfare. Please try reading my comment before you reply."<br /><br />Allow me to remind you of what Paola read. You said: <br /><br />"I'm guessing as a vegan you inadvertantly consume animal products as they are used in production of all kinds (not just clothes, food, etc)." <br /><br />You stated that she has an "all-or-nothing mentality" and that "By living in this society you are already contributing to all types of suffering worldwide and nationawide. [sic]"<br /><br />So Paola is correct in that you said "we cannot fix everything in the world by going vegan." Clearly, this is the point you are making. You say Mylene, a vegan advocating veganism, is "splitting hairs" and that she is "guilty for a hell of a lot of suffering..."<br /><br />The "it's not worth it" part of Paola's interpretation is also clear here: "I think your stance is in some ways counterproductive, and you seem to be splitting hairs in regard to semantics such as using "part" rather than subset, etc."<br /><br />By claiming Mylene's stance is "counterproductive" is it really inappropriate for Paola to claim you are saying here position is "not worth it"?<br /><br />Paola's interpretation is sound.Adam Kochanowiczhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13190729335643458295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-79047709187251749532010-03-05T12:42:14.785-04:002010-03-05T12:42:14.785-04:00M, we are reading your comments. And the link you...M, we are reading your comments. And the link you posted <i>does</i> matter, are you kidding me?<br /><br />You are presenting a position from an organization based on the protection of the exploitation of animals. Their position is formulated on and agrees with their position that animal use is morally justifiable.<br /><br />I mean why on earth should we disregard the fact that you referred us to an organization for animal exploitation?Adam Kochanowiczhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13190729335643458295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-63433312124223957742010-03-05T12:37:23.455-04:002010-03-05T12:37:23.455-04:00As an edit to my previous comment, I agree with mm...As an edit to my previous comment, I agree with mmissinglink's comment that M misrepresented Mylene's analogy to begin with.Adam Kochanowiczhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13190729335643458295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-19323875113811748542010-03-05T12:30:18.983-04:002010-03-05T12:30:18.983-04:00Sherryvanstone:
Your point is short, but not sim...Sherryvanstone: <br /><br />Your point is short, but not simple. You are saying that by advocating the truth we are "making becoming vegan seem difficult for omnivores." and that the truth "alienates people."<br /><br />What then do you propose? Continue to advocate exploitation v.2 (vegetarianism) because it doesn't alienate people?<br /><br />Personally, I don't care if I attract more people to my position if I don't <i>agree</i> with my own position in the first place.Adam Kochanowiczhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13190729335643458295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-18791803813491720222010-03-05T12:25:58.656-04:002010-03-05T12:25:58.656-04:00Sherryvanstone, to claim a social group that aims ...Sherryvanstone, to claim a social group that aims to end the exploitation of sentient beings are bent on their own superiority is terribly ironic.Adam Kochanowiczhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13190729335643458295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-26788696920277806962010-03-05T12:24:03.763-04:002010-03-05T12:24:03.763-04:00The "flaw" of Ouellet's analogy is a...The "flaw" of Ouellet's analogy is as much of an analogical flaw of likening hiring someone to beat your child to beating the child directly. I find Ouellet's analogy very effective, correct.Adam Kochanowiczhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13190729335643458295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-36570876272454118032010-03-05T12:23:31.102-04:002010-03-05T12:23:31.102-04:00Amanda: You're right that vegetarianism is con...Amanda: You're right that vegetarianism is confusing, particularly is someone purports to be a vegetarian out of concern for nonhuman animals. <br /><br />Pablo: Thank you very much!<br /><br />veganethos: You're right to emphasize that what is wrong is "use". It's not about balancing statistics (e.g. which animal industry takes more lives then the other). The point is that we have no legitimate excuse to use sentient beings as things. Period.<br /><br />Chastity Castro: Excellent comments (and thank you)!Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15800153451645970774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-14216756840597731582010-03-05T11:38:37.473-04:002010-03-05T11:38:37.473-04:00Mylène,
