Vegans bashing Vegans - Intelligent Debate/Conversation

[Guest]

The fact that he made the decision and it wasn't made for him validates my point. Hell...I could take bovine growth hormone to become a better cyclist and promote veganism but I wouldn't be vegan would I. And no it wouldn't be more confusing to call him a vegetarian because thats what he is. A cow if a vegetarian not a vegan. Its not a choice a wild plant eater makes...its something they just do. You can be a hunter...a fur trappper, a vivisector and be a vegetarian...that is purely about diet and he is a vegetarian I'm not gonna debate that. We here are all vegetarians. However a hunter...fur trapper...vivisector...voluntary gelatin capsule emptiers are not vegans no matter what they eat or don't eat. Calling himself a vegetarian would be completely fine with me and I would have never complained about anything. However thats not what the debate is about. Any person can be a vegetarian simply by not eating animal products...veganism is a whole different animal and requires choosing to avoid all animal products you can. I can avoid it and it seems like everyone here on this forum can avoid it but him....for some reason that doesn't make sense now does it. Its not like he's the only person here that enjoys durian fruit...he's the only person purchasing something that isn't vegan that he doesn't require to function in modern society.

As for your point of not calling someone vegan anymore because they eat dairy...thats just rediculous. I'm pretty sure if anyone here decided to eat dairy again they wouldn't consider themselves vegan. If John Robbins or Howard Lymann decided to start eating cheese and ice cream again they wouldn't be vegan anymore...it doesn't matter how much they've done for animals in that sense. Sure they've helped a lot and could still keep helping but they wouldn't be vegans and they would tell you that themselves.

[offense74]

If I had a better word to use when I go eat or explain how I eat to people, I would stop using the term vegan all together since according to me it serves no purpose otherwise.

Veganism is not an end in itself when it comes to either environment, animal rights, animal welfare, health, poverty or world peace and thus I'd rather descibe myself as something else.

But for now, since I want only plants at the restaurant, it's a convenient term to use.

[drjoe]

Let me address the issue that seems to have someone really upset. Yes, I am the culprit in regards to the gelatin capsules. Here is the story for any of you interested.

 

My best friend began his own product line of supplements recently. He wanted me to use them and then give my endorsement (if I liked them). One of the products was an herbal testosterone booster called Maximum Test. When I looked at the product I saw that they were gelatin capsules. I don't like gelatin capsules. He really wanted me to use and endorse his product so, as a friend, I agreed. Therefore, I simply just pour the contents out into my orange juice.

 

Would I go out and purchase a product with gelatin capsules and then throw out the capsules? No. However, I was helping out a friend in this case. Does that make me a non-vegan? LOL...I guess it does to some (or should I say "one".).

 

I don't understand why anyone would have so much anger and hostility over this issue. I am staying away from this and further discussions because I like to only direct my daily energy to positive matters and to helping others.

 

I'm sorry to bring religion in, but I feel I must in this case. I would like to leave the individual, who appears to harbor so much anger, with a great prayer that my buddy gave me. It is the Prayer of St. Francis. It is a fabulous prayer and I try to live my life by it:

 

Lord, make me a channel of thy peace

That where there is hatred,

I may bring love

That where there is wrong,

I may bring the spirit of forgiveness

That where there is discord,

I may bring harmony

That where there is error,

I may bring truth

That where there is doubt,

I may bring faith

That where there is despair,

I may bring hope

that where there are shadows,

I may bring light

That where there is sadness,

I may bring joy.

Lord, grant that I may seek rather to

comfort than to be comforted

to understand, than to be understood

to love, than to be loved.

For it is by self-forgetting that one finds.

It is be forgiving that one is forgiven.

It is by dying that one

awakens to Eternal Life.

Amen.

 

I will remain on this board to hopefully help others. However, I will not engage in this debate any further. Peace.

[markc7]

It really is a shame that robert would be the target of other vegan's criticism, because it's obvious that he does so much for the community and for veganism. Hugo Weaving said this week that one of the problems in the AR movement is that they use celebrities to get the message out, but that those celebrities then become easy targets. If any of us were interviewed every week and followed around by paparazzi, I'm sure that they would uncover some information that other vegans could criticize us for (OMG, markc7 wears five year old leather shoes that he bought years before becoming vegan!).