This is a terrific post...thank you for sh...Mylène,<br />This is a terrific post...thank you for sharing this and having the courage to do so.<br /><br />"M" is wrong. The analogy (and ALL analogies fall short in some way to that situation or thing they are being compared to) presented by Mylene is not that drinking milk is like beating your child on Tuesday but rather that the "Thinking that shuffling out this or that animal product is "enough" is like telling oneself that it's alright to beat the hell out of one's child on Tuesdays" That's the analogy...and there's a significant difference between the actual analogy stated and the one mistakenly conceived by "M" because in both instances, the morally irresponsible activity is known (the vegetarian advocate understands why and how contributing to dairy and egg production is morally wrong and any of us understands why beating your (a) child one day a week is morally wrong. So, the stated analogy by Mylène is apropos for the reasons given. In other words, if someone whom is aware of a preventable injustice states that it is okay to do that same injustice but just less frequently or with less viciousness and another person whom is aware of another preventable injustice states the same thing in reference to that other injustice, they are both guilty of advocating the same thing...that's what the analogy is highlighting.<br /><br />Thank you once again Mylene...you've made skillfully argued points and much needed criticisms.mmissinglinkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12313410698146026036noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-47078483910178837882010-03-05T11:02:33.650-04:002010-03-05T11:02:33.650-04:00You say that "There is no less death involved...You say that "There is no less death involved" in a vegetarian diet vs. an omnivorous one. I will have to respectfully disagree with you. When it comes to consuming animal flesh, (particularly frequently consumed smaller animals such as chicken and fish) people will often eat the entire animal or most of him/her, sometimes at a single meal. And they will often do so more than once a day. Someone might have fish for lunch and a small roasted chicken for dinner, for example.<br /><br />Since animals enslaved for their eggs and milk are kept alive longer - and in the case of cows, only reproduce appx. once a year - the number of male babies and spent mothers killed would still be less than the number of animals killed expressly for their flesh - such as chicken.<br /><br />Just look at the counter GF has on his website. Look at the number of chickens killed compared to all the other animals. It's astounding. <br /><br />While I absolutely agree that there is even more cruelty involved in eggs and dairy, I simply cannot logically understand how going vegetarian does not reduce the overall number of animals killed. I appreciate arguments such as this, however, when I feel there is hyperbole involved, I believe our credibility is diminished. If people cannot demonstrate or argue convincingly that vegetarianism causes the same number of deaths as omnivorism, then I don't think it's fair to say they are equally<br />abhorrent. <br /><br />I think it's perfectly valid to ask activists to promote veganism over vegetarianism, and to point out the problems inherent in vegetarianism, but to say that veg = omni....is simply untrue.Burntsugarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17667025249435534596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-3037237928795874682010-03-05T09:07:28.434-04:002010-03-05T09:07:28.434-04:00Doing unintentional harm that you have taken every...Doing unintentional harm that you have taken every precaution possible to avoid is, unavoidable.<br /><br />To consume dairy and eggs is avoidable - therefore, to choose to consume these is to intentionally support the exploitation that is an inherent part of these 'products'.<br /><br />Not nice to hear - I didn't like hearing it - that's why I went vegan. Do I still cause harm? Yes, of course I do. If I'm shown a way to cause less harm, will I follow that way? Yes.<br /><br />There is nothing superior in doing EVERYTHING we can to avoid use/exploitation.<br /><br />I notice that the word superior is brought up very often, and inappropriately, when a valid point is made. It is certainly predictable, and almost becoming a mantra.<br /><br />This issue is not about the personalities involved - it is about enslaved beings, and the effectiveness of the processes intended to bring about their emancipation.Lorraine Haineshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11239570273022634886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-9556450096434300052010-03-05T06:04:22.604-04:002010-03-05T06:04:22.604-04:00p.s
Ummm, did any of y'all even READ my comme...p.s<br /><br />Ummm, did any of y'all even READ my comment?<br /><br />So this "Paola" person says:<br /><br />"So, according to what this "M" person wrote, since we cannot fix everything in the world by going vegan, it's not worth it?"<br /><br />Ha ha, isn't the attitude criticized in the quote above the very attitude espoused by the blogger of this post and which I criticized in my comment. One, I'm not talking about "everything in the world", I'm talking about animal welfare. Please try reading my comment before you reply.<br /><br />Two, that there are no shades of grey etc. was the argument I disagreed with With the quote above, you're making my point by critizing the blogger's argument, thinking it's MY argument. You're making my point for me, my God, and you don't even seem aware of the irony of it or that you're doing it.<br /><br />Did you somehow miss that the mindset quoted above was exactly part of what I criticized about the original post here, and not my own point of view? What part of my saying I dismiss the "all or nothing mentality" was unclear? <br /><br />The same commenter says:<br /><br />"Why not remove our consumption of the products that support the enslavement and killing of sentient beings? " <br /><br />Did you miss my point about those products being in things you use everyday? Did you bother to read my comment? Seriously, it's like you're responding to someone else, as I said none of the things you seem to think I said.<br /><br />Did you look at the link (yes, the dreaded link that shows I crule I am) that actually includes the facts I cited about this topic? How do you not "consume products that support animal enslavement" when just about everything in society includes such products? And if you think you can draw the line somewhere then the orignal post's argument does not follow, as it specifically discusses that drawing the line is not to be advocated. <br /><br />Or is drawing the line where YOU or this blogger think it should be drawn the arbitrer of all things animal-welfare? Please. <br /><br />I said earlier this is no place for discussion partly because it's clear (see quotes above as well as other comment responses) no one responded to what I actually said but to your own assumptions and projections of what you think I said, meant, or who you think I am (based on a link no less, or on the fact that I happen to disagree with your mentality or point out nuances and so on.) <br /><br />Why waste time trying to have a discussion with people who aren't even listening to what you say but just make up things and put their own projections, assumptions, and baises in our mouth. <br /><br />If I knew no one would bother actually reading what I wrote rather than what you think I wrote or must have meant, I'd have not wasted my time here to begin with. I was wrong for thinking this might be a place for intelligent and genuine exchange of ideas. I assumed the best, although obviously wrongly.<br /><br />There are either some serious reading comprehension issues here, or issues of some other kind, or both. Based on what I'm reading here, my guess is it's that third option. Too bad.Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05046649976685551915noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-69567102730297630322010-03-05T04:44:03.175-04:002010-03-05T04:44:03.175-04:00My point was the all or nothing mindset of the blo...My point was the all or nothing mindset of the blogger was hypocritical and counterprodutive. I am not espousing that mindset, in fact far from it, just following it to its logical conclusion to make a point.<br /><br />"I disagree with that. I also disagree with your assertion that individual choices don't affect things on a societal level." I never made that point. That's your interpretation of what I said, not what I said or believe. <br /><br /><br />As for the comment that I don't care about issues of animal cruelty etc based on a link of relevant facts I posted, wow, what a logical assumption. This is the type of critical thinking that led to the intial post IMO. Who cares where the link is from, the info in it is true. <br /><br />Or does this mentality that vegetarianism = not caring about animals now also extend to those who post relevant links with true facts that are posted on a pro-agribusiness/animal industry sites in your eyes? Yes my not spending additional time searching for a vegan friendly source of accurate info when I already had the facts at my disposal from the first search I did depicts my lack of concern for animal welfare, you figured me out (sarcasm there in case you missed that and now want to make more assumptons about my attitude toward animal cruelty). <br /><br />Man, looks like there are lots of requirements for being compasisonate about animals, including where one gets one's links. I'll keep in mind for future visits here (yeah rigt).<br /><br />FYI: posting a link does not imply condoning of the positions of the link source. Just a tip for future use.<br /><br />Believe me I know all the issues involved here. I just don't agree with your approach and views as described in this post and comments. You don't know me, my lifestyle, nor my views and practices regarding animals and animal products. But your absurd assumptions about me based on a link I posted and on the fact that I don't agree with your approach and mentality here tell a lot about you, not me. <br /><br />This place seems less a place for genuine discussion (For those not of the party line) and more a place for narrow mindedness. Count me out.Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05046649976685551915noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-87360134141874981242010-03-05T02:01:50.565-04:002010-03-05T02:01:50.565-04:00How I wish I had someone educating me about vegani...How I wish I had someone educating me about veganism, the nine years I was vegetarian. I had thought I was doing something good for animals, not realizing the tremendous suffering, exploitation and death I was supporting and participating in. I know people who have gone vegan literally over night, without going vegetarian first. I also know that these people were given the truth. Promoting vegetarianism is not being truthful. Let's give people the truth. Who are we to say that this individual is not ready to hear the truth? I find THAT to be "superior" and elitist thinking.Sandra C.https://www.blogger.com/profile/01009602684988719018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-29076609645882287872010-03-05T01:58:52.906-04:002010-03-05T01:58:52.906-04:00ps.