 

When I think about the people who were most influential in me become vegan, neither of them are "perfect" by the standards of many vegans. The first was my mother, who has been a lacto-ovo vegetarian for years. Her approach to vegetarianism has always been to act in accordance with her own values and to be a role model. She never got in people's faces, forced us (her kids) to eat the way she did, or belittled people who don't conform.

 

My second biggest influence was a guy I've never met. He posts on Coolrunning.com, and for years and years his sig line contained a link that said "Portrait of a vegan runner". Although he never argued or pushed his beliefs (unless asked), having the knowledge that some normal guy out there was a successful vegan runner was instrumental in my later decision to try vegetarianism and eventually veganism. The only time that he ever posted about his veganism was when he was asked, or when threads were specifically about vegetarian or vegan issues. And he always treated people with respect, whether they were planning to go 100% vegan or whether they were asking on advice for cutting out red meat.

 

So I don't think it's any surprise that I learnt from these role models that we can influence people and change their behaviour without being a jerk about it. Having said that, I believe that there are times that call for a more confrontational style. But they are few and far between, and we have to ensure that compassion, not confrontation, is our default setting.

[pamela]

Dr. Joe, just wondering, could you maybe use your influence to convince your friend to use vegi-caps? They are pretty widely available and even many mainstream companies are using them on products.

 

One reason I like this forum is because this kind of debate hasn't really existed too much. I have left or scaled back my participation on other forums because I just get so tired of the politics and the policing. There's so much more to be doing in promoting the cause than ripping apart other vegans. In fact, ripping apart other vegans, vegetarians, or people trying to live a more vegan life is at best counter productive.

 

That being said, veganism isn't a free-for-all, "do whatever the heck you want and call it vegan" movement either. I do think there's a risk of being too focused on having a "united front" at the expense of it actually meaning something. I do think there is room for critical analysis of things, and dialogue between vegans about aspects we may disagree on.

 

I mean, for example, I am appalled by Farm Sanctuary's "pink veal" campaign. I think their time and resources would be much better invested in campaigns that don't just serve to create "happy veal" for omnivores. Veal has been black marked anyway to most people... so why take a step backwards? I don't think it's harming the movement for me, or others to say, "Whoa, I completely disagree with that approach." But some people might say to object to it is akin to causing "friction" or "dividing the movement."

 

I don't know... it's a fine line, and for the most part I don't care to walk it. These days I just try to focus more on real life rather than online squabbles. Or real life squabbles either. I just try to set a good example, and give people the tools and information they need to be vegan. The most important thing of all is to create new vegans, and to raise awareness of the benefits of veganism.

[pamela]

Brendan gets criticized too for not promoting the AR aspects of veganism enough in his talks and book.

 

While I think AR is a pretty critical part of veganism for most people, as Brendan says, there are areas he's stronger at, particularly pushing the health benefits (and not only that, but how to actually BE healthy).

 

Brendan has done a lot for bringing veganism into the mainstream, at least in Canada. The same with Robert (in the US).

[beforewisdom]

One reason I like this forum is because this kind of debate hasn't really existed too much. I have left or scaled back my participation on other forums because I just get so tired of the politics and the policing.

 

Amen.

 

I've been on other veg*n forums where the admin didn't step up to the plate like Robert did to smooth things out and hold the community together. I have even seen some admins "pile on" with other members with their own pious speeches.

 

That being said, veganism isn't a free-for-all, "do whatever the heck you want and call it vegan" movement either. I do think there's a risk of being too focused on having a "united front" at the expense of it actually meaning something. I do think there is room for critical analysis of things, and dialogue between vegans about aspects we may disagree on.

 

Amen.

 

If you don't ask people to change, you can't expect them to change. Things need to be said. There is a difference between entering into a dialouge with someone in a respectful was for the purpose of positive change and "indicting" them. Additionally, some people who have that good intention just don't realize how they come off. That is where community builders and doers like Robert are useful and where those other aforementioned admins are clueless.

[beforewisdom]

Brendan gets criticized too for not promoting the AR aspects of veganism enough in his talks and book.

 

I was a health vegetarian and vegan for years before I started looking at AR. My mind was much more open to it when my mouth wasn't full of animal products.

 

Likewise, after I was used to being a weekend warrior activist by doing volunteer AR activities I let down my guard enough to begin being open to some of the more philosophical theories in the movement.

 

There are people who go from zero to vegan abolitionist part time activist in one shot, but they are rare. Most people move a step at a time and are encourage by multiple sources of inspiration separated in time.

 

I think when you go out to the general public and leaflet you learn this quickly.

[beforewisdom]

I don't know... it's a fine line, and for the most part I don't care to walk it. These days I just try to focus more on real life rather than online squabbles. Or real life squabbles either.

 

I think about 85% of this conflict is online. Very few people will bring it up in real life and if they do, they will not be as nasty about it face-to-face as they are online. When I get a snootfull of this sort of thing I just avoid the internet places where it foments and just go out into real life to volunteer.

 

It is like stepping into a world mostly free of it. Since I quite that nasty local list over a year ago I have even started to like some of the more negative, voiceferous people from that list again.

 

I *try* to take the policy of volunteering first, bitching second, and being open to anyone who will volunteer with me in real life.

[robert]

I just wanted to write something before I head out because I'll be gone for the entire day and won't be able to write anything until late tonight.

 

As far as how this topic relates to the forum, my goal for starting this thread is to discuss these issues "here" in this thread, so these questions or issues don't come up all the time in other threads, which I think most of you would agree is a good thing. My intentions go beyond this forum as I've mentioned my concerns about my own city's vegan community, the way I'm viewed and perceived by the public, and the ways I see some "vegans" treating other "vegans" on a global scale and how I feel about it's effectiveness towards our overall mission.

 

I know many of you enjoy this forum because we don't have this debate often, and I appreciate that. But I felt it was necessary to at least open this topic up to discussion here so the rest of the forum topics flow a little better and are without as much conflict.

 

Thanks for all your input, comments, opinions, criticisms, feedback, support, and intelligent discussion.

 

Have a great day everyone. I appreciate all of you, no matter what part of veganism you choose to apply to your life.

[FormicaLinoleum]

I was a health vegetarian and vegan for years before I started looking at AR. My mind was much more open to it when my mouth wasn't full of animal products.

I think that this is a great point and insight. I think that if people stop eating animal products, regardless of their initial reason, they are then more open to AR information and points of view. When people are still eating animal products they can often be very defensive, which closes them off to AR information... if they stop eating them, whether for health or environment or whatver, their defensiveness decreases and it's easier for them to hear the AR message.

[pamela]

And I came to veg*nism through environmentalism, which later led to animal rights concerns. I thought vegetarianism was pretty bizarre before that, having grown up rurally, and may have tuned out someone bearing the AR message. The point being, of course, not that the AR message is bad or doesn't work with many people, but that there are a lot of people it may not be heard by at first. I think it's very shortsighted not to recognize that different things resonate with different people, and to proceed accordingly.

[Tasha]

I just wanted to write something before I head out because I'll be gone for the entire day and won't be able to write anything until late tonight.

 

As far as how this topic relates to the forum, my goal for starting this thread is to discuss these issues "here" in this thread, so these questions or issues don't come up all the time in other threads, which I think most of you would agree is a good thing. My intentions go beyond this forum as I've mentioned my concerns about my own city's vegan community, the way I'm viewed and perceived by the public, and the ways I see some "vegans" treating other "vegans" on a global scale and how I feel about it's effectiveness towards our overall mission.

 

I know many of you enjoy this forum because we don't have this debate often, and I appreciate that. But I felt it was necessary to at least open this topic up to discussion here so the rest of the forum topics flow a little better and are without as much conflict.

 

Thanks for all your input, comments, opinions, criticisms, feedback, support, and intelligent discussion.