animals are being and have been since the dawn...ps.<br />animals are being and have been since the dawn of time tortured,abused,violated,raped,<br />neglected & murdered.There is no good moral or ethical reason for any of it.<br />there is nothing pretty or kind or okay or justifiable about those monstrous facts.<br />Therefor I don't care if people get depressed,offended,or feel attacked honestly-so fucking what.<br />Any "negative" or alienated or displeasing emotion any human may have over being called on their irresponsible unjust and soul less actions is NOTHING compared to what the non human animals are forced to endure and still go through.<br />Would you be "polite" to a rapist you saw in action?would you be sweet and friendly to a person you saw viciously hacking another human up?would you be peaceful towards a parent beating a child?fuck no.<br />anyone that asks a Vegan to be anything but strong and solid in their convictions at all times with Veganisim is as bad as anyone who commits any cruelty against animals.I am not saying every instance of standing up for animals and the animal lib movement aka Veganisim should be volatile, every reaction depends on what one is opposing.Veganisim is not a fad or hip new way to be popular,Veganisim is not about being most adored Veganisim is about living your life in the ways that do the least amount of harm to non human animals.That means making it your business to make sure as much as you can that you are not wearing,eating,using or supporting anything that has to do with cruelty to animals or is from animals.Furthermore a speciesist is no different from a racist, sexist or homophobic person.They are all one in the same.If one's natural instincts have not kicked in, if one ignores the veins they see in that chicken wing or is able to forget the blood dripping from their "steak" & doesn't realize that they are not a baby cow therefore that "milk" is not for them than the reality of animal cruelty and the animal lib movement is spelled out in great detail and many languages for anyone these days across the web with footage and documents,or in any book stores.<br />Once a person learns the facts there is no excuse of why they should not be VEGAN.100%veganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11879371994738073704noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-5794493517951555012010-03-05T01:47:54.148-04:002010-03-05T01:47:54.148-04:00Thanks for this well written post!Thanks for this well written post!Jasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01669487836441798525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-85366899865814176762010-03-05T01:43:42.137-04:002010-03-05T01:43:42.137-04:00first off, let me say i 100%, totally agree with m...first off, let me say i 100%, totally agree with mylene. BUT i do have a problem with knowing how to respond to friends and family who have decided to go vegetarian. i mean, when they make a point of telling me proudly that they are going, or have gone, vegetarian i just don't think i would be able to not act happy and excited for them. from some of these people it is totally unexpected and i do want them to feel good about giving a shit about the animals when most people i meet coldly think them only as grillable body parts. some of these these people live in situations that make vegetarainism a real challenge, such as my friend who comes from a soth american culture where animals are eaten in copious amounts at every meal and vegetarianism is basically unheard of.erinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07928852856087835675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-54101683548826838272010-03-05T01:23:16.521-04:002010-03-05T01:23:16.521-04:00Just a quick note to say that I've had comment...Just a quick note to say that I've had comments on moderation for the past month or so and am hitting the sack for the night. I hope to address more of the comments that were left tomorrow, but if anyone posts anything further between now and my morning green tea, it won't be posted until the morning.<br /><br />I'm glad that this discussion is happening!Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15800153451645970774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-30891418064769213492010-03-05T01:16:56.189-04:002010-03-05T01:16:56.189-04:00sherryvanstone, if you are very, very vegan, then ...sherryvanstone, if you are very, very vegan, then why in the world are you resorting to ad hominem attacks when facts are being stated? From my experience, I've had flesh eating, secretion drinking, skin wearing nonvegans who were ready and open to hear my words about nonhuman animals. In fact, more open minded than the welfarists. So why are you making assumptions, undermining our efforts as well as your own efforts if you're so very, very vegan like you claim?