 

Have a great day everyone. I appreciate all of you, no matter what part of veganism you choose to apply to your life.

 

 

Well why don't they keep their mouths shut and take they lazy minds and put on their own show, or write their own book or speak in front of thousands of ppl and see how easy it is. It's not easy.

Criticism is good to a point. But when you have others reducible you it doesn't feel so good.

 

BTW Robert.

I've went to a lot of shows in the past two years. I just wanted to tell you that the Vegan Holiday Festival was the best one I've been to.

[Guest]

Oddly enough I've actually gotten quite a few forum members supporting me with PM and emails off the forum. I wish they would speak out but thats their choice which is fine. I don't like having this conflict here either but its here and I don't want it to go unnoticed. Anyhow many here agree with me that Dr. Joe isn't vegan. So really I'm not the only person here by any means. I know people don't want to be shared as targets with me and I don't blame them. Its not easy to be the lone person that wants to call someone out on something.

As for the caps and the company its quite easy to switch to veggie caps and just call them cellulose. This way people that are Jewish and Muslim can eat them without advertising that the pill is for vegetarians...and therefore people would be willing to buy it. Problem solved...no animals killed.

[Zack]

Why does this whole argument have to erupt over a gelatin capsule?

 

It's this stuff that makes vegans seem radical and unrealistic. Dr. Joe has probably done more for veganism than anyone here aside from Robert.

 

Stop flaming people over such a miniscule thing. One gelatin capsule, which is a byproduct, does less harm than any of you vegans that use something with rubber wheels. (bikes/cars/etc). Or any vegan that has plastic things...the list is endless of products that contain animal products, everyone is guilty of that.

 

If we really get specific none of us are vegan, so why be so critical over a minor thing when things they use everyday probably contain more animal products/byproducts?

 

Give it a rest, show some respect. If you consider him to be not vegan, so be it, but keep it to yourself.

 

I take some supplements for my liver that have a gelatin capsule, more than the 1 capsule that Joe takes. I guess I'm not vegan, but that's ok.

 

When you talk about compassion for animals through veganism, don't forget the human animal.

 

This thread wasn't even aimed at the potter/joe debate, this is a general thing pertaining to veganism as a whole, don't personalize it please.

[robert]

I just got home after a long day out of town.

 

I won't write much, but also wanted to mention that this isn't an anti-veganpotter thread or anything like that, so VP, please don't feel teamed up on or anything like that.

 

This issue of vegans vs. vegans or "vegans bashing vegans" has been bothering me for quite some time, as I mentioned, for over a year now. It is because people like me get criticized by other vegans who don't know me, don't know what I do for the movement, why I do it, and what long term effects I believe it will have on people and animals. They just look for flaws in my character or my actions and judge me accordingly.

 

So it started with that. Then is escalated when I got to Portland and saw great division within the vegan community. Sure not everyone in Portland sees it but we have to remember that I am involved in the vegan community more than almost anyone in town so I deal with the vegans from some group who criticize the other vegans from another group for not being vegan enough, or for being too extreme, or too angry towards others, or too lazy, etc. rather than supporting each other. That is just the industry I work in (Event organizer, Vega Rep, Board member for NW VEG, President of Vegan Bodybuilding & Fitness, etc.) so I see and hear more than most.......and I wish I didn't, but that is just my honest perception of the community here.

 

Sure, here in Portland a lot of vegans come together and work together and I think it is a positive work in progress that will get better. It is very inspiring and encouraging.

 

Then I started to see it online, on other websites and forums and eventually over here, where normally we have the family-friendly, every supports everyone feel, which was my goal from the get go.

 

Just think that there are some vegan forums that you could write an introduction that says you're vegetarian hoping to become vegan and be deleted because you're not "vegan yet." It think there are a handful of vegan sites/forums like that, or so I've been told. I'd have to confirm to be sure, but regardless, even the idea of it is somewhat frustrating if we consider what we're trying to accomplish on a larger scale.

 

I've had the conversation with many people and our fear is that we were losing the meaning of the movement because we became obsessed with our own labels and labeling others and we wanted to push everyone else away and then eventually question and break down our own vegan allies.

 

I know I mentioned one sentence that through some people off and I realized that when I wrote it but was too tired/lazy to change it....it was the comment about "reducing animal suffering because that is what our ultimate goal is" or something like that. Of course I realize that many people came to a plant-based diet for many reasons, but what I was referring to was the ethical stance that "veganism" takes, therefore what vegan really means (beyond just eating plants). But then again, that could spark up a bunch more comments about what "veganism is", so I'll leave it there.

 

Obviously, a by-product of a plant-based diet is usually fewer animals suffering, and dying for our use and most of us would agree that fewer animals suffering is a good thing.

 

My whole concept and theme of this post is that we should stop the in-fighting amongst ourselves as vegans, be it in Portland, towards me or Brendan for our stances on things, towards other vegans online and towards each other here on the forum. I guess my bottom line issue is that if we get caught up in the little things that don't make that much of impact on the larger scope of things, we lose sight of what is really important, and for a lot of us, it is the reduction of animal cruelty and the increase of peace throughout the world.

 

Please, nobody take this as a personal attack or a personal issue. This is an intelligent conversation to lead us to a more effective way of leading the vegan lifestyle through support of one another. It is also important to realize how we are perceived by others based on our actions and what we consider to be important or not important. For some people looking in, veganism is just way too far out there and they want no part of it. There are a lot of us, including probably the majority of forum members who are out there to change their minds by leading as a positive role model.

 

I understand that there is some grey area of how we define vegans, but it's just a word, the real issue at stake is the lifestyle and how we determine what is a good use of judgement based on our own thoughts, ideas and principles moving toward greater overall peace.

[Guest]

One thing though is that none of those people that don't like what you do can say you aren't a vegan. Plain and simple.

And Zack... doing a lot for animals doesn't make you a vegan if you aren't a vegan. Sir Paul does more for animals than nearly anyone on the planet. He isn't vegan...doesn't claim to be...and if he did claim to be he wouldn't be telling the truth. If he called himself vegan would you let that go even though he has cows and goats on his own property he uses to get milk??? At least he does it so he's in control of making it not so cruel but he's still using animals in an exploitive way that isn't so neccessary...but his money and fame alone have done more for veganism than everyone here combines...even though he is not vegan. What you do in terms of volume in helping animals doesn't you vegan if you aren't a vegan.

[robert]

potter....I'm heading to bed now, but I think what we're doing is agreeing.....it doesn't matter if we fit the "vegan stereotype or definition of the word" but that we make an effort to make a positive difference in the world, as you refer to Sir Paul doing just that.

 

I still think you are focusing too much on the label of 'vegan' more than the issues. I fear that if we focus too much on the label, we will start to ignore the actual issues because we'll be so focused on pointing out the flaws in others. That doesn't help our overall goal.

 

Basically, at it's primary basic level, my whole point is that we should focus on the issues that are involved in veganism and not compare ourselves to others, determining who is a better vegan (as you and others continue to refer to...who is doing more than others, etc. I have also made a statement or two about that, defending myself from those who criticize me, but we shouldn't even have to be in that situation.). It's the idea that we're doing something, not who's doing it better than someone else or who's doing it by a certain rule book, but rather that we're caring enough to do something.

 

So I think we agree for the most part, but still disagree a little, and I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing, as long as we both have good intentions and believe in ourselves, each other, and the underlying cause we both wholeheartedly care deeply about.

 

Goodnight everyone, or good morning to those just waking up

[loveliberate]

Some late-night ramblings...

 

I LOVE intelligent debates and constructive criticism - these are very powerful tools that we all can/should use to help us learn & improve ourselves!

 

It's good to ask questions and to keep an eye on how much peoples actions line up with their words BUT... None of us are perfect, this isnt - or at least shouldnt be - a contest and we all have room to grow! It's best to stay focused on encouraging people, including ourselves, to always work on being more thoughtful & compassionate.

 

Where do we draw the line of WHO is vegan & who is not? At what point does our quest for vegan "perfection" become counter-productive & turn folks off who otherwise would be interested in becoming/staying vegans themselves?