<br /><br />I'm not being mean, I'm pointing out a double standard that you just found yourself in. I was also a vegetarian for 8 years because nobody told me the truth and I was ready--I was either on the receiving end of unproductive attacks (name calling and no help) or vegans who tiptoed and didn't want to tell me the truth because they were afraid I was going to lash out at them.<br /><br />So what does that say about "vegans" like you? What does that say about the effectiveness of your method of advocacy?chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05940020073656804332noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-80159273834887991842010-03-05T01:04:11.876-04:002010-03-05T01:04:11.876-04:00Sherry, the truth is that in advocating for vegani...Sherry, the truth is that in advocating for veganism, the only question of "superiority" involves calling for humans to stop viewing themselves as superior to nonhuman animals. You think it's judgmental to ask humans to stop treating animals as things? You say that you want people to "identify with vegans"? How are they expected to identify with vegans if vegans feed them the lie that it's morally acceptable to consume some animal products over others or to exploit animals part-time? I mean, you can get them to "identify" with that, but that's not identifying with veganism; it's identifying with animal exploitation. You say that "alienating people" doesn't make a case for animals. Do you really think that condoning the part-time use of animals makes a more effective case for animals? If so, I really don't understand your logic. I mean, if you were an anti-rape advocate, would you shame someone for telling a rapist to not rape at all? From what you're saying, that rapist would end up alienated and should instead be reassured that raping occasionally is good enough. Think about it.Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15800153451645970774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-43923537017930039282010-03-05T00:52:36.702-04:002010-03-05T00:52:36.702-04:00I am SO HAPPY to hear another Vegan say it like it...I am SO HAPPY to hear another Vegan say it like it is.Good on you!<br />I was excited to find a site a few years ago called quarrygirl as it was said to be for Vegans.I thought I would find other Vegans on there of like mind,spirit,honesty,morals and ethics-FAR FROM IT!I too posted about several issues that were in fact counterproductive if not dangerous to the animal lib movement which to me is VEGANISIM not vegetarian.I pointed out many of the same facts you have shared over and over.I was met with a bunch of defensive to volatile to idiotic borderline mentally challenged reactions.Veganisim has no grey areas.It is not eating or supporting or wearing or using animal products.It disgusts me that there is a group of people in Los Angeles and else where that call themselves Vegan and than support and even defend non vegan products,food, clothes, and forms of "entertainment".Someone who defends vegetarianism is like saying that molesting a child is better than raping a child-bullshit.<br />a violation is a violation.Dairy is liquid meat, it is from an animal.It is stolen from an animal.An animal is tortured and murdered even if slowly to get dairy.The same bullshit with people who defend and applaud minor changes to how animals are mistreated in factory farms or fur farms or animal testing..it would be as ludicrous as saying "The jews should be given a little more room in captivity before we gas them" or equally as stupid as saying "don't beat your slaves but still enslave them" during the Holocaust or slavery times.People who call themselves Vegan and than make excuses for participating in, or supporting non Vegan violations are just as selfish,delusional, immoral and unethical as full on meat eaters.Veganisim is pretty clear, you either do not eat wear or use animals or you do.Simple as that.<br />Fuck all the people who call themselves Vegan and have all these little rule bending fine print bullshit ways.100%veganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11879371994738073704noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1528521735436082423.post-30361525149218430722010-03-05T00:50:33.635-04:002010-03-05T00:50:33.635-04:00For the record, I am vegan. I'm very, very veg...For the record, I am vegan. I'm very, very vegan. My point is really simple. This is making becoming vegan seem difficult for omnivores. We want people to identify with vegans. Alienating people does make a case for animals.sherryvanstonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03233178984909237444noreply@blogger.com