 

Using the definition of a vegan being a person who does not consume or use ANY products derived from animal sources, I'm fairly sure that not only are NONE of us here vegan but that it is impossible to be truly vegan in this world... There are lots of grey (gray?) area's when it comes to being vegan - it all depends on where you personally draw the line.

 

Beyond this if one is vegan for AR/AL &/or environmental reasons it is good to realize that our vegan foods, clothes, etc often are actually doing more harm to animals & the environment than eating/using animal products in many circumstances. Eating food that has been shipped long distances or using stuff that is made out of petroleum / mass produced crops / unsustainably harvested wood, etc - IS directly & indirectly killing & harming animals, including us humans.

 

Personally, I use labels like "vegan" but I dont get too caught in the fine details and prefer to instead like at people's motivations & actions overall. I strive to be a positive example of my ideals and to encourage folks to immediately make whatever steps towards veganism they can/will personally stick with long-term/permanently & to then always keep looking for ways to do better.

[LongTimeVegan]

Using the definition of a vegan being a person who does not consume or use ANY products derived from animal sources, I'm fairly sure that not only are NONE of us here vegan but that it is impossible to be truly vegan in this world...

 

This is an excellent point. Ultimately, being "vegan" is different for each of us. We all strive to eliminate consumption of animal products, and each of us is able to do that to varying degrees.

 

Imagine a "vegan" living in a "natural" environment, without electricity, growing all their own food, using only plant matter compost, without using any fossil fuels. Would they consider us "vegan" (sucking fossil-fuel electricity with our computers, driving cars, eating organic food fertilized with animal products, etc...)??? Probably not, if you use the common definition of the term.

 

I am not saying that we should all strive for a lifestyle like this (hermits in the mountains)... We all make certain compromises in order to live in modern society, but ultimately, this allows us to interect with, and INFLUENCE non-vegans to adopt a more ethical lifestyle!

 

In my experience, "judging" others for their actions is rarely productive. I find this true when interacting with "vegans" and "non-vegans" alike. I think it is best to focus on our common interests, rather than the differences. Because there will ALWAYS exist differences in the way people practice "veganism".

 

-Chris

[Richard]

I honestly think that my initial post covered the core problem. Sir Paul (beatles?) does a lot for animals, and is not vegan. Telling him "you're not vegan" doesn't get anywhere. Even if he claimed to be vegan, simply telling him that he isn't vegan won't change anything. You'd have to explain to him why his non-vegan actions are ethically wrong, then you would have educated him, and you could see how he used that knowledge.

 

There is a definition of veganism which was established by the man who made the word. Maintaining that word is important for things like restaurants, ingredient lists, and vegan labelling like the vegan society etc. If that definition is lost / degraded so that non-vegan ingredients / methods can be included in products, then I would be upset.

 

However, I don't think that the definition of veganism is as important as the actions that a person makes. I think that explaining to someone why they are wrong is a good thing, on any subject. But telling them that they're not fitting to a definition isn't necessarily a good thing, if both people disagree on the definition. If someone is doing XYZ that you think is wrong, you want them to stop doing XYZ, so why not tackle that head on, rather than that the long route, which you know will have more conflict?

 

The argument is often

XYZ -> I don't think it's vegan -> you want to be vegan -> here's what I say veganism is -> therefore you shouldn't do XYZ.

 

When really it should just be:

XYZ -> here's why I think it's wrong -> stop doing XYZ

 

The core matter of why XYZ is wrong is skipped in the first instance

[LongTimeVegan]

I don't think that the definition of veganism is as important as the actions that a person makes. I think that explaining to someone why they are wrong is a good thing, on any subject. But telling them that they're not fitting to a definition isn't necessarily a good thing, if both people disagree on the definition. If someone is doing XYZ that you think is wrong, you want them to stop doing XYZ, so why not tackle that head on, rather than that the long route, which you know will have more conflict?

This is an excellent point!

 

There is a definition of veganism which was established by the man who made the word. Maintaining that word is important for things like restaurants, ingredient lists, and vegan labelling like the vegan society etc. If that definition is lost / degraded so that non-vegan ingredients / methods can be included in products, then I would be upset.

 

I believe that the vast majority of "vegan" restaurants/products/etc... actually do cause some animal products to be "consumed". Just because the "vegan" products we consume don't have any animal ingredients, and aren't animal tested, I bet that somewhere in the production process, some non-vegan product is being used (cleaning products in the factory, maintenance of production equipment, farming, paint, construction materials, etc...). Virtually every restaurant/producer of vegan food uses electricity, utilities, food delivery, etc., and if we really want to be strict about the definition, the electricity, food delivery, and utility companies surely use products that aren't "vegan", right? And we're providing them revenue to continue buying these products, right? Additionally, as I mentioned in my earlier post, most "organic" produce is grown using animal byproducts. I've seen a ton of "vegan" restaurants that use "non-vegan" cleaning products, serve produce grown with animal products, etc...These are just a couple examples of how practically nothing is totally "vegan" if we use the textbook definition of the term.

 

I understand the point about "standards" being important, but if we really want to get technical, most of the "vegan" products we use aren't 100% "vegan".

 

This is not to say that we should not strive to eliminate the consumption of animal products! I am simply saying that judging others is not productive, since even the most strict vegan is likely causing some animal product to be consumed.

 

You'd have to explain to him why his non-vegan actions are ethically wrong, then you would have educated him, and you could see how he used that knowledge.

 

These could have easily been words from my mouth...

 

-Chris

 

ps. If all of this sounds like late night/early morning ramblings to you, you're right!!!

[hsorlando]

I read somewhere, I think it was on a PETA site that it is basically impossible to live a life being 100% vegan because of the way the world is. Whether it's a product that is processed on equipment that uses dairy, or equipment that's cleaned with products that aren't animal friendly, or some ingredient that we're unsure of. Anyway we just need to keep spreading the word about being vegan, and with time, and perhaps with people going green for environmental reasons things will change. But it will take time.

[Richard]

I believe that the vast majority of "vegan" restaurants/products/etc... actually do cause some animal products to be "consumed". Just because the "vegan" products we consume don't have any animal ingredients, and aren't animal tested, I bet that somewhere in the production process, some non-vegan product is being used (cleaning products in the factory, maintenance of production equipment, farming, paint, construction materials, etc...). Virtually every restaurant/producer of vegan food uses electricity, utilities, food delivery, etc., and if we really want to be strict about the definition, the electricity, food delivery, and utility companies surely use products that aren't "vegan", right? And we're providing them revenue to continue buying these products, right? Additionally, as I mentioned in my earlier post, most "organic" produce is grown using animal byproducts. I've seen a ton of "vegan" restaurants that use "non-vegan" cleaning products, serve produce grown with animal products, etc...These are just a couple examples of how practically nothing is totally "vegan" if we use the textbook definition of the term.

 

I understand the point about "standards" being important, but if we really want to get technical, most of the "vegan" products we use aren't 100% "vegan".

 

This is not to say that we should not strive to eliminate the consumption of animal products! I am simply saying that judging others is not productive, since even the most strict vegan is likely causing some animal product to be consumed.

 

That's correct, and I hope that as people become more and more aware of these things that more labelling / certificates arise with more specifics to do with general management of the company, and veganness of the production process.

 

Even though as you say "100% vegan" or whatever you want to call it is pretty much unattainable, I don't want the term to be diluted anymore than it already is. That is to say, if milk protein, or non-vegan food colourings etc are in food labelled as vegan, then it's just going to slide from there into nonsense and become an utterly meaningless word. The term needs to remain at least as strict as it is, if not stricter, as you suggest. I think that it's strange that some stuff, which is pretty unethical, is considered 'vegan', like companies who destroy parts of forests etc to make way for plantations of their crops. The end product has vegan ingredients in it, but the process is far from ethical - yet none of that will be mentioned on the label. It would be cool if you could read about the production process, truthfully, on packaging, so you'd know more about what you're buying.

[offense74]

And still -> Crude oil has dead animals in it. What's a guy to do, right?